Another Pre-Season Analytic Projection

He hates us.

Luckily his model is total garbage.

At least preseason. Maybe it will improve although I doubt it since the returning production portion seems to be the most solid part.
Click to expand...

Reading through his website, in season he hits 80% predictions on who will win games, but preseason projections are just below 60% hit rates. So it definitely is more accurate in season as the data begins to compile.

He admits himself that the data skews towards returning production in his preseason models.

Not sure exactly who he is but he does pods with the Arizona 247 mod, and he claims he is an econometrician.
Click to expand...

Econometrics? Great.
 
 
Last edited:
From reading those tweets embedded in that post, this guy sounds like a moron. Our offense sucked and we know what suck looks like. Our offense being bad is mostly independent of Utah's offense. I think that he must conflate being critical of nonsense as trying to build yourself up.

A spade is a spade Roob Bowron.
 
From reading those tweets embedded in that post, this guy sounds like a moron. Our offense sucked and we know what suck looks like. Our offense being bad is mostly independent of Utah's offense. I think that he must conflate being critical of nonsense as trying to build yourself up.

A spade is a spade Roob Bowron.
Click to expand...

You’re not wrong. I just find it all very entertaining
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
Click to expand...

s/o @HeretoBeatmyChest he loves the s&p all unadjusted or readjusted metrics
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
Click to expand...

Poont of clarification on my own personal stance since I don’t know if I’ve ever made it known:

I’m not a huge metrics guy. I’m with you on scoreboard. I find my main role and ultimately my purpose at HH is just Dooging over anything that looks good for my Dwags or makes my Dwags shine, or, poasting anything that I find interesting.

And all these metrics like Connelly’s S&P+, the Pick Six Previews, and now this Beta_Rank.... I find them I interesting. I enjoy seeing how they rank UW and generally it’s in a good light (#shocker; a well run program with elite coaching and development and increasing recruiting comes out shining in computer models).

I like to compare them and see what different ones come up with, and I like to investigate them to get a general sense of how teams are projected to be before the season starts (specifically the Pac-12). Then you see how those preseason projections crumble once the season is underway and the actual players on the field matter.

I don’t put a ton of stock in them, but I enjoy finding out how they perceive my favorite team as well as my hated teams. Then I like to poast them here for my brethren and fake internet friends to debate and fight over and call each other names or jerk each other off.

TL:DR

Grundle, all I want is to....

View attachment 21332
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
Click to expand...

Poont of clarification on my own personal stance since I don’t know if I’ve ever made it known:

I’m not a huge metrics guy. I’m with you on scoreboard. I find my main role and ultimately my purpose at HH is just Dooging over anything that looks good for my Dwags or makes my Dwags shine, or, poasting anything that I find interesting.

And all these metrics like Connelly’s S&P+, the Pick Six Previews, and now this Beta_Rank.... I find them I interesting. I enjoy seeing how they rank UW and generally it’s in a good light (#shocker; a well run program with elite coaching and development and increasing recruiting comes out shining in computer models).

I like to compare them and see what different ones come up with, and I like to investigate them to get a general sense of how teams are projected to be before the season starts (specifically the Pac-12). Then you see how those preseason projections crumble once the season is underway and the actual players on the field matter.

I don’t put a ton of stock in them, but I enjoy finding out how they perceive my favorite team as well as my hated teams. Then I like to poast them here for my brethren and fake internet friends to debate and fight over and call each other names or jerk each other off.

TL:DR

Grundle, all I want is to....

View attachment 21332
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about you. I don't think, I dunno, do you fag out about these too?

If metrics are entertaining, enjoy. There is so much twatters metric smack though, it's cringey.

I do appreciate how Connelly goes about it. PAPNv1 (RIP) used it as a tool but not an end in itself.
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
Click to expand...

Poont of clarification on my own personal stance since I don’t know if I’ve ever made it known:

I’m not a huge metrics guy. I’m with you on scoreboard. I find my main role and ultimately my purpose at HH is just Dooging over anything that looks good for my Dwags or makes my Dwags shine, or, poasting anything that I find interesting.

And all these metrics like Connelly’s S&P+, the Pick Six Previews, and now this Beta_Rank.... I find them I interesting. I enjoy seeing how they rank UW and generally it’s in a good light (#shocker; a well run program with elite coaching and development and increasing recruiting comes out shining in computer models).

I like to compare them and see what different ones come up with, and I like to investigate them to get a general sense of how teams are projected to be before the season starts (specifically the Pac-12). Then you see how those preseason projections crumble once the season is underway and the actual players on the field matter.

I don’t put a ton of stock in them, but I enjoy finding out how they perceive my favorite team as well as my hated teams. Then I like to poast them here for my brethren and fake internet friends to debate and fight over and call each other names or jerk each other off.

TL:DR

Grundle, all I want is to....

View attachment 21332
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about you. I don't think, I dunno, do you fag out about these too?

If metrics are entertaining, enjoy. There is so much twatters metric smack though, it's cringey.

I do appreciate how Connelly goes about it. PAPNv1 (RIP) used it as a tool but not an end in itself.
Click to expand...

The thing I like about "metrics" is they can do a lot better job of evaluating a lot of data to compare two teams who will never face each other and have many common opponents. This is particularly important if the Pac 12 ever fields a good team because it is the only way the East coast will hear about it. The biggest problem is they have somewhat limited value early in the season and by end of season largely tell you what you already knew, and are more of a refinement for comparing team 13 in texas to team 14 in california to team 15 in mississippi. If you don't watch a lot of games though then maybe this is a lot more informative for you though.

To start a season we know future wins correlate with talent levels, and weakly with returning starts/production, but actually heading in to a season with a metric that predicts how good a team will be would be something else.
 
I don't get the metrics obsession. I get the projection and historical comparisons part. But outside of serious gamblers, I don't understand why people get so passionate about that. Some out here seems to value metrics wins more than scoreboard, baby.
Click to expand...

Poont of clarification on my own personal stance since I don’t know if I’ve ever made it known:

I’m not a huge metrics guy. I’m with you on scoreboard. I find my main role and ultimately my purpose at HH is just Dooging over anything that looks good for my Dwags or makes my Dwags shine, or, poasting anything that I find interesting.

And all these metrics like Connelly’s S&P+, the Pick Six Previews, and now this Beta_Rank.... I find them I interesting. I enjoy seeing how they rank UW and generally it’s in a good light (#shocker; a well run program with elite coaching and development and increasing recruiting comes out shining in computer models).

I like to compare them and see what different ones come up with, and I like to investigate them to get a general sense of how teams are projected to be before the season starts (specifically the Pac-12). Then you see how those preseason projections crumble once the season is underway and the actual players on the field matter.

I don’t put a ton of stock in them, but I enjoy finding out how they perceive my favorite team as well as my hated teams. Then I like to poast them here for my brethren and fake internet friends to debate and fight over and call each other names or jerk each other off.

TL:DR

Grundle, all I want is to....

View attachment 21332
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about you. I don't think, I dunno, do you fag out about these too?

If metrics are entertaining, enjoy. There is so much twatters metric smack though, it's cringey.

I do appreciate how Connelly goes about it. PAPNv1 (RIP) used it as a tool but not an end in itself.
Click to expand...

I definitely do not dive into twatters Metric smack talk @GrundleStiltzkin. And I don’t try to use metrics to prove points or win debates. I just like to see where teams are ranked and how they compare to the Dwags.

Connelly is probably my favorite. This new Bowron doesn’t go about it the same way as Connelly even though S&P+ was what made him want to start Beta_Rank.

But yeah, my only investment is to see how metrics claim teams are, then poast it here for others to debate.

Case in point for what I find interesting:

All last season I heard how Cristobal has made Oregon into a smash mouth SEC style team who like to impose their will and wear teams down. Portland radio has discussed how in the UW game last year Oregon dominated the line and wore us down (False, their YPC wasn’t impressive and UW had better rushing stats).

Then this entire offseason it’s been all about how Oregon has the best line in the country, most returning starts. Etc etc.

Then you look at something like footballoutsiders OL metrics and they were extremely average.

I don’t take that to mean their line will suck this year or be amazing. I'll wait until I watch their games and decide. I just find it interesting to see how metrics match or argue the narrative.

vyjdqwm0f339.png

u6d58wghi022.png

b342kc9bs09z.png

TL:DR,

I love college football and UW and try to find all sources of info that talks about it. Metrics are entertaining for me, but I don’t take them as gospel, and I definitely don’t fight on twatter about it.
 
From reading those tweets embedded in that post, this guy sounds like a moron. Our offense sucked and we know what suck looks like. Our offense being bad is mostly independent of Utah's offense. I think that he must conflate being critical of nonsense as trying to build yourself up.

A spade is a spade Roob Bowron.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, spade means sumthin different here in the ‘Lou. Ask any white policeman.

Just saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top