Playoff thread

[dolphins4life]

For the machine, to account for strength of victory, wouldn't you have to account for all the games and simulate every one of them?

Let's say Miami defeats New Orleans and loses to one of either NE or Tenn

The Chargers beat the Texans lose their two remaining games. 

This gives Miami and LA 9-8 records and 6-6 Conference records

This means the next step is common games, with a minimum of four

Raiders = Chargers won, Miami lost
Giants = Both won
Ravens = Miami won, Chargers lost
Patriots = Miami won Chargers lost.

Does this mean that Miami has another pathway in at 9-8 even if NE or Buffalo do not lose out?

[Spider-Dan]

Only if strength of victory is a tiebreaker.

In any case, the machine does account for all the games if you Select Criteria in the upper right.

[dolphins4life]

There is another pathway in at 9-8 for Miami that does not involve Buffalo or New England losing out

Week 16

GB beats CLE
Den beats LV
KC beats Pit
Cin beats Bal

Week 17

Cle beats Pit
Den beats LAC
LV beats Indy

Week 18

Pit beats Bal
LV beats SD

[EDGECRUSHER]

Derrick Henry is coming back just in time for the Miami game.

That is a big oof.

[masterfins]

The current status is a 95% chance that Miami does NOT make the playoffs. I think their odds are a little better, maybe a 75% chance they don't make it.


http://www.playoffstatus.com/nfl/afcstandings.html

[Pappy13]

For the machine, to account for strength of victory, wouldn't you have to account for all the games and simulate every one of them?

Yes...and no. With the machine you determine the result of every game and it tells you who makes the playoffs in that scenario so it doesn't have to simulate anything, it's based on the results that you have already selected. Now if you have not chosen a winner of a game then it just uses the games that you have chosen, but that's a crappy way of using it because all that says is who would make the playoffs prior to that game being played which is pretty pointless. What you want to know is who makes the playoffs based the results of the games that you choose.

[Pappy13]

If Miami wins out and the chargers loses one more game, they both finish 10-7 with a 7-5 conference record.  The next tiebreaker is common games.  Do the chargers have that?

Depends on what Buffalo and New England do. If New England wins the division and BUF finishes with the same record as Miami, Miami is out in every scenario I can find where there are tie-breakers involved. If Buffalo wins the division and MIA, IND, LAC and NE are all 10-7, MIA, IND and NE make the playoffs and the Chargers are out, but it's less likely MIA wins out than the Chargers do. The Chargers will probably be favored in all 3 of their remaining games where Miami will probably be underdogs in at least 1 or 2.

Also, if Denver and the chargers tied with Miami, the division tiebreaker would eliminate one of them and one left would go against Miami

Not according to the Playoff Machine. If MIA, BUF, DEN and LAC are all 10-7 then according to the Playoff Machine BUF, DEN and LAC are the wild cards and MIA is out of the playoffs. I think you are misinterpreting the tiebreaker rules, otherwise the Playoff Machine is incorrect. I think the division tie breakers only apply when ONLY teams from the same division are involved in the tie-breaker. If there are multiple teams from different divisions involved then it's a different set of tie-breakers that apply. I think in that case it's record in common games and MIA is hurt anytime they are involved in that tie breaker with BUF because they lost twice to them. If BUF wins the division and MIA is tied with NE they are in MUCH better shape because they would have beaten NE twice.

[Spider-Dan]

I have split off the unrelated discussion about evaluating player/team quality into a different thread.

[dolphins4life]

If the Raiders win tomorrow, it hurts Miami

If Raiders and the Patriots win tomorrow, Miami's only path in will be overtaking Buffalo. 

[Spider-Dan]

If Raiders and the Patriots win tomorrow, Miami's only path in will be overtaking Buffalo.

Incorrect.

1) OAK wins vs. DEN
2) IND loses out
3) MIA wins out
4) excepting the above, no team loses to a team with (as of right now) a worse record
5) no ties

In that scenario, LAC is #5 seed, BUF is #6 seed, MIA is #7 seed.

[EDGECRUSHER]

With each passing game, it's looking less and less likely we get in even if we win out. That being said, finishing the season with 9 straight wins would be a hell of an achievement and something to build on in the offseason. I just can't help but think "What If?" on so many things like losing to Jacksonville. We beat them, we're looking a lot better for the playoffs.

Needless to say, no team has ever lost 7 straight games and won 9 straight in the same season, especially under the old 16 game format.  Bittersweet history for us if it happens.

[Dolfanalyst]

With each passing game, it's looking less and less likely we get in even if we win out. That being said, finishing the season with 9 straight wins would be a hell of an achievement and something to build on in the offseason. I just can't help but think "What If?" on so many things like losing to Jacksonville. We beat them, we're looking a lot better for the playoffs.

Needless to say, no team has ever lost 7 straight games and won 9 straight in the same season, especially under the old 16 game format.  Bittersweet history for us if it happens.

The problem is that that storyline is becoming the norm for every season.  At some point the players acquired have to play well enough and become leaders and give the team the kind of high-quality team identity with which it starts seasons in a far better manner and plays consistently well throughout.  The fact that the team has but one Pro Bowl player, when even rookies and early-career players are readily being acknowledged as having that caliber of talent (Chase, Herbert, Taylor, Slater, etc.) isn't a good sign.  You can't simply play as though you're "rebuilding" every year and call a second-half of the season rebound something positive.

Tony Romo hit the nail on the head when calling one of the Dolphins' games earlier this year.  He noted that amidst the bevy of draft picks the team has acquired and used, there hasn't been even a single difference-maker obtained.  That's a problem.  This team is going to need Tua, Waddle, Phillips, and Holland to become Pro Bowl-caliber, and they're going to need an insertion of capability on the offensive line as well.  The teams that win Super Bowls have stars on the field, not projects with potential.

[dolphins4life]

More a matter of luck and having some more plays go their way

[Dolfanalyst]

More a matter of luck and having some more plays go their way

The "luck" that's most strongly related to winning in the NFL is turnovers, as turnovers are roughly 50% random in nature.  This team led the league in defensive takeaways last year, yet finished only 10-6.  They had their spell of luck last year and couldn't capitalize on it.  This year their luck ran out, as their defensive takeaways were far more middle of the road, fully expected as a function of regression to the mean.  Turnover margin this year is -2, also not indicative of good luck.

The problem with luck is that you can't count on it, because by definition it's random.  If you're counting on luck you're behind the eight ball in comparison to the teams that can count on their talent.

[dolphins4life]

Brady can