I have discovered something!

[Stevo]

An anaylis of the patriots scoring history over the last three years reveals that have have a mean score 28.4 Points with a Standard Deviation of 12.3 points.

What's more odd is that the Corelation coefficient between their cumulative standard normal distrubution and their actuals scores is .9965 meaning their scoring history perfectly fits a normal distrubution

however for the past 10 games there average has only been 21.9 points with a standard deviation of 9.53

Furthermore the corelation coefficient is only .968

But when there cumulative standard normal disturbution is graphed against the natural log of their raw score we get a coefficient of .9949

Meaning(!) The patriots 2008 patriots scoring distrubtion is an log-normal distrubution, not a normal one.

Clearly this is what's holding the 2008 Patriots back

P.S. If anyone who is actually good at stastics notices some logic errors, I will pay you casino cash not to mention them

 

[Brady's Bunch]

wtf

 

[SteelerFan87]

wtf

Indeed.


:shrug:

 

[tehrick67]

An anaylis of the patriots scoring history over the last three years reveals that have have a mean score 28.4 Points with a Standard Deviation of 12.3 points.

What's more odd is that the Corelation coefficient between their cumulative standard normal distrubution and their actuals scores is .9965 meaning their scoring history perfectly fits a normal distrubution

however for the past 10 games there average has only been 21.9 points with a standard deviation of 9.53

Furthermore the corelation coefficient is only .968

But when there cumulative standard normal disturbution is graphed against the natural log of their raw score we get a coefficient of .9949

Meaning(!) The patriots 2008 patriots scoring distrubtion is an log-normal distrubution, not a normal one.

Clearly this is what's holding the 2008 Patriots back

P.S. If anyone who is actually good at stastics notices some logic errors, I will pay you casino cash not to mention them

Obviously

 

[grog]

An anaylis of the patriots scoring history over the last three years reveals that have have a mean score 28.4 Points with a Standard Deviation of 12.3 points.

What's more odd is that the Corelation coefficient between their cumulative standard normal distrubution and their actuals scores is .9965 meaning their scoring history perfectly fits a normal distrubution

however for the past 10 games there average has only been 21.9 points with a standard deviation of 9.53

Furthermore the corelation coefficient is only .968

But when there cumulative standard normal disturbution is graphed against the natural log of their raw score we get a coefficient of .9949

Meaning(!) The patriots 2008 patriots scoring distrubtion is an log-normal distrubution, not a normal one.

Clearly this is what's holding the 2008 Patriots back

P.S. If anyone who is actually good at stastics notices some logic errors, I will pay you casino cash not to mention them

The scarecrow got him a brain.

 

[Canadian]

Hard to argue with numbers. Distribution curves make me hot.

 

[Stevo]

The scarecrow got him a brain.

Just boredom + a requirement to take a stastics course

 

[BY1401]

ROFL

I heart this thread!

wuv

 

[Wandering Athol]

An anaylis of the patriots scoring history over the last three years reveals that have have a mean score 28.4 Points with a Standard Deviation of 12.3 points.

What's more odd is that the Corelation coefficient between their cumulative standard normal distrubution and their actuals scores is .9965 meaning their scoring history perfectly fits a normal distrubution

however for the past 10 games there average has only been 21.9 points with a standard deviation of 9.53

Furthermore the corelation coefficient is only .968

But when there cumulative standard normal disturbution is graphed against the natural log of their raw score we get a coefficient of .9949

Meaning(!) The patriots 2008 patriots scoring distrubtion is an log-normal distrubution, not a normal one.

Clearly this is what's holding the 2008 Patriots back

P.S. If anyone who is actually good at stastics notices some logic errors, I will pay you casino cash not to mention them

This was already brought up by D22 in the Asylum. Dawson, dashoe, cutler, Danny Boy, and he debated the implications of said data to everyone's delight and fascination. If you missed it, don't worry: it's all part of the Assclown Insight, Volume III (forward by SF87) coming to a bookstore near you just in time for Christmas.

Got anything new for us?

 

[thomas144]

Isn't a normal distribution to be expected over a number of years anyway?

As for this year, it sounds like what you are saying is that the offense is getting better as the season progresses.


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9rMpraPPQ2A&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9rMpraPPQ2A&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[midgar8784]

Umm let me sum it up, we are scoring less this year than in any other year since 2000.

 

[JD10367]

An anaylis of the patriots scoring history over the last three years reveals that have have a mean score 28.4 Points with a Standard Deviation of 12.3 points.

What's more odd is that the Corelation coefficient between their cumulative standard normal distrubution and their actuals scores is .9965 meaning their scoring history perfectly fits a normal distrubution

however for the past 10 games there average has only been 21.9 points with a standard deviation of 9.53

Furthermore the corelation coefficient is only .968

But when there cumulative standard normal disturbution is graphed against the natural log of their raw score we get a coefficient of .9949

Meaning(!) The patriots 2008 patriots scoring distrubtion is an log-normal distrubution, not a normal one.

Clearly this is what's holding the 2008 Patriots back

P.S. If anyone who is actually good at stastics notices some logic errors, I will pay you casino cash not to mention them

Caveman Translation:

No Brady = less points