For each of the regions, I created a quick chart showing the teams odds of reaching the final four. I'll add some charts for the Sweet 16 matchups that detail the actual matchup a little better, but I currently have KU, UNC, MSU and OU (sure, Duke is slightly favored, but I'm taking Buddy Hield to advance)
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
NCAA Mens Odds to the Final 4
For each of the regions, I created a quick chart showing the teams odds of reaching the final four. I'll add some charts for the Sweet 16 matchups that detail the actual matchup a little better, but I currently have KU, UNC, MSU and OU (sure, Duke is slightly favored, but I'm taking Buddy Hield to advance)
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
NFL Punters: Is there a difference
Watching the Broncos this season, one of the most oft heard complaints is about Britton Colquitt, the punter. His average through the first fifteen weeks of the season was at 43.58 yards per punt, and Broncos fans were finding him lacking. However, it bugged me that almost every qualifying punter in the league was averaging somewhere in the 40 + yards per punt region. How much of difference can you truly glean from looking at the averages?
Using some data from the NFL Savant website, where they have gathered play by play data for the NFL this season, I pulled out every punt through week 15 and how far it traveled. From there I computed the descriptives for each punter. hen, performing an ANOVA test, I was able to conclude that there was in fact a difference amongst punter means.
I also then tested for a difference in variances, ie whether or not the difference in means could be accounted for by the variance in their punts. This was not the case though, as the Levene test gave us the inclination that punter to punter variance is the same
Followign this gives us that we needed to do some Post Hoc work to determine exactly where each punter falls in the hierarchy of the league.
The above table breaks down the Tukey test results. There is a decent break down of punters in the league, with there being 5 different groupings. However, much like place kickers where there are some very good, and some very bad players earning money in the league, a majority of them all fall together, with a bit of luck helping to determine a punt travelling either 45 or 43 yards on a play.
This of course is a fairly rudimentary analysis. A punt that travels 35 yards might force a fair catch when one that goes 60 outkicks the coverage units and allows a big return. IT would be interesting to see as well with more detailed data if some punters are sacrificing some distance for more control, like pinning in a returner on the sideline versus kicking it straight down the middle.
Using some data from the NFL Savant website, where they have gathered play by play data for the NFL this season, I pulled out every punt through week 15 and how far it traveled. From there I computed the descriptives for each punter. hen, performing an ANOVA test, I was able to conclude that there was in fact a difference amongst punter means.
ANOVA Results
|
|||||
Yardage
|
|||||
Sum of
Squares
|
df
|
Mean
Square
|
F
|
Sig.
|
|
Between Groups
|
6578.996
|
31
|
212.226
|
2.749
|
.000
|
Within Groups
|
164029.928
|
2125
|
77.191
|
||
Total
|
170608.924
|
2156
|
|||
I also then tested for a difference in variances, ie whether or not the difference in means could be accounted for by the variance in their punts. This was not the case though, as the Levene test gave us the inclination that punter to punter variance is the same
Test of
Homogeneity of Variances
|
|||
Yardage
|
|||
Levene
Statistic
|
df1
|
df2
|
Sig.
|
1.282
|
31
|
2125
|
.138
|
Followign this gives us that we needed to do some Post Hoc work to determine exactly where each punter falls in the hierarchy of the league.
Tier
|
Punter
|
Average
|
1
|
48.39
|
|
J.HEKKER
|
48.39
|
|
2
|
47.93
|
|
M.BOSHER
|
47.93
|
|
3
|
45.65
|
|
K.HUBER
|
46
|
|
P.O'DONNELL
|
43.95
|
|
B.ANGER
|
45.9
|
|
P.MCAFEE
|
47.81
|
|
D.COLQUITT
|
45.71
|
|
B.COLQUITT
|
43.58
|
|
M.DARR
|
47.48
|
|
R.QUIGLEY
|
43.66
|
|
S.KOCH
|
47.84
|
|
B.PINION
|
43.96
|
|
M.SCIFRES
|
44.7
|
|
T.WAY
|
45.59
|
|
B.KERN
|
47.17
|
|
C.JONES
|
45.75
|
|
C.SCHMIDT
|
45.59
|
|
R.ALLEN
|
45.65
|
|
S.MARTIN
|
46.07
|
|
T.MORSTEAD
|
44.94
|
|
M.KING
|
44.27
|
|
A.LEE
|
46.66
|
|
B.NORTMAN
|
45.83
|
|
D.JONES
|
47.41
|
|
T.MASTHAY
|
43.68
|
|
B.WING
|
44.84
|
|
J.RYAN
|
45.82
|
|
S.LECHLER
|
46.93
|
|
4
|
42.27
|
|
D.BUTLER
|
42.37
|
|
J.BERRY
|
42.19
|
|
J.SCHUM
|
42.25
|
|
5
|
42.05
|
|
J.LOCKE
|
42.05
|
|
The above table breaks down the Tukey test results. There is a decent break down of punters in the league, with there being 5 different groupings. However, much like place kickers where there are some very good, and some very bad players earning money in the league, a majority of them all fall together, with a bit of luck helping to determine a punt travelling either 45 or 43 yards on a play.
This of course is a fairly rudimentary analysis. A punt that travels 35 yards might force a fair catch when one that goes 60 outkicks the coverage units and allows a big return. IT would be interesting to see as well with more detailed data if some punters are sacrificing some distance for more control, like pinning in a returner on the sideline versus kicking it straight down the middle.
Monday, October 5, 2015
College Football Rankngs
After 5 weeks of play, its time for preseason projections to be removed from the program's system. Team's are who they are now, no longer can fans be buyoed by the small sample size of games and plays.
Top 10:
The Bottom 10:
Top 10:
- Alabama
- USC
- Oklahoma
- Michigan
- Ole Miss
- Boise State
- Stanford
- Georgia
- Baylor
- Texas A&M
The Bottom 10:
- North Texas
- Georgia State
- UTEP
- New Mexico State
- Wyoming
- Kansas
- Charolotte
- Old Dominion
- Idaho
- South Alabama
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
College football Over and Under Achievers So far
So, I really should post more. However, life continues to get in the way, as work schedules and house moving have conspired to keeping my normally free weekends quite packed. I have however carved out enough time to look through some of the programs ratings, and see how far some teams are from the preseason projected rating, for better or for worse.
At the Top:
Those at the bottom:
At the Top:
- Air Force
- UNLV
- MTSU
- Boston College
- Ole Miss'
Those at the bottom:
- Oregon
- North Texas
- Washington State
- New Mexico State
- Georgia State
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
Best Bowl matchups
The folks over at the SBNation main site released their big college football preview. One of the most interesting pages that they do annually is their bowl projections. I went ahead and categorized the matchups they gave by how close the projections put the bowl game being, as well as what the spread should be.
The best matchup in their projection is a battle of old school powers in Michigan State and UCLA, while the UNC-Navy game would be one to skip.
Team 1
|
Opponent
|
Team 1Win Chance
|
Average Spread
|
Departure from Even
|
Michigan State
|
UCLA
|
47.40%
|
-1
|
2.60%
|
Western Michigan
|
Appalachian State
|
52.90%
|
1
|
2.90%
|
Georgia Tech
|
Texas
|
53.00%
|
1
|
3.00%
|
Wisconsin
|
Arizona State
|
45.40%
|
-2
|
4.60%
|
Michigan
|
Georgia
|
44.60%
|
-2
|
5.40%
|
Oklahoma
|
Southern California
|
56.00%
|
2
|
6.00%
|
Central Florida
|
Bowling Green State
|
56.00%
|
2
|
6.00%
|
Kansas State
|
California
|
56.90%
|
3
|
6.90%
|
Minnesota
|
Arkansas
|
41.50%
|
-3
|
8.50%
|
Nebraska
|
Texas A&M
|
40.80%
|
-3
|
9.20%
|
Utah State
|
Utah
|
40.10%
|
-4
|
9.90%
|
West Virginia
|
Missouri
|
39.30%
|
-4
|
10.70%
|
Oklahoma State
|
Louisiana State
|
38.50%
|
-4
|
11.50%
|
Louisville
|
Tennessee
|
38.30%
|
-4
|
11.70%
|
Alabama
|
Oregon
|
62.70%
|
4
|
12.70%
|
Texas-El Paso
|
New Mexico
|
35.80%
|
-5
|
14.20%
|
Boise State
|
Notre Dame
|
33.90%
|
-6
|
16.10%
|
Virginia Tech
|
Penn State
|
66.40%
|
6
|
16.40%
|
Toledo
|
Georgia Southern
|
67.00%
|
6
|
17.00%
|
Duke
|
Mississippi State
|
31.90%
|
-7
|
18.10%
|
Iowa
|
Arizona State
|
31.40%
|
-7
|
18.60%
|
East Carolina
|
Louisiana-Lafayette
|
69.70%
|
7
|
19.70%
|
Florida State
|
Auburn
|
70.40%
|
7
|
20.40%
|
Baylor
|
Mississippi
|
72.20%
|
8
|
22.20%
|
Arkansas State
|
San Jose State
|
72.90%
|
8
|
22.90%
|
Houston
|
South Carolina
|
25.20%
|
-9
|
24.80%
|
Temple
|
Rice
|
75.50%
|
10
|
25.50%
|
North Carolina State
|
Stanford
|
23.20%
|
-10
|
26.80%
|
Northern Illinois
|
Colorado State
|
77.20%
|
11
|
27.20%
|
Cincinnati
|
Western Kentucky
|
78.90%
|
11
|
28.90%
|
San Diego State
|
Texas State
|
79.40%
|
12
|
29.40%
|
Ohio State
|
Texas Christian
|
79.50%
|
11
|
29.50%
|
Pittsburgh
|
Memphis
|
81.00%
|
12
|
31.00%
|
Maryland
|
Air Force
|
83.60%
|
14
|
33.60%
|
Miami(FL)
|
Marshall
|
85.80%
|
15
|
35.80%
|
Middle Tennessee State
|
Akron
|
86.10%
|
15
|
36.10%
|
Old Dominion
|
Brigham Young
|
10.90%
|
-17
|
39.10%
|
North Carolina
|
Navy
|
93.20%
|
21
|
43.20%
|
The best matchup in their projection is a battle of old school powers in Michigan State and UCLA, while the UNC-Navy game would be one to skip.
Monday, August 24, 2015
NFL Preseason to Regular season correlation
So, there have been a few posts over on MileHighReport talking about the team's preseason performance so far. There's been some speculation that in recent years defensive stats have been a decent indicator of regular season performance. I wanted to test this a bit, checking to see if there was any real link between the two.
Going back to 2012, I found total yards allowed per game in pre and regular season, as well as yards per play. The results were not encouraging. In the following chart, we'll see Yards per game has an R^2 of just .11, an extremely basic correlation.
Going back to 2012, I found total yards allowed per game in pre and regular season, as well as yards per play. The results were not encouraging. In the following chart, we'll see Yards per game has an R^2 of just .11, an extremely basic correlation.
Yards per play is even worse, with an R^2 of just .03.
We shouldn't expect there to be any real predictive power for preseason play. Schemes offensively and defensively are vanilla through and through, with no game planning to attack weaknesses. You also get extreme variance with a lot of guys playing extended snaps, who will likely be selling cars in a few weeks.
Monday, August 17, 2015
College football Top 25 Projection
This summer has been busy. I have managed however to find some time to tweak the formulas I've used to predict team strength and come up with some composite rankings. The changes centered a lot on removing some emphasis on turnover luck (it really has a very low significance for explaining year to year variability), and redid my returning experience formula. It should help give a much better view of a team over a season, since the formula had a new reduced standard error equal to about half of what it had been.
In season I'll be making a few tweaks to what happens for a team afflicted with injuries, which of course will as the old military adage goes, ruin this ranking at first contact.
It loves the Pac-12, which I think will continue to shine. I do doubt though we see USC, UCLA and Oregon in the top 5 or so at the end of the year. I'm also not nearly as high on Florida, but they could be a darkhorse with that defensive secondary.
The program also generates odds for a team to win a range of games, which I'll sort by below, going from the best chances to win at least 11 games in the regular season.
In season I'll be making a few tweaks to what happens for a team afflicted with injuries, which of course will as the old military adage goes, ruin this ranking at first contact.
| Team | Ranking |
| Alabama | 1 |
| Ohio State | 2 |
| Southern California | 3 |
| UCLA | 4 |
| Oregon | 5 |
| Oklahoma | 6 |
| Baylor | 7 |
| Stanford | 8 |
| Florida State | 9 |
| Notre Dame | 10 |
| Georgia | 11 |
| Texas A&M | 12 |
| Texas Christian | 13 |
| Mississippi | 14 |
| Arizona State | 15 |
| Clemson | 16 |
| Oklahoma State | 17 |
| Michigan | 18 |
| Texas | 19 |
| Missouri | 20 |
| Texas Tech | 21 |
| Michigan State | 22 |
| Florida | 23 |
| Arizona | 24 |
| Miami(FL) | 25 |
It loves the Pac-12, which I think will continue to shine. I do doubt though we see USC, UCLA and Oregon in the top 5 or so at the end of the year. I'm also not nearly as high on Florida, but they could be a darkhorse with that defensive secondary.
The program also generates odds for a team to win a range of games, which I'll sort by below, going from the best chances to win at least 11 games in the regular season.
| Team | Ranking |
| Ohio State | 1 |
| Florida State | 2 |
| UCLA | 3 |
| Alabama | 4 |
| Southern California | 5 |
| Oklahoma | 6 |
| Notre Dame | 7 |
| Baylor | 8 |
| Marshall | 9 |
| Nebraska | 10 |
| Boise State | 11 |
| Penn State | 12 |
| Georgia | 13 |
| Cincinnati | 14 |
| Stanford | 15 |
| Oregon | 16 |
| Massachusetts | 17 |
| Texas Christian | 18 |
| Wisconsin | 19 |
| Michigan | 20 |
| Northern Illinois | 21 |
| Michigan State | 22 |
| Clemson | 23 |
| Texas A&M | 24 |
| Oklahoma State | 25 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
