Sagarin says

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

I'm fairly certain they don't factor in at all.

---

Another reason to be pissed at Montana State.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebootfitter

Some people showed interest in these stats, and I don't mind posting them since I am doing the analysis anyway. I plan to continue this analysis through the end of the season and see if any reasonable conclusions can be drawn then.

Overall, the average predicted vs actual point differential is even smaller this week than last (only 0.2 points vs 0.3), and the variance is down a bit with a standard deviation of 14. Sagarin correctly predicted the winner 81% of the time.

Out of 106 games between DI opponents:
--> Average difference between Sagarin's predicted point differential and the actual point differential is only 0.2 points (0.3 points last week), with a standard deviation of 14 points (16 last week).
--> (81.1%) 86 games - Sagarin correctly predicted the winner (75.9% last week)
--> (11.3%) 17 games were within 2 points of Sagarin's predictions in either direction (15.7% last week)
--> (17.9%) 13 games were between 2 & 5 points off Sagarin's predictions (12.0% last week)
--> (30.2%) 23 games were between 5 & 10 points off Sagarin's predictions (21.3% last week)
--> (12.3%) 17 games were between 10 & 15 points off Sagarin's predictions (15.7% last week)
--> (28.3%) 38 games were greater than 15 points off Sagarin's predictions (35.2% last week)

---

Out of curiousity, approximately how many of these were blowouts that Sagarin predicted a blowout but by 15+ more points. NDSU doesn't have any examples, but let's try to use ISUb as an example. Sagarin predicted a 36 point spread and we won by 46. What if we won by 52 thus putting that game in the 15+ point category.

The reason I ask is I think that 28% is very misleading when in reality no one should be setting a line at 50 points. Does that make sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayville Bison

Out of curiousity, approximately how many of these were blowouts that Sagarin predicted a blowout but by 15+ more points. NDSU doesn't have any examples, but let's try to use ISUb as an example. Sagarin predicted a 36 point spread and we won by 46. What if we won by 52 thus putting that game in the 15+ point category.

The reason I ask is I think that 28% is very misleading when in reality no one should be setting a line at 50 points. Does that make sense?

---

Makes sense to me, seems like there should just be a 21-and-over bucket (or thereabouts) because the point differential in a lot of games beyond that depends on how soon the third-stringers come in and/or the game plan changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayville Bison

Out of curiousity, approximately how many of these were blowouts that Sagarin predicted a blowout but by 15+ more points. NDSU doesn't have any examples, but let's try to use ISUb as an example. Sagarin predicted a 36 point spread and we won by 46. What if we won by 52 thus putting that game in the 15+ point category.

The reason I ask is I think that 28% is very misleading when in reality no one should be setting a line at 50 points. Does that make sense?

---

If the standard deviation is running around 14-16 those are roughly the percentages you'd expect.

If, in reality no one should be setting a line at 50 points. That's only reality because betters are unwilling to lay that many points despite the objective evidence. If you think Sagarin or some other objective model is good at predicting games, those are exactly the kind of market inefficiencies that you're looking to take advantage of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

If the standard deviation is running around 14-16 those are roughly the percentages you'd expect.

If, in reality no one should be setting a line at 50 points. That's only reality because better are unwilling to lay that many point despite the objective evidence. If you think Sagarin or some other objective model is good at predicting games, those are exactly the kind of market inefficiencies that you're looking to take advantage of.

---

Very good point I didn't consider. Question from someone who hasn't ever placed a sports bet - How many people are betting on the games that are showing Alabama -40? I get how if the line is 25 and Sagarin or another model is showing 40 it would be a good bet, but what if the line is 40 and Sagarin is showing 55? There can't be many who would have the confidence to place that bet is there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayville Bison

Very good point I didn't consider. Question from someone who hasn't ever placed a sports bet - How many people are betting on the games that are showing Alabama -40? I get how if the line is 25 and Sagarin or another model is showing 40 it would be a good bet, but what if the line is 40 and Sagarin is showing 55? There can't be many who would have the confidence to place that bet is there?

---

I don't have any idea how the handle changes depending on how big the spreads are. I'm sure the books have a very good idea, though.

If you're not gambling more than you can afford to lose, and you're sufficiently convinced that you've identified an edge, there's no objective reason to be afraid of any line.

If you are gambling more than you can afford to lose, the rest of it doesn't make any difference.

Based on Sagarin's numbers (3.97 home field) and a 2.61 pt kicker for coming off a bye week, here's the outlook for the remainder of the regular season:


USD 99.3% (+0.1 percentage points from last week)


11-0 99.3% (+16.6)
10-1 0.7% (-16.5)



Assumes a normal distribution of outcomes w/ Sagarin's projected spread as the mean and a standard deviation of 13.86. In round numbers this means that if the spread is 14 the model predicts that roughly 2/3 of the outcomes will be between a tie and a 28 point victory. Half of the remaining outcomes or about 1/6 of all the outcomes would be a victory by more than 28 and there would be roughly a 1 in 6 chance that the team favored by 14 would lose.


Playoffs:

Sagarin gives NDSU a 60.8% chance of winning the SportsNetwork bracket.
Most likely opponents by round (assuming NDSU advances):
Montana State 52.5% (Tennessee State 47.5%)
#8 N. Arizona 79.2% (Furman 16.2%)
#5 SE Louisiana 54.4% (#4 Maine 40.1%)
#2 Eastern Illinois 68.1% (#3 E. Washington 12.5%)

CUSA 59.62 (-0.20 from last week)
MVFC 59.35 (+0.11)
MAC 58.05 (-0.67)
Sn Blt 57.30 (-0.78)

NDSU's 79.90 would rank:

2nd in the American Athletic (+1 from last week)
4th in the ACC (+1)
4th in the Big Ten (=0)
4th in the Big 12 (+1)
1st in Conference USA (=0)
1st in the MAC (=0)
2nd in the MWC (=0)
10th in the PAC 12 (-1)
8th in the SEC (=0)
1st in the Sun Belt (=0)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

NDSU's 79.90 would rank:

2nd in the American Athletic (+1 from last week)
4th in the ACC (+1)
4th in the Big Ten (=0)
4th in the Big 12 (+1)
1st in Conference USA (=0)
1st in the MAC (=0)
2nd in the MWC (=0)
10th in the PAC 12 (-1)
8th in the SEC (=0)
1st in the Sun Belt (=0)

---

I find it interesting that the PAC 12 North & South have the 2nd and 3rd spots, while the SEC West & East have the 1st and 4th spots. Get tired of ESPN's proclamations of the SEC being so much better than everyone else.