Packers and Close games

[Upnorth]

http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_5423_The_truth_about_the_front-running_Green_Bay_Packers.html

Reading this as a packers fan you start to get kinda depressed, until the final part.
There are some unreal stats uncovered in here, including the packers inability to win 4th quarter come back attemps during the Rodgers era.
However when we loose, it tends to be close games, where 78.3% of his losses are with in one score.
Give it a read, but it highlights what I tend to brush over in my head after the two years of sucsess.

[pbmax]

All I needed to read was that John Skelton was better than Rodgers at (their definition of) comebacks to realize they have no idea the implication of the data they are tracking.

[Smidgeon]

I think that last point was something we'd discussed on this board a while ago: his comeback percentage is so low because the Packers don't get blown out of games. If they're going to lose, they're going to lose by a little and not a lot.

But still a fascinating article.

[pbmax]

The other interesting thing is that is starts off as a critique of the team but quickly devolved into the problem of the QB.

[Upnorth]

All I needed to read was that John Skelton was better than Rodgers at (their definition of) comebacks to realize they have no idea the implication of the data they are tracking.

I belive the metric they used was w/l when game within 7 or less in the 4th quarter. Using that as the basis Rodgers raw numbers don't look great, however they do being to look better when you get into the meat of the matter. In the end I would like to see his 'comeback' numbers not have to improve if they are leading through the 4th quarter instead. (They did a great article on that last year as well).

[smuggler]

Yeah, there are more than a few forms of bias at play in the logic that fine chap uses. Basically, don't bother reading it.

[denverYooper]

Yeah, there are more than a few forms of bias at play in the logic that fine chap uses. Basically, don't bother reading it.

Captain Comeback worked very hard to construct his data set and he's apparently getting some pub for his 4th quarter comeback/game winning drive statistic. So there's that -- he spent a lot of time on building his data set . I'm with you, though -- his story is porous and his statistic is arbitrary at best. His defense reads like a high schooler's argumentative essay.

I'd read his methodology at one point from some sports stats discussion board (can't remember which) and it amounted to a slog through the games at pro-football-reference to examine point differential swings in the 4th quarter. Like Upnorth said, I think that he said the QB had an opportunity for a 4th quarter comeback if the QB was down by 7 or less. Then he tallied the number of games won or lost and the QB at the helm at the time and constructed the record from that.

There is a larger problem that I have with many NFL statistics being pumped out and sold to people -- most of them are as crude and arbitrary. Though I find CHFF entertaining at times, I would never pay for their quality stats because most of them are pretty easy to figure out with a spreadsheet and a scrape from any one of numerous public data sources.

[pbmax]

I have to go back and read it carefully, but is there any mention of defense in the article?

[smuggler]

Green Bay was tied or trailed in two games last year. We won 1 game, we lost 1 game. The New York Giants, led by Capt. Clutch himself, Eli Manning, were tied or trailed in thirteen games last year. They won 6 and lost 7.