How does one check the current strength of schedule for a team?

by TJBOLT on Nov 10, 2010 6:55 PM PST

I guess this curiosity jumped to me, as I was listening to Hacksaw Hamilton (I know dumb idea), but the guy said the chargers have had the league's easiest schedule so far. If I can remember right, entering the season the chargers the 30th easiest schedule. I seriously doubt the chargers have had the easiest schedule considering the have faced one team in 9 games with a losing record at this moment. So how does one check the current strength of schedule for a team? I have only found files containing the rankings against the 2009 record, but not an up to date with the 2010 records?

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.

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I haven't found week-by-week strength of schedule

information posted anywhere. I usually calculate it myself when I’m that curious. It can get pretty tedious later in the season.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 10, 2010 8:46 PM PST reply actions

How do you want to measure strength of schedule?

FBO includes in their weekly DVOA analysis posts a table that shows how hard DVOA-wise every team’s schedule has been so far, and how hard their remaining schedule is.

For example, so far the Chargers have played the 24th hardest schedule, as our opponents together have posted a -3.3% DVOA. We have the 21st hardest schedule remaining, our future opponents posting a cumulative -4.0% DVOA. As Wonko has pointed out, that’s roughly the equivalent of playing the San Francisco 49ers for the rest of our remaining games.

My name is Guybrush Threepwood, and I'm a mighty pirate.
"How appropriate! You fight like a cow!"
Faceless slider-tossing goofs FTW.

by Zach (maestro876) on Nov 10, 2010 9:06 PM PST reply actions

The silliest way of measuring SoS

is by last year’s win/loss record. For obvious reasons.

My name is Guybrush Threepwood, and I'm a mighty pirate.
"How appropriate! You fight like a cow!"
Faceless slider-tossing goofs FTW.

by Zach (maestro876) on Nov 10, 2010 9:07 PM PST up reply actions

Some more strength of schedule

The Chiefs have played the 20th hardest schedule so far (-1.2% DVOA), and have the 29th hardest schedule remaining (-11.1% DVOA). That means they essentially get to play somewhere between Tampa Bay and Jacksonville for the rest of their games.

A reason not to fear the Raiders? So far they’ve played the 25th hardest schedule (-4.3% DVOA), and have the 6th hardest remaining (6.7% DVOA).

My name is Guybrush Threepwood, and I'm a mighty pirate.
"How appropriate! You fight like a cow!"
Faceless slider-tossing goofs FTW.

by Zach (maestro876) on Nov 10, 2010 9:13 PM PST reply actions

But is it really meaningful in any way

beyond the abstract?.

The way I understand it your played SOS and your upcoming SOS would be fluid values, as progressive performances increase the known quantity of measurement week by week.

For example the Chargers could be winless after 8 games and whoever playing us in the 9th week would therefore be meeting the (possible) 32nd hardest opponents. If the Chargers then go to say 7-8 the team playing us in week 16 are meeting a team rated more around 16th -18th hardest.

The point being that the difficulty shifts retroactively – you don’t truly know who were the season’s hardest and weakest teams (and therefore who had the hardest schedule) until the entire schedule is played. By which time it’s a moot point.

Ok, now my head hurts a little bit.

This is my first football-related post. I think if I get through this one, I can get through anything.

'Special' Teams means those guys ride in a big orange bus, right?
It's NEVER a shrimp on the barbie. It's not even a shrimp.

by The Land Of Real Beer on Nov 11, 2010 6:47 AM PST up reply actions

It is fluid.

Because as you say, teams change week to week based on performance. That’s why it’s silly to base strength of schedule on something like 2009 performance. 2010 performance is far more relevant.

My name is Guybrush Threepwood, and I'm a mighty pirate.
"How appropriate! You fight like a cow!"
Faceless slider-tossing goofs FTW.

by Zach (maestro876) on Nov 11, 2010 8:10 AM PST up reply actions

It helps to understand the quality of opponents.

SOS would necessarily change throughout the season.
It is also possible to look at it comparitively to your current situation. So if you take the difference between your current cumulative DVOA and the current cumulative DVOA of your opponents you would come up with a different ranking than another team facing those same opponents or just ranking the cumulative DVOA from 1 – 32.
No matter how it is done it will be always relatively abstract. It can never take luck into effect. I don’t think it takes injury or blackouts into effect either. Blackouts would mean that the home team didn’t fill the stadium and therefore there is no tangible “12th man on the field” effect.

It’s like religion. No one can prove or disprove it’s truth. But the merit lies in how it makes us feel.

6/10/2010 - Tra Thomas signs with the Chargers
8/21/2010 - Tra Thomas retires.

That was fast.

by SD FTW on Nov 11, 2010 8:11 AM PST up reply actions

The fluid part makes it interesting

I thought entering the season the schedule would basically be a walk over, while not the most difficult it clearly hasn’t been the cake walk it looked entering the season.

But if you don’t do your homework (i.e. Hacksaw) what looks like an easy schedule hasn’t been as easy. But that would actually take work, and would require you actually give the chargers a little bit of a break, and that wouldn’t get people calling your show either.

by TJBOLT on Nov 11, 2010 9:16 AM PST up reply actions

And if your head didn't hurt enough before, also consider this

A team obviously plays differently at different times; sometimes well, sometimes not so well. The DVOA accounts for this in a cumulative way, but doesn’t account for how well the team played on any given day. What I mean is this: the Chiefs defeated the Chargers when the Chargers weren’t playing well. But the Chargers have played better (and worse) since then. Consequently, their DVOA has improved (and gone down). So the value of the Chiefs’ victory over the Chargers changes each time the Chargers do really well or really poorly. But what doesn’t change is how the Chargers played the day the Chiefs beat them. If the Chiefs win when they play the Chargers again, the SOS value of both wins would be the same, because the Chargers will have a single DVOA that cumulatively defines their season (unless I’m mistaken about how the DVOA-adjust SOS is calculated). I don’t know if there’s any way to make the value of a win over a team reflect how that team played on that day.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 11, 2010 1:35 PM PST up reply actions

Yes!

I DO get it – and you said it better than me, the way a team’s performance in a game earlier in the season can alter in value depending on what performances follow it. I’m struggling to see how useful that is given that the value of say your first game of the season alters 15 times thereafter.

Maybe the way to measure a team’s performance on a given day is to give a value to the deviation between how you are EXPECTED to perform measured by your DVOAs against your opponents, and how you ACTUALLY perform according to the same measurements. This deviation would be more relevant that say comparing the stand alone values of your performances of say games 1 and 15, which could be wildly dissimilar and completely independent of one another.

Or is this already done?

'Special' Teams means those guys ride in a big orange bus, right?
It's NEVER a shrimp on the barbie. It's not even a shrimp.

by The Land Of Real Beer on Nov 12, 2010 6:03 AM PST up reply actions

It's not done this way

as far as I know, but it would be much more relevant if it were. The problem is this:

Maybe the way to measure a team’s performance on a given day is to give a value to the deviation between how you are EXPECTED to perform measured by your DVOAs against your opponents, and how you ACTUALLY perform according to the same measurements.

It’s that term “expected”. What we’re talking about is using various kinds of statistics to put some objectivity into what is, ultimately, a subjective concept. What I consider a difficult or easy schedule isn’t necessarily what you would. An extreme example to illustrate: Say for the sake of argument that the Chiefs are the best running team in the NFL, but horrible passing. Similarly, the Chargers are the best passing team, but can’t run the ball. If both teams play the same schedule, and it’s loaded with teams that are great against the run, but can’t stop the pass, then this is an easy schedule for the Chargers, but monstrous for the Chiefs. Same schedule, different assessments. Finding the statistics to describe a teams strengths and weaknesses vis a vis its opponents’ strengths and weaknesses would be even more relevant.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 12, 2010 8:20 AM PST reply actions

Whoops! Was supposed to be a reply to TLORB's comment.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 12, 2010 8:21 AM PST up reply actions

In your example

the Chargers expected performance would be high and the Chiefs low, so my (well not really mine) theoretical system of using some kind of deviation between that and actual performance would still hold true.

Would defining and quantifying an ‘expected’ performance be that difficult?

You could use all the exising stats of each team, maybe with a weighting of the stats BETWEEN those teams, to say that the Chargers, if they pass x number of times, should make x number of yards in this game, and work from there for every type of play and the number of those plays. Then compare those results with what actually happens if they do pass x number of times and run x number of times etc.

Should we be selling this to Football Outsiders?

Or should we just crack a beer and flip a coin?

'Special' Teams means those guys ride in a big orange bus, right?
It's NEVER a shrimp on the barbie. It's not even a shrimp.

by The Land Of Real Beer on Nov 12, 2010 9:34 AM PST up reply actions

Now this makes sense

Or should we just crack a beer and flip a coin?

The former for sure. When all else fails, crack a beer; it’s 5:00 somewhere.

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 12, 2010 1:23 PM PST reply actions

I'm having a bad 'reply' button day

Are Marlon McCree and Antonio Cromartie the same person? Just askin'.

by QLFixBoy on Nov 12, 2010 1:23 PM PST up reply actions

you could use the yahoo computer generated playoff outlook...

Im not sure exactly what they call it but its a post game weekend analysis updated as to which teams have improved their chances of making the playoffs after the most up to date statistics…You may be able to deduce similar or new info from their computer program assisted calculations. Again, its on Yahoo, sorry I can’t remember the exact article name or can’t give a fraction of the effort it’s taken to write this, to go research. I didnt say I was a scholar. lol

by Terecksis Nunchucken Heads on Nov 20, 2010 6:02 PM PST reply actions