2012 vs. 2013 Miami Dolphins: A Statistical Comparison

[royalshank]

This must have been disappointing to the forum's resident statistician:

Why are you killing the guy? What he's doing is helping represent the "moneyball" side of sports today - I think his different perspective adds a lot to the forum. Being a stats guy myself, I don't think anyone is saying that the stats weigh more heavily than other factors, but they provide more data to evaluate things and that can't possibly be a bad thing. Not trying to start a pissing match here - just stating that I for one think Shoutrights posts add to the quality of this forum.

 

[2413fanphins]

Smdh

 

[Shouright]

Interesting - let's hope their statisticians are < our statisticians :)

Here's a guy who started in this area and who was recently made GM of a professional team:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Hinkie

This might be another link of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Sloan_Sports_Analytics_Conference

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Why are you killing the guy? What he's doing is helping represent the "moneyball" side of sports today - I think his different perspective adds a lot to the forum. Being a stats guy myself, I don't think anyone is saying that the stats weigh more heavily than other factors, but they provide more data to evaluate things and that can't possibly be a bad thing. Not trying to start a pissing match here - just stating that I for one think Shoutrights posts add to the quality of this forum.

Then you are simply not reading his posts. As I have stated over and over again, I have no problem with data or stats, but when people purposely use them fraudulently or blatantly ignore reality, I'm going to call them on it. They are worse than posters who simply put up opinions with nothing to back them. They are lying and they know it (or should). How else do you explain a 30 page thread trying to prove that sacks don't matter? How else to you explain ignoring of facts and reality that fly in the face of the conclusions that are drawn from bogus analyses?

Sacks don't matter? Really? Tell that to the 32 teams paying big money to tackles that can block (or wishing they had tackles that could block). The argument is stupid. Worse than that, the argument was only presented because of the ridiculous agenda to blame Tannehill.

I'm killing the guy because I don't have the self control to ignore stupid posts. I hold out hope that he can be trained to make some sense but that is looking less and less likely.

 

[Baller]

I really appreciate the intelligent work and content of your post. There are not very many posts that compare. You are one of my favorite posters. I do have a few questions though:
* The goodness of fit of your model is 80%. An 80% GOF would be on the low end in manufacturing. Please excuse my ignorance but this does not seem good to me.
* How do you account for flyers, are the high and low end week to week stats thrown out since they could skew the data significantly?
* Do Passing Efficiency numbers really correlate to QB efficiency numbers since they do not take into account the play called, opponent, weather, or pass receivers? Can these factors really be considered constant across all of the data?
* Wouldn't you say that poor passing efficiency numbers are less of an indictment of the qb and more of a measure of the entire passing offense?

 

[Shouright]

I really appreciate the intelligent work and content of your post. There are not very many posts that compare. You are one of my favorite posters. I do have a few questions though:
* The goodness of fit of your model is 80%. An 80% GOF would be on the low end in manufacturing. Please excuse my ignorance but this does not seem good to me.
* How do you account for flyers, are the high and low end week to week stats thrown out since they could skew the data significantly?
* Do Passing Efficiency numbers really correlate to QB efficiency numbers since they do not take into account the play called, opponent, weather, or pass receivers? Can these factors really be considered constant across all of the data?
* Wouldn't you say that poor passing efficiency numbers are less of an indictment of the qb and more of a measure of the entire passing offense?

Per your last point, with the firing of Sherman, I think we'll find out a great deal more about that in the coming season.