Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

ESPN's flawed POFF Stat


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 demopublican

demopublican

    20,758 posts 1 warning points

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 22,330 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 03:28 PM

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=3474432

http://www.coolstand...andings.asp?i=1

The statistic focuses on runs scored and runs surrendered. Failing to take teams like the 2012 O's into account.

36% chance? Yet Tampa has a 53% chance and Oakland an 87% chance?

That is crazy talk.
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." — Steve Earle.

Disclaimer: I hate the Democrats and the Republicans but I am a registered Democrat. That way I can vote against O'Malley more often.

#2 demopublican

demopublican

    20,758 posts 1 warning points

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 22,330 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 03:29 PM

http://www.coolstand...com/welcome.asp

How do we calculate these statistics? Basically we simulate the rest of the season millions of times, based on every team's performance to date and its remaining schedule. We then look at how many "seasons" a team won its division or won the wildcard, and voila - we have our numbers.

The trick, of course, is to determine what chance each team has of beating every other team. Our method is to use simple team statistics (e.g. runs scored and runs against) to predict how each team will fare against all others. For those of you familiar with baseball prediction, we use a variation of the Bill James "Pythagorean Theorem" to predict results. Pretty smart, huh? That's why we call this prediction mode "Smart mode".

Another method is to simply assume that any team has a 50-50 shot of beating any other team. You could flip a coin to decide who would win each game. This method isn't too realistic, but it usually gives Chicago teams a better shot at the division. For lack of a better term, we call this prediction mode "Dumb mode".
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." — Steve Earle.

Disclaimer: I hate the Democrats and the Republicans but I am a registered Democrat. That way I can vote against O'Malley more often.

#3 TravisMoon

TravisMoon

    Oriole-riffic Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 68,956 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 04:25 PM

Anti-Orioles bias.

ESPN is in so much denial, you'd think some folks from this board give them these stats %'s.

:)

TM
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "The Preying Matusz" devours another batter!

#4 demopublican

demopublican

    20,758 posts 1 warning points

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 22,330 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 04:51 PM

Not biased. Just flawed.
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." — Steve Earle.

Disclaimer: I hate the Democrats and the Republicans but I am a registered Democrat. That way I can vote against O'Malley more often.

#5 weenie

weenie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 928 posts

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:16 AM

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=3474432

http://www.coolstand...andings.asp?i=1

The statistic focuses on runs scored and runs surrendered. Failing to take teams like the 2012 O's into account.

36% chance? Yet Tampa has a 53% chance and Oakland an 87% chance?

That is crazy talk.


Oakland plays 7 of their final nine series against contenders with the other two against Seattle, who are actually playing good ball. Watch Oakland wilt against the Rangers (7 gms), Tigers (3 gms), Angels (6 gms), Os (3 gms) and Yankees (3 gms).

ESPN's various so called scientific rankings and predicters have been debunked so badly, they dumped the power ranking system yesterday and reverted to having one of their guys do the slotting exercise.

The Orioles just make ESPN look stupid and that's hard for even the insiders to ignore.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users