1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gase Guys

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by tirty8, Oct 29, 2018.

  1. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Fame specifically asked about HoF coaches.

    Regardless, we need to see what expected winning percentages look like if you fire a coach based on record after N years coaching using historical records for all NFL coaches. I finally downloaded all the year-by-year coaching data so now I just need some time to do this analysis. Probably over the weekend.
     
    Pauly, resnor and danmarino like this.
  2. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,695
    3,741
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Not at all. I want Don Shula’s successor more than I want Dan Marino’s successor. For sustained success coaching is the number 1 requirement. The point I was making is that if you take back to back winning seasons as the minimum measure for a successful coach then you should see signs of it coming together fairly quickly. Yes there are some exceptions on the HoF list, but those exceptions were the mostly seen as innovative coaches introducing new elements to the NFL, or Tom Landry starting an expansion team from nothing.

    If season 3 is a non winning season the Gase’s contract needs to be reviewed with a c9ld critical eye. I say that as a long time Gase supporter. It’s like Jarvis Landry at some point you have to assess the hype -v- the production. I’m not saying get rid of Gase, more that the honeymoon is over and can he cook a good breakfast - not just drive you wild in bed?
     
    KeyFin and danmarino like this.
  3. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Here's a first pass at that year-by-year coaching data. First of all the data I used are plotted below: win percentages for every coach whose rookie year was 1970 or later (thus this doesn't include Shula or Landry). The red line is the average win percent for that year.

    [​IMG]

    Let's say for fun that you're going to fire a coach based solely on his W/L record after N years, and that your goal is to find a coach who will coach at least 10 more years (so total coaching years is at least N+10) AND the coach ends up having a winning record from year N+1, the year after you made the decision to fire or keep the coach.

    These are the probabilities you'll find such a coach if you make that decision after N years (x-axis):

    [​IMG]

    Turns out the best length of time to evaluate a coach if your goal is to have the highest probability of finding a winning coach that will coach at least 10+ more years is N=4 years and the next best is N=3 years, with the differences fairly negligible (at N=4 the value is 23.44% and at N=3 it's 22.39%). However, this doesn't take into account the extra year you have to wait each time you miss (that's a separate and more tricky calculation using probability summation that I have to think about.. will get back to it another time).

    Otherwise, those kinks in that second graph are interesting. Theoretically they could be due to either: 1) decreasing number of coaches that even coached up to year N (if they didn't coach that far they're not included), or 2) decreasing number of coaches that coached 10+ years from year N+1, or 3) decreasing percentage of coaches among coaches that did coach 10+ years that had winning records. Turns out it's mostly #3 that's driving those kinks, which suggests something else interesting: don't keep a winning coach too long! Specifically, it's statistically dangerous to keep a coach that has a winning record his first 11+ years another 10 years lol.

    Well.. like I said it's a first pass. I want to try to take into account the wait time each time you miss, but damn that looks like a complicated calculation at first sight.. maybe I'll just do it by simulation, we'll see.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2018
    KeyFin and danmarino like this.
  4. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,695
    3,741
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    4) the kink at 7-10 years relates to successful coaches retiring (not fired) and then handing a good team to an appointed successor.


    However the main takeaway is 4 years +/-1 year is the optimal zone to be doing your fire/keep decision.
     
    KeyFin and danmarino like this.
  5. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,276
    20,838
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Awesome stuff cbrad
     
    cbrad likes this.
  6. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The successor's record doesn't show up in that graph. It's the record of that same coach from year N+1 assuming he coached 10+ more years. Retiring or being fired before that 10 year period was possible reason #2. I checked again and the graph for reason #3 alone is just a scaled version (stretched vertically) of that second graph, so at least the way I did the analysis the reason for those kinks is primarily due to the coach in question having a losing record before he either retires or is fired.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2018
    Pauly, danmarino and KeyFin like this.
  7. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, let me ask this- how many teams in the NFL have had winning seasons the past 10 years? Let's keep it simple.....just from 2007 to 2017 since we're comparing this data to Gase.

    The reason I'm asking this is because if there's only a handful of teams that have been 9-7 or better year after year, it's unrealistic to expect that from any coach. We know NE is on that list and probably GB, Pitt...who else? I'm working so I don't have time to look it up today.

    Maybe the better question here would be, "What's the average winning season streak for the most consistent NFL teams?" Who are the top 5 besides NE and how many years in a row have they reached better than 8-8?

    It would also be interesting to see the same list of teams WITHOUT a locked-in HOF quarterback (so no Brady, Manning, etc.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2018
  8. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Oh.. let's make sure there's no confusion as to what I did in post #43. When I say the coach had a winning record from year N+1 onwards I don't mean he had a winning season EVERY year from N+1 onwards, I mean his overall win% from year N+1 was greater than 50% so he could have both winning and losing seasons in there (sorry for the confusion).

    Having a long streak of consecutive winning seasons is so rare you can forget about looking at that unless that's specifically your goal. Out of curiosity I just wrote a short program to search for that and it says NE is the only team that has had a winning season every year from 2007-2017. To show you how rare this is (unless there's an error in my code.. I did write it really quickly lol), when I ask the program to list all teams that had a winning season every year from 2012-2017 it only spits out Seattle and NE! Remember that 8-8 isn't a winning season, and I'm counting ties as 0.5 wins.

    In any case, it's not that rare to have a coach with an overall winning record over a 10+ year period assuming they coach that long. What's rare is that the coach stays that long, as you can see here: https://www.thephins.com/threads/gase-guys.93682/#post-3108371

    btw.. I am interested in that question of yours about the distribution of consecutive winning seasons (never looked at it), so later today I'll write a program to find that out.
     
    KeyFin and danmarino like this.
  9. Nappy Roots

    Nappy Roots Well-Known Member

    10,191
    4,187
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Bradenton,FL
    Thanks to cbrad especially but others as well, this thread has some fantastic info.

    For me it is simple, Gase demands the locker room and demands the culture. To me that is a long term solution. As a young coach(and not unlike all coaches even vet ones), Gase makes plenty of mistakes, but the idea of demanding the right locker room and culture is much more important than individual mistakes during games. It is not the ONLY thing however, but I think Gase has the mindset to adjust and change for the better gives me the thinking Gase should stay around.
     
    danmarino, RevRick and adamprez2003 like this.
  10. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Here's the data on all N-consecutive season winning and losing streaks from 1970 for all teams, excluding all seasons with 50% win percentage and treating ties as 0.5 wins.

    Number of consecutive winning seasons:
    N=1: 100
    N=2: 47
    N=3: 20
    N=4: 9
    N=5: 17
    N=6: 11
    N=7: 1
    N=8: 4
    N=9: 3
    N=10: 0
    N=11: 1
    N=12: 3
    N=13: 0
    N=14: 0
    N=15: 0
    N=16: 1
    N=17: 1

    Number of consecutive losing seasons:
    N=1: 105
    N=2: 43
    N=3: 23
    N=4: 11
    N=5: 11
    N=6: 5
    N=7: 2
    N=8: 4
    N=9: 3
    N=10: 2
    N=11: 3
    N=12: 1
    N=13: 0
    N=14: 1

    NE currently holds the record for most consecutive winning seasons with 17 from 2001-2017 and SF has that 16-season win streak from 1983-1998. Tampa Bay holds the most consecutive losing seasons record at 14 from 1983-1996.

    The average win streak is 2.7 seasons and the average losing streak is 2.5 seasons. Well.. nice trivia.

    EDITED that 1988 typo (see danmarino's post below)
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2018
    danmarino and KeyFin like this.
  11. RevRick

    RevRick Long Haired Leaping Gnome Club Member

    7,191
    3,940
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Thomasville, GA
    Completely agree. There are going to be mistakes made - "To err is human." However, getting the right person in that capacity is difficult at best, and Gase is still young both as a man and as a head coach. Getting the culture right is more important than one may think. This team made mistakes today, but they did not quit!
     
    danmarino likes this.
  12. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,276
    20,838
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    1988 - 1983 is 5 not 16!


    (JUMPS around as I finally got cbrad with a math error.... lol )
     
    KeyFin, Pauly and cbrad like this.
  13. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,276
    20,838
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Also, I’ve written before that it’s a culture problem. A bad culture for the last 20 years. Changing that will take more than 2/3 seasons.
     
  14. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,276
    20,838
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Exactly Rev... When I was a kid of course I wanted the Dolphins in the Super Bowl. I got that wish in 1982 and 1984... never again. However, when we had a competitive team is when the game is fun. Marino and Shula ensured we were always competitive. That lack of competitiveness is what gets me. It seems that for a lot of others here that it’s Super Bowl or bust. Maybe it’s an age thing? Us older fans are content with winning seasons and everything else is icing on the cake?
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2018
  15. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Nah.. I'd bet that if we were consistently competitive most of the posters saying SB or bust wouldn't say that because they'd feel like we had a decent shot at a SB each year. It's just that when you're consistently uncompetitive the ultimate goal seems so far away that it seems more urgent to get there. We're all aging and waiting to finally witness (some of us for the first time) a Dolphins SB win.
     
    danmarino and Carmen Cygni like this.
  16. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, you said if we won we have a slightly better than 50/50 shot at making the playoffs. I haven't even looked at the AFC yet because it's way too early, but come late December we can be back close to the team that started this season 3-0. So if we can somehow squeak in with 4-5 more wins, I'll be pretty darn excited for this year.

    Can we win 5 of the last 7 though? That's a really tall order. We can beat the Colts, the Bills at home and maybe the Jags. NE at home is our Super Bowl so I still sort of like us there as well (I know, I'm an idiot). The Packers and Vikings are having off years so hey...it's possible. We're screwed at Buffalo so let's not even pretend there. I wouldn't put our odds at 50/50 but hey, any given Sunday. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens anyway.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, historically a 5-4 record gets you in the playoffs 52% of the time. Does it hold in our case right now? It's not totally off the mark but it is higher than actual because the teams in contention for the last Wild Card spot in the AFC are the Bengals (5-3), Dolphins (5-4) and an outside shot Ravens (4-5) with all other teams having at most 3 wins.

    Still, we may only need to go 4-3 or so the rest of the way because it's like that joke about running away from a bear: you only need to run faster than the guy next to you, not faster than the bear. That loss to Cinci btw is hurting a lot right now. Anyway, we are in the race.
     
    danmarino and KeyFin like this.
  18. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I'm not a true stats guy like you are, but our odds of winning that Cinci game going into the 4th quarter had to be above 90%. That dumb pass/fumble was about the only way we were going to lose with the way our D was playing. That game may continue to haunt us all season long.
     
    resnor, danmarino and cbrad like this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    lol.. it actually turns out to be just BELOW 90% at the peak (great guess though!): 89.9% win probability that gradually sunk to about 79% right before the interception that tied the game. Here's a link to an interactive graph, the image of which I posted below:
    https://www.gambletron2000.com/nfl/41471/miami-dolphins-at-cincinnati-bengals

    [​IMG]
     
    resnor, KeyFin and danmarino like this.
  20. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I have absolutely no idea how you chart that since there are tons of variables that go into it.....but that's very cool. I was off by .1%!
     
    danmarino likes this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, it's more complicated than the simple statistical stuff you often read about. Here's one explanation if you're interested lol:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/win_prob.htm

    The "tons of variables" part isn't that important if you're not modeling things however. In stats you can just assume that the total "error" distribution (deviation from mean of the sum of ALL variables) has a certain form, such as a normal distribution (that Bell curve). There are theoretical reasons why it should be so anyway (e.g., the Central Limit Theorem). So they start with an assumed relation between that normal distribution and point differential and then modify things from there.. (.. etc.. lol).
     
    Pauly and danmarino like this.
  22. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    LOL, I was interested but that's some big-boy formulas. =) I could follow the concepts and most of the math, but I'd have to play with their formulas some to make sure I'm reading it right.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  23. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,695
    3,741
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Sorry to break it to you but it is 6 not 5 because it is inclusive of 1983, so you can’t do simple subtraction. But otherwise your jumping around is justified.
     
  24. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,323
    1,376
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    I feel like a broken record, but yes. It was pretty much the only thing I posted about for quite some time. But in fairness, we don't have anywhere near the talent that we had on defense last year. Adam Gase and Matte Burke "stayed the course," but Flores came in hear and finally decided that there is in fact a world past the wide 9. Objectively, when I thought that someone else could come in and get more out of these guys. What you've seen done with our defense is what a brilliant mind does. If you need an example, look at what Quinn has done in Dallas, but Gase and company couldn't get anything out of him.

    Just look at how the Jets have faired offensively. The Jets broke the bank in the offseason, and the Jets have done nothing on offense. They got Gase one of the best young QBs in the league, and Gase literally has him seeing ghosts. He has ruined the kid. Not convinced - look at Tannehill. He is killing it since leaving Gase. I guess he can do more than throw WR bubble screens.

    Yeah, people have tried to change mind, but I never saw the "solid opinion" that you claimed that they presented me with. I know that I should be sorry for being a broken record and wanting Gase off this team, but it was because that dude was the anchor holding an entire franchise down.
     
    resnor likes this.
  25. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I agree with the white, disagree with the red.
     
    resnor and danmarino like this.
  26. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,276
    20,838
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Yeah, I may have spoke too soon. Flores is really jump starting this team!
     
    resnor and Fin D like this.

Share This Page