Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Longest losing streak in NFL

Runner said:
Your numbers show 9 data points - what are they and what did you project for this season's record? Are you considering Capers 2-14 season the starting point?
Click to expand...

Yes, the 2-14 season is the year 0 data point. You have to set the starting point from which improvement is to be judged otherwise you are making year 1 a no improvement (or decline) year no matter the result. So the 9 points are year 0 and 8 seasons of results (and I used your 5 win scenario for year 8). Best scenario of them winning out, the slope would be .8.
 
infantrycak said:
Yes, the 2-14 season is the year 0 data point. You have to set the starting point from which improvement is to be judged otherwise you are making year 1 a no improvement (or decline) year no matter the result. So the 9 points are year 0 and 8 seasons of results (and I used your 5 win scenario for year 8). Best scenario of them winning out, the slope would be .8.
Click to expand...

I don't think we are answering the same question. I'm answering the question "how has Kubiak improved since he's been here". You are answering the question "how have the Texans done since Kubiak had been here". The inclusion of the two win season radically changes the slope of the line.

However, that is a two edged sword. Your .533 slope starting at a two win season projects something like 8 wins next year. My lesser slope starting at six wins projects more like 9.

I'm just glad this discussion isn't being graded with a red pen...
 
Runner said:
I don't think we are answering the same question. I'm answering the question "how has Kubiak improved since he's been here". You are answering the question "how have the Texans done since Kubiak had been here". The inclusion of the two win season radically changes the slope of the line.
Click to expand...

Well it isn't the same question but your question is not what you suggest. I am answering how the Texans' results improved under Kubiak. You are answering how the Texans' results improved under Kubiak since his 1st season. They didn't get to 6 wins without Kubiak so his 1st season should be included as a result data point rather than ansthe starting point. Neither formulation measures "how Kubiak improved" for either time period.
 
infantrycak said:
Well it isn't the same question but your question is not what you suggest. I am answering how the Texans' results improved under Kubiak. You are answering how the Texans' results improved under Kubiak since his 1st season. They didn't get to 6 wins without Kubiak so his 1st season should be included as a result data point rather than ansthe starting point. Neither formulation measures "how Kubiak improved" for either time period.
Click to expand...

Correct. I am comparing Kubiak to the base he set his first year. If he won 6 games each of his first three years (or 8 or 10 each year) I'd say his performance was flat over those three years. I wouldn't say it had an upward trend because Capers had a 2 win season.

If he won 8 then 7 then 6 I wouldn't say his performance had a positive slope due to the previous 2 win season either. That is obviously misleading.
 
Runner said:
Correct. I am comparing Kubiak to the base he set his first year. If he won 6 games each of his first three years (or 8 or 10 each year) I'd say his performance was flat over those three years. I wouldn't say it had an upward trend because Capers had a 2 win season.

If he won 8 then 7 then 6 I wouldn't say his performance had a positive slope due to the previous 2 win season either. That is obviously misleading.
Click to expand...

No it is proper mathematical analysis. Now you are intentionally skewing. He did not take over a 6 win team. The baseline is what he took on, not the result after a year's effort. Its that simple.

After the 2006 season, if someone asked, you said the team won 4 more games, not none.

Look, linear regression is a very simple tool and it is going to flatten out to a best fit. Non-linear regression would yield a more form fitting curve. You will still include the 2 win season as the start to do it properly.

1 parameter non-linear: y = ln(x + 1522.620766)
2 parameter non-linear: y=2.455916484 x1/2 + 2.987163122
 
Last edited:
infantrycak said:
No it is proper mathematical analysis. Now you are intentionally skewing. He did not take over a 6 win team. The baseline is what he took on, not the result after a year's effort. Its that simple.

After the 2006 season, if someone asked, you said the team won 4 more games, not none.
Click to expand...

After the 2006 season, if someone asked how many games Kubiak's team won, I'd say 6, not +4.

I am clearly stating that I am comparing Kubiak's progress as a coach from his first season onward. Whether you like the question or not, I'm not hiding/skewing anything.

If I am comparing him to Capers, I don't have to do the math to do that. He's much better.
 
Runner said:
After the 2006 season, if someone asked how many games Kubiak's team won, I'd say 6, not +4.

I am clearly stating that I am comparing Kubiak's progress as a coach from his first season onward. Whether you like the question or not, I'm not hiding/skewing anything.

If I am comparing him to Capers, I don't have to do the math to do that. He's much better.
Click to expand...

The ORIGINAL post by EriaDoc made a statement implying that we haven't seen an upward trend since Kubiak took over.

Even if we throw out the previous regime's 2-14 season, there is still an upward trend. Almost any method you use to place a line through those numbers is going to have an upward slope.
 
Runner said:
After the 2006 season, if someone asked how many games Kubiak's team won, I'd say 6, not +4.

I am clearly stating that I am comparing Kubiak's progress as a coach from his first season onward. Whether you like the question or not, I'm not hiding/skewing anything.

If I am comparing him to Capers, I don't have to do the math to do that. He's much better.
Click to expand...

Putting aside the math, you don't have a data source for progress of a coach so you have a logic fallacy to begin your process. W's are a measure of the team in toto. By your suggested standard Bill Belicheck has made no "progress as a coach" during his tenure in New England.

Anyway, I started off basically agreeing with you (or thought I was) that the team's progress has been mediocre.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
The ORIGINAL post by EriaDoc made a statement implying that we haven't seen an upward trend since Kubiak took over.

Even if we throw out the previous regime's 2-14 season, there is still an upward trend. Almost any method you use to place a line through those numbers is going to have an upward slope.
Click to expand...

Correct through last season for certain. Through this season too, barring an extremely unlikely two or three win season. I thought my five win assumption was low, but the change from a 2-7 start to s 3-4 to finish is a pretty big change
 
infantrycak said:
By your suggested standard Bill Belicheck has made no "progress as a coach" during his tenure in New England.
Click to expand...

First, is not my suggested standard. Someone asked for a graph. I was bored and made one.

Second, it is interesting you brought that up. I thought that was the exact point people would jump on when I made my original post. I thought to myself at the time, that'll be easy to answer. I'll just ask our resident stats expert, cak, to figure out how to weight 8 vs 12 win averages as it pertains to the NFL season. You usually can pull that esoteric stuff up in about five minutes. True story.
 
Runner said:
Second, it is interesting you brought that up. I thought that was the exact point people would jump on when I made my original post. I thought to myself at the time, that'll be easy to answer. I'll just ask our resident stats expert, cak, to figure out how to weight 8 vs 12 win averages as it pertains to the NFL season. You usually can pull that esoteric stuff up in about five minutes. True story.
Click to expand...

I suspect you will find a bell curve distribution on season win totals. Wouldn't be that hard to do a weighting system but I'm not that motivated on the subject.
 
infantrycak said:
I suspect you will find a bell curve distribution on season win totals. Wouldn't be that hard to do a weighting system but I'm not that motivated on the subject.
Click to expand...

Me neither. My boring afternoon is over and I just had a great Martini.
 
Dave Zangaro ‏@DZangaro
Today is the two-month anniversary of the #Texans last win. Then, they were 2-0. Cushing, Daniels, Manning were healthy. Hopes were high.
Click to expand...
sigh.gif
 
Someone just tole me that Kubiak is now 61-61 as a head coach.

Folks can use advanced math formulas all they want, but an 8 year coach with a .500 record screams mediocrity to me.
 
At first I was like, lol at the bucs and that dumpster fire they have going with Schiano...

Then I was like, lol we're looking at them right next to us..


































:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top