NFL Playoff Machine

[Poppa San]

But I was so perplexed trying to figure out what a “TAM” was

the hat

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Zartan]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

This is my prediction and final answer.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I did “like” it. But I was so perplexed trying to figure out what a “TAM” was.., my A.D.D kicked in full throttle and I forgot everything I read.

I guess you mean, "If 8-5 TAM had not lost to 3-10 DET...." You couldn't surmise who TAM was that lost to DET? Did "DET" cause any problems for you? I'm going to say these are not my problems.

Just a for instance, scroll down the followning link to any block of stats to see who that particular guy plays for. Hint: It shows "TAM".

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WinsJa00.htm

These abbreviations are everywhere.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I do think the 49ers catch some L's down the line, but making up 3 games in 5 weeks is highly unlikely.

It would be unlikely that the Packers make up three games on the Niners with five weeks left in the season but not impossible considering the remaining schedules of both teams.

Based on which tie breaker? SoS?

If both teams win out the Seahawks would win the tie breaker based on record in common games because of the Packers loss to the Eagles.

I mean it's kinda silly on its face when one machine says the Packers have a 45% chance of a first round bye with a win at SF, 5% with a loss while there is still five more weeks to go after than. The Packers could win to get that 45% and then lose the next week and see that % dump.

The result of the head to head matchup is a huge factor when talking about these probabilities though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The result of the head to head matchup is a huge factor when talking about these probabilities though.

Right, these probablities. Lets see if it matters 6 weeks from now.

 

[Heyjoe4]

***Mods please feel free to move this if you all feel it fits better elsewhere.***

I saw that ESPN has the playoff machine up and I was messing around with it today. From what I am getting, it seems like the only way GB gets a 1 or 2 seed would be for us to win out. Majority of "realistic sims I have done put us at the #3 seed.

I also saw that if we lose to San Fran, and win every other game then it won't matter if we win or lose to Minnesota based on my sims, we will fall to the 3 seed regardless.

My X-Factors that may be different from others is I have Seattle winning almost all their remaining games (they may drop 1, 2 if lucky). I also have San Fran losing to Baltimore, Saints, and Seahawks. The simulator is pretty fun to play around with. What do you all predict the seeding to be?

Question - if the Packers win four out of the next five, lose to the Vikings and end up with the same record, who wins the NFC North? Because that’s the only way to a number 3 seed I think.

 

[Poppa San]

Packers end with the same record as Minnesota, Packers have the tiebreaker no matter the outcome of their game in a few weeks. Thanx to the B3@rz.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers end with the same record as Minnesota, Packers have the tiebreaker no matter the outcome of their game in a few weeks. Thanx to the B3@rz.

That's only true if the Packers end up tied with the Vikings at 12-4. If they lose another game within the division and finish the season with 11 Minnesota could win the tie breaker over them.

 

[PackAttack12]

Right, these probablities. Lets see if it matters 6 weeks from now.

In 6 weeks we'll discuss based on new data. Have a little fun sometimes.

 

[HardRightEdge]

In 6 weeks we'll discuss based on new data. Have a little fun sometimes.

Riding some emotional or intellectual whipsaw, depending on one's disposition, is not my idea of fun. The probability engines flip and flop every week, something that should be known in advance. It's like predicting where the S&P 500 will be in 6 weeks.

Converting the first down on 4th. and 10? That's my idea of fun.

 

[OldSchool101]

I guess you mean, "If 8-5 TAM had not lost to 3-10 DET...." You couldn't surmise who TAM was that lost to DET? Did "DET" cause any problems for you? I'm going to say these are not my problems.
These abbreviations are everywhere.

Oh. I can’t even tell you what DET did to me!
https://www.abbreviations.com/det

That’s what got my ADD kicking in. It was all downhill from there. This is how I read it...
Regarding GB..if TAM Lost TO DET and got TO’d in 2XOT. Then NO ?, a L VS. a W at DET VS GB puts us at least ONE GB. It took a little DET. work, but IM SO O.K. with IT. I DO still ? What’s best 4 the TEAM.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Oh. I can’t even tell you what DET did to me!
https://www.abbreviations.com/det

That’s what got my ADD kicking in. It was all downhill from there. This is how I read it...
Regarding GB..if TAM Lost TO DET and got TO’d in 2XOT. Then NO ?, a L VS. a W at DET VS GB puts us at least ONE GB. It took a little DET. work, but IM SO O.K. with IT. I DO still ? What’s best 4 the TEAM.

I could have worked out that way but it didn't.

 

[elcid]

For us to retake the 2nd seed we and SF would have to win out. Let's root for them vs the Saints and Hawks!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

For us to retake the 2nd seed we and SF would have to win out. Let's root for them vs the Saints and Hawks!

Actually it doesn't matter who wins the NFC West. The Packers would solely need the Saints to lose another conference game.

 

[PackAttack12]

The Saints don't have a particular tough schedule remaining but I didn't expect them to lose vs. the Falcons two weeks ago either.

I’ve got my eye on Saints/Titans in Nashville.

The #1 seed is a bit of a stretch at this point, but not impossible.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I’ve got my eye on Saints/Titans in Nashville.

The #1 seed is a bit of a stretch at this point, but not impossible.

The Saints would win a tie-breaker over the Packers if they only lose to the Titans even with Green Bay winning out.

They would have to suffer a defeat at the hands of the Niners or Panthers for the Packers to have the edge in a scenario in which both teams end up with the same amount of wins.

 

[PackAttack12]

The Saints would win a tie-breaker over the Packers if they only lose to the Titans even with Green Bay winning out.

They would have to suffer a defeat at the hands of the Niners or Panthers for the Packers to have the edge in a scenario in which both teams end up with the same amount of wins.

Ahhh. Due to common games tie breaker.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Somewhere in here it was stated that if the Packers lost to SF their chances of a first round bye would drop to 5%. Well, Packer wins in the last two games now earn that bye. Looks like a lot more than 5% to me.

So, like I said from the get go, no machine is going to tell you anything meaningful with 6 weeks to go.

 

[PackAttack12]

Somewhere in here it was stated that if the Packers lost to SF their chances of a first round bye would drop to 5%. Well, Packer wins in the last two games now earn that bye. Looks like a lot more than 5% to me.

So, like I said from the get go, no machine is going to tell you anything meaningful with 6 weeks to go.

Well lets consider what it has taken for that to occur, and what has to continue to happen for it to occur. The Packers have won three straight, and will have to win another two games, for a total of a 5 game winning streak to finish the season. The 49ers have lost 2 of its last 3 (including one to a below .500 team), and will have to lose another game after starting 10-1. The Seahawks have had to drop a game, and will have to proceed to lose another game after starting the season with just 1 loss. The Vikings were in a better position to win the division at that point as well, which factors into the probability, because the Packers obviously have to win the division to get the 1st seed.

I'm not saying that the playoff machine that I use is a fool proof, end all be all system to measure true probabilities. But it is advanced enough to draw a picture. The chances of the Packers getting the #1 overall seed a few weeks ago was very slim, and a certain series of events have increased those odds, but it's still a better probability than not of the Packers not getting the #1 seed even after what all has transpired.

Take into account what has happened, along with the Packers having to win at Minnesota (along with week 17 at Detroit). Additionally, we now need another loss by both the 49ers and the Seahawks. But it's even more complicated than that, given that the two of them play each other in week 17. So if the 49ers lose next week and the Seahawks win, we then have to hope for the 49ers to come back and beat the Seahawks in week 17. And vice versa. If the Seahawks lose and the 49ers win, we have to hope for the Seahawks to beat the 49ers in week 17.

The odds of all of that happening in and of itself, no matter WHO you ask just off the top of their head would probably say has less than 1/3 or 1/4 of a chance of happening, given that the Packers will be underdogs next week, and both Seattle and San Fran will be favorites. You definitely wouldn't give it an above 50% chance to happen.

I would venture to say that a playoff machine that does tens of thousands of simulations to formulate their percentages is a lot more accurate than either of us throwing darts.

A 5% chance is still a chance. Just because it might happen, doesn't mean it wasn't a massive long shot a few weeks ago.

So again, whether you want to quibble over whether there's actually some dead set probability out there, the simulations they do absolutely draw a picture of a ball park figure. If you can't at least acknowledge that, I'm not sure that I can help you.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well lets consider what it has taken for that to occur, and what has to continue to happen for it to occur. The Packers have won three straight, and will have to win another two games, for a total of a 5 game winning streak to finish the season. The 49ers have lost 2 of its last 3 (including one to a below .500 team), and will have to lose another game after starting 10-1. The Seahawks have had to drop a game, and will have to proceed to lose another game after starting the season with just 1 loss. The Vikings were in a better position to win the division at that point as well, which factors into the probability, because the Packers obviously have to win the division to get the 1st seed.

I'm not saying that the playoff machine that I use is a fool proof, end all be all system to measure true probabilities. But it is advanced enough to draw a picture. The chances of the Packers getting the #1 overall seed a few weeks ago was very slim, and a certain series of events have increased those odds, but it's still a better probability than not of the Packers not getting the #1 seed even after what all has transpired.

Take into account what has happened, along with the Packers having to win at Minnesota (along with week 17 at Detroit). Additionally, we now need another loss by both the 49ers and the Seahawks. But it's even more complicated than that, given that the two of them play each other in week 17. So if the 49ers lose next week and the Seahawks win, we then have to hope for the 49ers to come back and beat the Seahawks in week 17. And vice versa. If the Seahawks lose and the 49ers win, we have to hope for the Seahawks to beat the 49ers in week 17.

The odds of all of that happening in and of itself, no matter WHO you ask just off the top of their head would probably say has less than 1/3 or 1/4 of a chance of happening, given that the Packers will be underdogs next week, and both Seattle and San Fran will be favorites. You definitely wouldn't give it an above 50% chance to happen.

I would venture to say that a playoff machine that does tens of thousands of simulations to formulate their percentages is a lot more accurate than either of us throwing darts.

Like I said lo those many weeks ago, and as cliched as it might be, it is the truth of the matter: you play the games one week at a time.

 

[swhitset]

Well lets consider what it has taken for that to occur, and what has to continue to happen for it to occur. The Packers have won three straight, and will have to win another two games, for a total of a 5 game winning streak to finish the season. The 49ers have lost 2 of its last 3 (including one to a below .500 team), and will have to lose another game after starting 10-1. The Seahawks have had to drop a game, and will have to proceed to lose another game after starting the season with just 1 loss. The Vikings were in a better position to win the division at that point as well, which factors into the probability, because the Packers obviously have to win the division to get the 1st seed.

I'm not saying that the playoff machine that I use is a fool proof, end all be all system to measure true probabilities. But it is advanced enough to draw a picture. The chances of the Packers getting the #1 overall seed a few weeks ago was very slim, and a certain series of events have increased those odds, but it's still a better probability than not of the Packers not getting the #1 seed even after what all has transpired.

Take into account what has happened, along with the Packers having to win at Minnesota (along with week 17 at Detroit). Additionally, we now need another loss by both the 49ers and the Seahawks. But it's even more complicated than that, given that the two of them play each other in week 17. So if the 49ers lose next week and the Seahawks win, we then have to hope for the 49ers to come back and beat the Seahawks in week 17. And vice versa. If the Seahawks lose and the 49ers win, we have to hope for the Seahawks to beat the 49ers in week 17.

The odds of all of that happening in and of itself, no matter WHO you ask just off the top of their head would probably say has less than 1/3 or 1/4 of a chance of happening, given that the Packers will be underdogs next week, and both Seattle and San Fran will be favorites. You definitely wouldn't give it an above 50% chance to happen.

I would venture to say that a playoff machine that does tens of thousands of simulations to formulate their percentages is a lot more accurate than either of us throwing darts.

A 5% chance is still a chance. Just because it might happen, doesn't mean it wasn't a massive long shot a few weeks ago.

So again, whether you want to quibble over whether there's actually some dead set probability out there, the simulations they do absolutely draw a picture of a ball park figure. If you can't at least acknowledge that, I'm not sure that I can help you.

I think his point was that throwing those darts would be pointless with 5 or 6 weeks to go.

 

[PackAttack12]

Like I said lo those many weeks ago, and as cliched as it might be, it is the truth of the matter: you play the games one week at a time.

That's the most captain obvious response you've ever come up with

It doesn't invalidate the unlikeliness of it happening a few weeks ago, and the unlikeliness of it happening now.

Hell if we were to base everything posted off of your premise, we would never even try formulating opinions, or try analyzing statistics or a current state of events for any purpose, because it can all change week to week and you play the games one week at a time. If you followed your own logic, it would save you a whole bunch of time that you've invested in this forum.

 

[adambr2]

I think we stand a decent chance of losing in Minnesota, so I've been trying to find a way that we can get the #2 seed over the Saints if they drop a game to an AFC team and we both finish 12-4 but I just can't find one. It looks like no matter what, they'll hold the tiebreaker on SOV.

So as much as I'd like the Colts to win tonight, it doesn't do much for us unless coupled with another loss to Tennessee.

 

[HardRightEdge]

That's the most captain obvious response you've ever come up with

Sometimes the the obvious thing is the right thing, Occam's Razor and all that.

Hell if we were to base everything posted off of your premise, we would never even try formulating opinions or try analyzing statistics or a current state of events for any purpose, because it can all change week to week and you play the games one week at a time. If you followed your own logic, it would save you a whole bunch of time that you've invested in this forum.

As for the bolded passage, I would say it is not everthing, just some things. The closer a thing is to the present the more likely it is a candidate for prediction.

There is also a difference between analysis and prediction. Good analysis gets you to a clearer understanding of what has actually happened, for its own sake or as a basis for a plausible prediction of an event amenable to prediction. Putting a percentage value on the likelihood of something happening six weeks down the road in this game is not one of them.

Otherwise you become like the inveterate gambler, not diffentiating between weak predictors and strong ones, just playing for the action.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think we stand a decent chance of losing in Minnesota, so I've been trying to find a way that we can get the #2 seed over the Saints if they drop a game to an AFC team and we both finish 12-4 but I just can't find one. It looks like no matter what, they'll hold the tiebreaker on SOV.

So as much as I'd like the Colts to win tonight, it doesn't do much for us unless coupled with another loss to Tennessee.

If the Packers lose at Minnesota and finish the season in a tie with New Orleans at 12-4 they would clinch the #2 seed if the Saints lose to the Panthers in week 17.