Tuesday, September 15, 2009

2009 NFL Survivor Elimination Pool - Week 2 Pick Strategy

My week one pick Indianapolis defeated the jacksonville Jaguars on Sunday, meaning I have advanced to week 2 of this year's 2009 NFL survivor pool. Here is my strategy for this week's pick:

My week 2 pick is the Green Bay Packers to defeat the Cincinnati Bengals (in Green Bay). A Green Bay victory is actually one of 5 projected blowouts on the NFL week 2 schedule. I also expect 3 other home teams (Atlanta over Carolina, Tennesee over Houston, and Washington over St. Louis) and one road team (Minnesota over Detroit) to also win in blowout fashion along with Green Bay. However, Green Bay is a better choice for a week 2 winner than those other 4 options because:

1. Green Bay has 2 other projected blowout wins on the calendar. Week 3 on the road against St. Louis and week 6 at home against Detroit. However, in week 3, the Eagles are an even more likely winner at home against Kansas City. And in week 6, the Pittsburgh Steelers are an ever more likely winner at home against the Cleveland Browns. So we can use Green Bay now because we're planning to use Philadelphia and Pittsburgh those other weeks.

2. Not going to pick Minnesota on the road this week against Detroit because we're saving Minnesota for week 10 when they play Detroit at home (and are even more likely to win).

3. Not going to use Atlanta at home this week against Carolina because we're saving Atlanta for week 12 when they are home against Tampa Bay. The updated (week 2) ESPN power rankings say that Carolina is a much better team than Tampa Bay, so Atlanta will be even more likely to win in week 12 than this coming week.

4. Not going with Tennesee over Houston this week because we're planning to save Tennessee for week 14 when they are playing at home against St. Louis. St. Louis is a much worse team than Houston (at least according to the ESPN power rankings).

5. The last blowout option I am passing on is Washington to beat St. Louis in Washington. Unlike with the other 3 blowouts we are passing on, in the case of Washington, this is their most likely week to win as a favorite in their entire remaining schedule. However, using my formula based on the ESPN power rankings, the differential between Green Bay and Cincinnati in the coming week is greater than the differential between Washington and St. Louis.

Notes: I developed an Excel model to optimize winner picks for the entire NFL schedule so that the sum of the differential of all the games used is the largest. On Tuesday of each week, I update my Excel model with the latest ESPN power rankings, which are also updated on Tuesdays. From week to week, as the power rankings fluctuate, the optimal set of winners the model says to use for all remaining games will change. That is why I am not publishing my picks now for every single remaining week. I will just take the latest information, and use it to come up with the best possible pick for this week, but always keep the entire NFL schedule in mind. For more on the philosophy / algorithm / approach / methodology of the Excel picking model, please see the post announcing my winner pick from week 1.

19 comments:

  1. I thought you weren't gonna disclose your algorithm...

    ReplyDelete
  2. also, maybe you should make the product the largest? Two 5's are better than a 1 and a 9.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So you are saying that Washington is the second best choice?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just based on your week 1 pick, I have no faith in anything you say or your algorithm. Jacksonville ALWAYS plays indy tight. Indy usually wins, but they are always close games, and for that fact you SHOULD have stayed away. My guess is that you haven't played survivor a lot. You Don't save teams. Just pick the best matchup each week. Most leagues don't make it to the final weeks

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear ReverendTom,

    Your "You Don't save teams" (incorrect capitalization retained) comment is what's known to those of us with a college education as a greedy algorithm, and can be proven not to be optimal in this case. For the record, The Fantasy Sports Consultant fielded the top two teams in his league last year, with 100+ entrants. How did you do?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks for backing me up Pete. Peter is one of my best buds with nice credentials to boot (Master's degree in operations research from Cornell Univ and current PhD student at Princeton). So, he definitely knows a lot about optimization and alogirthms.

    Anyway, the model does look at all weeks, which is definitely the right thing to do. However, as I explained in an earlier post, future weeks are weighted less than the current week according to an exponentially decaying function.

    Finally, as Pete mentioned, I don't usually like to brag, but I did submit 2 entries into my office's elimination pool last year which had over 100 entries. One of my entries took the first place prize outright, and the other entry tied for second with 2 other entries. It was a great showing and I am hoping for a repeat performance this year.

    ReplyDelete
  7. John, I would, in fact, say that Washington is the 2nd best choice this week.

    ReplyDelete
  8. why do you assume that espn's power rankings are correct, and that 1 difference in the rankings is worth 1 point, and that home field advantage is worth 5 points? that's exceedingly stupid and completely baseless.. there's zero evidence that backs any of this up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dear Adam,

    While the difference of 1 rank is a simplification, it's not baseless - it assumes a uniform distribution and linearity, reasonable approximations. The difference of 5 ranks for the home team is somewhat arbitrary (or is it FSC?), but it seems reasonable, and is clearly much better than nothing. It reminds me very much of the adjustments to betting spreads that home teams get. The only "exceedingly stupid" part of this blog is your overly disdainful comment. If you don't have a constructive idea or comment, keep your insults to yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's not reasonable at all. There's no reasonableness to your assumptions until you prove them, unless you believe them blindly... and you appear to believe them blindly. The constructive part of my comment comes from hoping that you'll see some error in your ways and better assess your options in the future.

    It's unfortunate that people take your advice when you are making assumptions that are just... not true; they don't hold up in the real world at all. If you had run some kind of a regression on week-by-week ESPN ranking vs. win pct and come up with a significant p-value (and a better estimate for HFA), and then based your "results" on some kind of an "equation" that can be "derived" using statistics/mathematics, I might take you seriously. Until then, enjoy your blind following of mathematically challenged idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Adam,

    First off, the FSC is smarter than you. And me, for that matter. But nevermind that.

    Secondly, your diatribe on assumptions is silly - no matter what you are doing, you have to make some assumptions (see Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).

    Third, your idea of using a regression to figure out HFA is a fair one - but I don't see how regressing ESPN ranking on win pct would really do anything. A better regression would be a logistic regression which regresses game outcomes for a particular team versus both power ranking and a binary home field variable (along with some other covariates, such as power ranking of the other team). Then, you could take the ratio of the coefficient on the home field variable and compare it to the coefficient on the power ranking variable. For instance, if one power ranking spot increased winning percentage by .01, and home field increased it by .1, you could argue that home field advantage is roughly equivalent to 10 spots in the power rankings.

    If you'd like me to explain logistic regression to you further let me know.

    Apparently a mathematically challenged idiot,
    Pete

    ReplyDelete
  12. Week 3 Picks??? Eagles have no chance in being my suicide pick now. Oakland at home is looking OK.
    Ideas?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Green Bay Week 2.. yeah that didn't work. Should have picked Washington. What good is it to save a pick for the future when your not in the pool anymore

    ReplyDelete
  14. I felt that Washington was a better choice than Green Bay, and was right. Not that Washington looked that good, I just had a bad feeling about the Packers.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Adam,

    Sorry I deleted your comment, please feel free to re-post it, just leave out the expletive.

    ReplyDelete
  17. A very awesome blog post. We are really grateful for your blog post. You will find a lot of approaches after visiting your post. 안전놀이터

    ReplyDelete
  18. 토토사이트✅️먹튀폴리스✅️안전놀이터 먹튀검증 추천은 여기에서 확인해 보세요! 최적화된 페이지와 고퀄리티 자료를 방문해 주시는 회원님들 제공하며 먹튀 없는 토토사이트 문화가 나오는 날까지 최선을 다하겠습니다 먹튀폴리스

    ReplyDelete

 

© 2010 Zach Samuels

links to this site are welcome, but copying and reposting of the contents of this page are not permitted without express written consent from the author.