UPDATED: Pythagenport Relative Power Index Week 5
by Richard Wade on Oct 8, 2008 7:11 PM PDT
21 comments
Here's this week's Power Rankings updated this morning.
| Rk | Team | G | PF | PA | PCT | Opp | OppOpp | RPI | PF/G | PA/G | LW |
| 1 | Washington Redskins | 5 | 109 | 98 | .576 | .710 | .465 | .615 | 21.8 | 19.6 | 3 |
| 2 | Philadelphia Eagles | 5 | 127 | 97 | .689 | .551 | .547 | .585 | 25.4 | 19.4 | 1 |
| 3 | Chicago Bears | 5 | 128 | 87 | .755 | .522 | .535 | .583 | 25.6 | 17.4 | 4 |
| 4 | Carolina Panthers | 5 | 114 | 70 | .796 | .498 | .539 | .583 | 22.8 | 14.0 | 7 |
| 5 | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 5 | 114 | 94 | .636 | .601 | .485 | .581 | 22.8 | 18.8 | 2 |
| 6 | Tennessee Titans | 5 | 115 | 56 | .878 | .393 | .593 | .564 | 23.0 | 11.2 | 10 |
| 7 | Arizona Cardinals | 5 | 147 | 120 | .653 | .536 | .516 | .560 | 29.4 | 24.0 | 17 |
| 8 | San Diego Chargers | 5 | 148 | 129 | .606 | .552 | .515 | .556 | 29.6 | 25.8 | 8 |
| 9 | Dallas Cowboys | 5 | 151 | 111 | .721 | .441 | .602 | .551 | 30.2 | 22.2 | 5 |
| 10 | Baltimore Ravens | 4 | 75 | 56 | .688 | .491 | .523 | .548 | 18.8 | 14.0 | 13 |
| 11 | Miami Dolphins | 4 | 79 | 74 | .546 | .563 | .515 | .547 | 19.8 | 18.5 | 25 |
| 12 | Minnesota Vikings | 5 | 101 | 109 | .445 | .632 | .475 | .546 | 20.2 | 21.8 | 14 |
| 13 | New Orleans Saints | 5 | 138 | 130 | .546 | .538 | .558 | .545 | 27.6 | 26.0 | 6 |
| 14 | New York Jets | 4 | 115 | 116 | .493 | .576 | .512 | .539 | 28.8 | 29.0 | 19 |
| 15 | Pittsburgh Steelers | 5 | 103 | 79 | .677 | .440 | .555 | .528 | 20.6 | 15.8 | 9 |
| 16 | New York Giants | 4 | 127 | 49 | .943 | .259 | .632 | .523 | 31.8 | 12.3 | 11 |
| 17 | Denver Broncos | 5 | 149 | 130 | .606 | .445 | .548 | .511 | 29.8 | 26.0 | 16 |
| 18 | Green Bay Packers | 5 | 133 | 128 | .530 | .489 | .535 | .511 | 26.6 | 25.6 | 12 |
| 19 | Cincinnati Bengals | 5 | 74 | 118 | .211 | .685 | .432 | .503 | 14.8 | 23.6 | 21 |
| 20 | Jacksonville Jaguars | 5 | 100 | 111 | .425 | .560 | .443 | .497 | 20.0 | 22.2 | 18 |
| 21 | Atlanta Falcons | 5 | 117 | 107 | .566 | .432 | .543 | .493 | 23.4 | 21.4 | 23 |
| 22 | Indianapolis Colts | 4 | 83 | 94 | .409 | .456 | .578 | .475 | 20.8 | 23.5 | 24 |
| 23 | Cleveland Browns | 4 | 46 | 78 | .197 | .574 | .514 | .465 | 11.5 | 19.5 | 26 |
| 24 | Houston Texans | 4 | 83 | 130 | .199 | .597 | .462 | .464 | 20.8 | 32.5 | 20 |
| 25 | Buffalo Bills | 5 | 126 | 104 | .639 | .329 | .544 | .460 | 25.2 | 20.8 | 15 |
| 26 | New England Patriots | 4 | 79 | 79 | .500 | .396 | .524 | .454 | 19.8 | 19.8 | 30 |
| 27 | Oakland Raiders | 4 | 78 | 101 | .318 | .493 | .471 | .444 | 19.5 | 25.3 | 22 |
| 28 | San Francisco 49ers | 5 | 115 | 127 | .426 | .400 | .509 | .434 | 23.0 | 25.4 | 29 |
| 29 | Kansas City Chiefs | 5 | 65 | 131 | .120 | .557 | .453 | .422 | 13.0 | 26.2 | 31 |
| 30 | St. Louis Rams | 4 | 43 | 147 | .024 | .624 | .412 | .421 | 10.8 | 36.8 | 27 |
| 31 | Detroit Lions | 4 | 66 | 147 | .077 | .569 | .461 | .419 | 16.5 | 36.8 | 32 |
| 32 | Seattle Seahawks | 4 | 83 | 124 | .225 | .508 | .403 | .411 | 20.8 | 31.0 | 28 |
The Redskins have taken over the top spot, which I think is where I'd rank them were I doing this subjectively. Three teams moved at least 10 spots from last week's rankings. Miami's win over the Chargers moved them from 25th to 11th. Arizona and Buffalo moved in opposite directions based on the outcome of their game. Both the Steelers and Giants dropped despite winning, though only the Giants fell five spots while improving their pythagenport winning percentage. They fell entirely due to strength of schedule.
UPDATE: I thought about it a bit and then decided to steal the idea of reducing opponent adjustments by 50%. The new rankings certainly agree more with DVOA, so if you believe in those numbers these are better:
| Team | G | PF | PA | PCT | Opp | OppOpp | RPI |
| New York Giants | 4 | 127 | 49 | .943 | .259 | .632 | .733 |
| Tennessee Titans | 5 | 115 | 56 | .878 | .393 | .593 | .721 |
| Carolina Panthers | 5 | 114 | 70 | .796 | .498 | .539 | .690 |
| Chicago Bears | 5 | 128 | 87 | .755 | .522 | .535 | .669 |
| Philadelphia Eagles | 5 | 127 | 97 | .689 | .551 | .547 | .637 |
| Dallas Cowboys | 5 | 151 | 111 | .721 | .441 | .602 | .636 |
| Baltimore Ravens | 4 | 75 | 56 | .688 | .491 | .523 | .618 |
| Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 5 | 114 | 94 | .636 | .601 | .485 | .608 |
| Arizona Cardinals | 5 | 147 | 120 | .653 | .536 | .516 | .606 |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 5 | 103 | 79 | .677 | .440 | .555 | .602 |
| Washington Redskins | 5 | 109 | 98 | .576 | .710 | .465 | .596 |
| San Diego Chargers | 5 | 148 | 129 | .606 | .552 | .515 | .581 |
| Denver Broncos | 5 | 149 | 130 | .606 | .445 | .548 | .558 |
| Buffalo Bills | 5 | 126 | 104 | .639 | .329 | .544 | .550 |
| Miami Dolphins | 4 | 79 | 74 | .546 | .563 | .515 | .546 |
| New Orleans Saints | 5 | 138 | 130 | .546 | .538 | .558 | .546 |
| Atlanta Falcons | 5 | 117 | 107 | .566 | .432 | .543 | .529 |
| Green Bay Packers | 5 | 133 | 128 | .530 | .489 | .535 | .520 |
| New York Jets | 4 | 115 | 116 | .493 | .576 | .512 | .516 |
| Minnesota Vikings | 5 | 101 | 109 | .445 | .632 | .475 | .495 |
| New England Patriots | 4 | 79 | 79 | .500 | .396 | .524 | .477 |
| Jacksonville Jaguars | 5 | 100 | 111 | .425 | .560 | .443 | .461 |
| Indianapolis Colts | 4 | 83 | 94 | .409 | .456 | .578 | .442 |
| San Francisco 49ers | 5 | 115 | 127 | .426 | .400 | .509 | .430 |
| Oakland Raiders | 4 | 78 | 101 | .318 | .493 | .471 | .381 |
| Cincinnati Bengals | 5 | 74 | 118 | .211 | .685 | .432 | .357 |
| Houston Texans | 4 | 83 | 130 | .199 | .597 | .462 | .331 |
| Cleveland Browns | 4 | 46 | 78 | .197 | .574 | .514 | .331 |
| Seattle Seahawks | 4 | 83 | 124 | .225 | .508 | .403 | .318 |
| Kansas City Chiefs | 5 | 65 | 131 | .120 | .557 | .453 | .271 |
| Detroit Lions | 4 | 66 | 147 | .077 | .569 | .461 | .248 |
| St. Louis Rams | 4 | 43 | 147 | .024 | .624 | .412 | .223 |
This FanPost was written by a member of the Bolts From The Blue community and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Bolts From The Blue editors or SB Nation.
0 recs |
21 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Hochuli and Gramatica included in the calculations?
How are Tampa Bay, New Orleans, and San Diego all ranked ahead of Denver when Denver has beaten all of them?
Honest question… just curious how this works.
by CoastalBronco on Oct 8, 2008 9:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well I'll tell you
There is no subjectivity at all. It’s all based on the numbers you see above.
People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power.
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 8, 2008 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Because this is based entirely off of total points for and against combined off the strength of opponents (also based off of points for and against). For instance, because of the Hochuli mistake the Broncos have an extra 8 points (15 if you count the botched Bailey int call) and the Vikings an extra 7. If you used a stat based on the strength of each play run a team runs based on offense, defense and special teams combine with opponent strength then the effects of the Hochuli incidents would be minimized (it’s only 1-3 plays among many many plays). Gramatica would still count though, since he is the one (not) executing plays.
Homer: Ohhhh, The Denver Broncos.
Marge: Whats wrong with the Denver Broncos?
Homer: Marge you just don't understand football.
by Wonko on Oct 8, 2008 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From My Week 3 Post:
Pythagenport is (pfx)/(pfx + pfx) where x is ((pf+pf)/g).285.
RPI is 25% Pythagenport Winning Percentage, 50% Opponents’ Pythagenport Winning Percentage and 25% Opponents’ Opponents’ Pythagenport Winning Percentage.
The rest of the stats should already be familiar.
by Richard Wade on Oct 8, 2008 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ouuuuuuuuuch
MAAAAAAAAATH!!! I HATE MAAAAATH!!!
RAAAAAARRRRR
(d’s for degrees got me through stats in case you couldnt tell. thank god poli sci majors dont have to take calculus)
www.wellbelowthemendozaline.blogspot.com
by justdave on Oct 8, 2008 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so PA is not factored into RPI or PCT
and Pythagenport from your explanation = PCT in the chart
by CoastalBronco on Oct 9, 2008 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, son of a -
I really should have proofread that. Sorry.
(pf ^ x)/(pf ^ x + pa ^ x), where x is ((pf+pa)/g)^.285
by Richard Wade on Oct 9, 2008 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
whoa... x is an exponent
that is some heavy math…
And it now makes more sense why the Broncos are ranked so low (previously their PF should have had them nearer the top of the heap).
I like the new weighting of SOS… the rankings seem more reasonable to me. Although Carolina is a bit of a surprise.
Interesting that the PCT for the Chargers and Broncos is identical.
by CoastalBronco on Oct 9, 2008 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chargers and Broncos with same PCT
Makes sense, since their PF and PA is almost identical. I guess it’s not the interesting…
:P
by CoastalBronco on Oct 9, 2008 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I can see why you were confused. There were something like 8 typos in my first posting of the equation.
It’s not quite identical. The Chargers’ is slightly (and I must stress slightly) better.
by Richard Wade on Oct 9, 2008 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm still curious if their is a correlation between these numbers and future winning percentage
I know there is a strong correlation in baseball. But if the correlation were there in football it seems like stat based sites like football outsiders would use Pythagenport instead of DVOA.
So is there any advantage that anyone knows of to using this over DVOA?
Homer: Ohhhh, The Denver Broncos.
Marge: Whats wrong with the Denver Broncos?
Homer: Marge you just don't understand football.
by Wonko on Oct 8, 2008 12:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Good question.
I’d like to know the answer too if anyone can explain.
We're gonna dazzle you with our "sub par" play.
by soulSD on Oct 8, 2008 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
FO does reference Pythagorean records.
by Richard Wade on Oct 8, 2008 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW
I’m not try to criticize anything here. I’m just making observations. Every stat has its own role in interpreting the data.
One big difference I see between this and DVOA is the NY Giants. DVOA has them as the #1 team in football on the strength of its #1 ranked offense and #7 ranked defense. Pythagenport has them at #16. A lot of it is due to the strength of schedule (Was, StL, Cin, Sea). Pythagenport seems to weight those points for and against as average performance whereas DVOA sees the plays they made on par with what would be expected of a top team vs far inferior opponents. I would think Pythagenport wouldn’t have a problem with a top team beating Sea and StL by the scores it did, but it is really hitting them hard for the close Cincinnati game.
Homer: Ohhhh, The Denver Broncos.
Marge: Whats wrong with the Denver Broncos?
Homer: Marge you just don't understand football.
by Wonko on Oct 8, 2008 12:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The Giants are #1 by Pythagenport. They’re taking a hit from having so 75% of their games against terrible teams. I should probably change the weighting based on games played, but I haven’t looked at it closely enough to know what that weighting should be. If you have thoughts on that, I’d be interested to hear them.
by Richard Wade on Oct 8, 2008 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, when you look at points rather than plays you’re probably going to get a less accurate picture just as you would if you went by wins rather than points.
by Richard Wade on Oct 8, 2008 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
I didn’t pay attention to the ordering by RPI. So it’s the RPI that is having a tough time with the Giants’ opponents.
Homer: Ohhhh, The Denver Broncos.
Marge: Whats wrong with the Denver Broncos?
Homer: Marge you just don't understand football.
by Wonko on Oct 8, 2008 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
New Update Still has the Bolts over the donks.
People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power.
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 8, 2008 11:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Take heart
I’ve been running down a rankings rabbit hole, and I found this guy who I thought Charger fans might find encouraging: http://fspi.blogspot.com/2008/10/nfl-week-5-power-rankings.html
by CoastalBronco on Oct 9, 2008 3:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How can you compute Pythagorean percentage for football teams?
I enjoy it in baseball and basketball, i’d like to try in for football.
My name is Finlay, and I love to fight!
by Finlay on Oct 14, 2008 10:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
(pf ^ x)/(pf ^ x + pa ^ x), where x is ((pf+pa)/g)^.285
by Richard Wade on Oct 14, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
