Official Packers vs. Vikings II Discussion Thread

[Maxie the Taxi]

Is the vertical axis on the left the North coast of the Gulf of Mexico?

If so, it looks like the hurricane tracks are zeroed in on my house. I think I'm going to evacuate immediately!

[pbmax]

Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 3m3 minutes ago
The Packers added CB Davon House (illness) to the injury report. He's still probable to play against #Vikings

[Fritz]

Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 3m3 minutes ago
The Packers added CB Davon House (illness) to the injury report. He's still probable to play against #Vikings

Weird, these added injury reports. Does this mean, perhaps, that some guys have been banged up for awhile, and the team sees this as an opportunity to rest some guys because of the level of competition?

[pbmax]

Weird, these added injury reports. Does this mean, perhaps, that some guys have been banged up for awhile, and the team sees this as an opportunity to rest some guys because of the level of competition?

Maybe. Or he could just have the flu.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think I'm going to evacuate immediately!

Loss of bowel control must be one of the worst parts about aging.

[Harlan Huckleby]

But it gives you a very good sense of who has sustained success (Bears and Packers) who has been mediocre for a LONG time (Bears then Giants-even with 5 Super Bowl wins between them) and the expansion teams who rise above all others, the Browns, and the single biggest era jump in the chart, Walsh's 49ers. Unless you want to give full credence to the AAFC, in which case I think the Browns increased their overall margin nearly by nearly 3,000 points in slightly less time than Walsh and the 49ers did.

I'm afraid those graphs have got me very cranky indeed. I'm all for integration, but this is ridiculous. It is NOT useful for looking at eras. Slopes at left end of plot are less significant than changes at right. A more interesting graph would just show margin of victory, with maybe a smoothing filter (moving average) to show era trends clearer.

Very disturbing. I'm inconsolable - don't talk to me about this again.

[smuggler]

it looks as if Floyd and Khalil are both questionable for the game on Sunday. I expect they'll probably try to trot them both out there but both missed practice yesterday with knees. Not a good sign for Minny.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Loss of bowel control must be one of the worst parts about aging.

Without a doubt. I have evacuation routes mapped out from all rooms in my house to the nearest bathroom.

[pbmax]

I'm afraid those graphs have got me very cranky indeed. I'm all for integration, but this is ridiculous. It is NOT useful for looking at eras. Slopes at left end of plot are less significant than changes at right. A more interesting graph would just show margin of victory, with maybe a smoothing filter (moving average) to show era trends clearer.

Very disturbing. I'm inconsolable - don't talk to me about this again.

This graph is exactly margin of victory.

[smuggler]

What does the graph have to do with the Purple Queens?

[pbmax]

What does the graph have to do with the Purple Queens?

Packers are great, Vikings are better than the Saints and Falcons over the long haul.

[Harlan Huckleby]

This graph is exactly margin of victory.

Well, it is supposed to be "cumulative regular-season point differential since 1920"
I read that to be a running total of all game margins since 1920. Perhaps I misunderstand, but that's what it says.

edit: I just looked again: yes, that's exactly what it is, and it's a dumb ass graph.
I was making a calculus joke with "integration"
Now I'm upset all over again.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Without a doubt. I have evacuation routes mapped out from all rooms in my house to the nearest bathroom.

I was thinking of that picturesque phrase, "I evacuated my bowels."

[pbmax]

Well, it is supposed to be "cumulative regular-season point differential since 1920"
I read that to be a running total of all game margins since 1920. Perhaps I misunderstand, but that's what it says.

That means the accumulated margin of victory (if you are willing to live with negative margin of victory for losses).

If you went with an average for each team, that would exacerbate the problems with different eras.

To both look at the historical record and consider eras, you would need a differential between a teams yearly margin of victory and total scoring or standard deviation.

[Harlan Huckleby]

That means the accumulated margin of victory (if you are willing to live with negative margin of victory for losses).

yes, not the margin of victory.

To both look at the historical record and consider eras, you would need a differential between a teams yearly margin of victory and total scoring or standard deviation.

Huh? No, just a plot of margin of victory totaled for each year and plotted by year. Good enough.

I had the idea of applying a smoothing filter just to see era trends easier, but not necessary. And maybe bad idea.