NFR Nate Silver predicts Seattle and New England in the Super Bowl

Kent Lufkin

Remember when you could remember everything?
#1
Anybody who paid attention to the blog 538.com and in the New York Times during the last two presidential elections knows that Nate Silver is the same kind of whiz kid statistician that Billy Bean relied on in the movie Moneyball.

Well Nate's ventured beyond politics and is now calling for the Seahawks to meet the Patriots in the Super Bowl. See him explaining why to a very skeptical panel at http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=8831714

We'll see if his prediction holds up as the Hawks try to advance to the next step this Sunday.

K
 

IveofIone

Active Member
#4
I think both Nate and the Hawks run out of luck on Sunday. Road games 3,000 miles away on consecutive weekends and the next one an early game at that spells trouble for any team no matter how good. Throw in the loss of their best pass rusher and their kicker and you have a situation that I wouldn't bet any of my hard earned money on. If they can get by Atlanta they may go all the way although either of the teams they would meet in the 3rd round would have tremendous incentive to beat them. And this ain't politics-you actually have to perform to win.

Ive
 

Kent Lufkin

Remember when you could remember everything?
#6
Duly noted Ive. Since you seem pretty pessimistic about the Hawks' prospects Sunday, wanna put a favorite lake fly where your mouth is on the outcome?! They lose, I'll send you a Gray Hackle. They win, you send me . . . ?

K
 

jimmydub

Active Member
#8
I like the sort of interpretations of statistics he was referring to. DVOA is the new way of gauging team play, but there are a lot of unpredictable things in this game. I think the Seahawks have something really interesting going right now, and I'm not so sure injuries at key positions can stop them.

If in fact the injury to Clemons unravels the D, it would be the first major deficiency on an otherwise stellar unit. They are solid and deep, and the reserves have shown consistently they can step up and play. The Hawks have shown an ability to win in all sorts of fashion and can overcome adversity. The Falcons are a great team, but the two teams have played vastly different schedules. Our team has the best strength of victory in the league, while their team had the easiest regular season schedule. My biggest concern would be the freshness of our team vs. theirs, 10 am PST games are tough for west coast teams.

I still think the Hawks are gonna win, and the Falcons offense is gonna get pantsed.
 

Tim Cottage

Formerly tbc1415
#9
I don't think last week's game was so much about the Seahawks ability to come from behind as it was about RGIII falling apart. At the beginning of the game the Seahawks had no answer to the other team's drive and versatility. As the other team succumbed to their injuries and the lose of their leader the Seahawks were able to capitalize on it.

For the last two games the Seahawks defence didn't seem to have quite the same discipline and organization as in the two previous games. You can be as big and aggressive as you want but all that goes to waste without a well conceived and strictly followed play by play plan with contingencies drilled into their heads so no thought is needed. A bunch of big aggressive line men running around ad-libbing isn't going to prevail in a closely matched game, which is something they haven't had for a while.

That said, I do wish they would go all the way to the Super Bowl.

TC
 
#10
Awwwww, poor hawks lost their best D-lineman, had a hurt kicker, and had to travel east last week? Sure sounds like how the Niners rolled into their game in Seattle a bit back.

Hope to see the hawks in the stick next weekend(meaning we both win this weekend!).

NFC worst no more!
 

Kent Lufkin

Remember when you could remember everything?
#11
Tim, I'd heard the same thing about RGIII's injury and exit from the game last Sunday. While that might explain why the Redskins didn't score another TD after their first two, it doesn't explain why the Hawks scored 24 unanswered points afterwards.

K
 

jimmydub

Active Member
#12
I think the Redskins lost a bunch of momentum when the Seahawks started getting shots on RGIII, which began in the first quarter. You don't want to hurt a guy, but you want to make him pay for trying to go big. RGIII and Shanahan went really big and went home in an ugly way because of the way the team prepared for the game. Also, the Seahawks D played the first two drives flat footed, and once they started moving around they completely shut down the Redskins on offense.
 

Tim Cottage

Formerly tbc1415
#13
Tim, I'd heard the same thing about RGIII's injury and exit from the game last Sunday. While that might explain why the Redskins didn't score another TD after their first two, it doesn't explain why the Hawks scored 24 unanswered points afterwards.
It may have something to do with that M word jimmydub mentioned. Momentum. It can effect the whole team. Both offence and defence.

TC
 

Josh

dead in the water
#15
Anybody who paid attention to the blog 538.com and in the New York Times during the last two presidential elections knows that Nate Silver is the same kind of whiz kid statistician that Billy Bean relied on in the movie Moneyball.

Well Nate's ventured beyond politics.....
Actually, it's a return for him. Nate Silver first gained recognition by creating a career prediction model for MLB players. He then managed the uber-stathead publication "Baseball Prespectus" before turning his attention to election prediction models. And in fact, 538 has a history of looking at sports (often the Yankees due to the NYT ownership) when election news is slow.