Intangibles or Luck? | The 2017 Dolphins Should be 2-4

[ShorePhin]

Well since you said it in a condescending manner, you must have some irrefutable proof of that?

feel free to show me 1) fairy or 2) gremlin 3) luck or 4) intangibles who's very definition means it doesn't exist

 

[<O>]

feel free to show me 1) fairy or 2) gremlin 3) luck or 4) intangibles who's very definition means it doesn't exist

Luck is simply the effect of a random (versus a systematic) variable. Certainly that exists. The strength of schedule point above illustrates that clearly.

 

[ShorePhin]

no luck doesn't exist luck does not equal random events. random events are just random events. Luck insinuates an unforeseen hand or force changes outcome or adds weight to a side

 

[The Goat]

That article deals with the effect of the predicted strength of schedule, based on what teams did the preceding year. The changes in teams' performances from year to year weakens the effect of that variable.

What I'm talking about here is the strength of schedule determined at the end of the year, based on the records of the teams already played that year. Some teams had an easier go of it through the season, and other teams had a harder go of it.

The 2016 Dolphins for example had the 5th-weakest schedule in the league, based on their opponents' 2016 combined records.

It doesn't make a difference WHEN you do the math. Now figure out what happens if the Dolphins go 5-11 instead of 10-6. I'd be willing to bet their strength of schedule jumps considerably, because strength of schedule is always so close. For example; the difference between the 7th and 14th most difficult schedule to start this season (or, to use your data...the end of the 2016 season)? .025 winning percentage.

 

[<O>]

no luck doesn't exist luck does not equal random events. random events are just random events. Luck insinuates an unforeseen hand or force changes outcome or adds weight to a side

If a team benefits far more than average from random events, that isn't good luck?

And strength of schedule, determined at the end of the year, is indeed an "unforeseen hand" over which a team has very little control.

 

[The Goat]

If a team benefits far more than average from random events, that isn't good luck?

How...in the name of all that is sane and holy, can you AVERAGE RANDOM EVENTS? That's like saying "Why haven't I had more acts of God on Thursdays?"

 

[Finland]

There has been some luck and also luck of luck. Many would say good luck is when preparation meets opportunity. We're we lucky we got an interception late in the last game, or did we make a play. I think our prepared "D" helped force a bad throw and a prepared player caught it. Then he got spanked on the arse for his performance! If there is luck it will be diminished as time goes on.

 

[<O>]

How...in the name of all that is sane and holy, can you AVERAGE RANDOM EVENTS? That's like saying "Why haven't I had more acts of God on Thursdays?"

Is there not an average strength of schedule in the league, for example?

 

[ShorePhin]

nope just the law of averages, bell curve etc. to say anything that this team does is luck is to belittle the hard work every player anywhere in any sport all the hardwork they committed themselves to training and honing their talent. You don't think it is luck when Cameron Wake continues this late in his career to get sacks? I attribute it to his constant honing of his craft. Luck exists in the fantasy realm as unicorns.

 

[<O>]

Correct.

The point is that the one team in question ALSO plays 15 other games. And it has more than a 6 to 12.5% effect on it's OWN strength of schedule.

Strength of schedule is determined by the combined records of the opponents. It has nothing to do with how many other games the team in question plays.

 

[<O>]

OP raises a very, very interesting question. Right now Football Outsiders has us as the second worst 4-2 team in history, with last year's Texans a close 3rd. And it fits in very well with what I've seen, too. We've been extremely fortunate in three of our four wins -except the Jets, who suck and we barely beat at home with the biggest 4th quarter comeback of the year so far.

So we're magic! The big question is, is magic real? If magic is real, we can keep it up. If it's not, we're coming back down to earth, son. This is a serious question. The only people I'd trust to answer it are the Vegas hotshots who actually lay their money on the line and beat the house.

To them I ask, is magic real??

I did find this content just now by the way:

Perhaps the most surprising team in the Awful Eight is Miami. After all, the Dolphins are 4-2. What the hell are they doing down with the winless San Francisco 49ers? The answer is that Miami has not been good. Their four wins all have come by less than a touchdown, against an easy schedule. (Scott Kacsmar talks about their unsustainable record of fourth-quarter comebacks in Clutch Encounters this week.) They also got shutout 20-0 by New Orleans and lost to the Jets 20-6. They've gotten lucky from opposing field goal kickers missing 5 of 12 kicks, although one of those was a 59-yarder from Atlanta's Matt Bryant and those usually don't connect.

The Dolphins are not quite the worst 4-2 team in DVOA history. The 2007 Detroit Lions were even worse. Here's the list for your perusal. Usually I do these lists to 10 or 12 teams, but once you get to teams with DVOA around -12% there's really no similarity to the current Dolphins. It is interesting to note that the other teams on this list all improved in the second half of the season except for the 2007 Lions. The 2015 Vikings and 2010 Buccaneers improved significantly, to the point where their final DVOA ratings were a much closer match for their win-loss records. And honestly, given the way this season seems to be going, a 5-5 record the rest of the way probably still has the Dolphins in the wild-card race.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2017/week-7-dvoa-ratings

 

[phintim]

Heres how I look at it the longer it goes on the less its about luck and the more it is about Gase. Last years team personal wise for the most part was atrocious, especially defense and RT looked like a deer in the headlights those first four game. Gase got RT back on track and used the rest of his magic to hide the issues on the rest of the team.
So here we are in year 2, down to our 3rd string QB in a sense and we think we just might have a chance at 4 -2 to be a playoff team, even with a tough schedule. Thats pretty magical or we have a magician running the team. Go figure.

 

[Digital]

Here's the thing. The more data points we have about Gase winning one-score games, the harder it is to make the argument that it's luck. I mean, one can make the argument, but it starts to sound like someone denying that the earth is round.

I'm sure Gase will lose some close games, it's inevitable. But you can't look at his record in those and call it pure luck. Clearly he's doing some things that are increasing his odds ... even if the masses don't realize what is causing it or why it has that effect.

I loved those old commercials that featured the coaches at press conferences after losses just ranting. They'd say things like "You are what your record says you are!" or "You play to win the game!" or my favorite one, which the Jet's fans are saying today "Playoffs ... playoffs!?!?!?" Good stuff.

 

[<O>]

The difficulty with the above two posts is that you'd have to believe that Gase possesses a characteristic with regard to his coaching that's nearly twice as good as Bill Belichick's, when you consider the following:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/clutch-encounters/2017/clutch-encounters-week-7

Miami head coach Adam Gase is continuing a run of good fortune that you'd love to visit Vegas with. The Dolphins lead the NFL with four game-winning drives this season. This comes on the heels of a 2016 season in which Miami scored the game-winning points in the fourth quarter or overtime in seven games, so Gase's Dolphins have pulled this off 11 times in their last 21 games. Only a handful of teams in NFL history have sustained this type of success in a two-period span, and it's not like the Dolphins have a Joe Montana (1989-1990 49ers), Troy Aikman (1990-1991 Cowboys), Peyton Manning (2008-2009 Colts), or Drew Brees (2009-2010 Saints) at quarterback.

Yet, Gase's record when the Dolphins need a comeback or game-winning drive is a remarkable 10-3 (.769) so far. That does not include the win over the Jets last year that was won on a kick return touchdown. The following table shows the records for all 32 active head coaches. The first record is for fourth-quarter comeback opportunities only, which are games where the coach's offense had possession in the fourth quarter (or overtime) with a one-score deficit. The second set of records is the overall record at game-winning drive opportunities, which includes games where the score was tied. Playoff games are included.

See the table below the above content for the Belichick comparison.

The further difficulty in this area is the question of why, if the team can finish strong as a function of Gase's coaching, can't it start strong? Why does this supposed coaching characteristic function only at the ends of games?

The same team is on the field throughout the game, and the same coach is coaching it.

 

[BlueFin]

Part of it is the culture a coach breeds by cutting players who don't give 110%....instilling a never quit attitude...that is the key.

Also there is a conservative style of play calling Gase goes too in these games which reduces losses by mistakes, turnovers and allows his defense to make game winning plays.

But luck?....please....nobody gets lucky at that percentage rate....period.