07-08-2020, 05:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-08-2020, 05:23 PM by iStegosauruz.)
Question on methodology - how did you factor in strength of schedule or initial starting point? Obviously maximizing your % chance to win is the obvious goal but not everyone starts every matchup with the ability to hit 50%. A team that starts with 15% and gains 27% to hit 42% is still down 8% but made substantial gains.
I know you based it off the previous games numbers but that excludes a few key variables - strength of schedule, home and away splits, and ability to run variant strategies.
Adding % purely for gains on the year also ignores average gain or loss which would be another metric to used to gauge. In that situation for an accurate statistical average you’d drop a high and a low to normalize somewhat and rid of outliers - something that would change the outcomes drastically. For example, in the situation of Austin they lose 11% because of W2 at New Orleans, a major outlier since its the second largest change of any team on any week. This would also normalize the Austin matchup W3 against Orange County where the strategy that was dropped then obviously was improved on in the other direction.
Just food for thought. I do find this interesting and accept the comments that it’s not a shot at anyone in particular, but the opening allusion to a meme, other responses by Sarasota players, comments within the post, and the way the methodology was constructed to avoid outliers and normalize data do tend to contradict that to me and also skew the data.
I know you based it off the previous games numbers but that excludes a few key variables - strength of schedule, home and away splits, and ability to run variant strategies.
Adding % purely for gains on the year also ignores average gain or loss which would be another metric to used to gauge. In that situation for an accurate statistical average you’d drop a high and a low to normalize somewhat and rid of outliers - something that would change the outcomes drastically. For example, in the situation of Austin they lose 11% because of W2 at New Orleans, a major outlier since its the second largest change of any team on any week. This would also normalize the Austin matchup W3 against Orange County where the strategy that was dropped then obviously was improved on in the other direction.
Just food for thought. I do find this interesting and accept the comments that it’s not a shot at anyone in particular, but the opening allusion to a meme, other responses by Sarasota players, comments within the post, and the way the methodology was constructed to avoid outliers and normalize data do tend to contradict that to me and also skew the data.