B1G Expectations: 2016 Week 6 Total Conference Wins Update

Submitted by Ecky Pting on

Big_Ten_Conference_logo.png Expectations

Week 6 Conference Wins Update

Preamble

“Break their hearts my pride and hope, break their hearts and have no mercy.”

    - Miss Havisham (Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations)

Six weeks and counting and it’s the midway point of the season already. Time and distance sure flies by when your team is trundling along like a runaway locomotive. The Out-of-Conference games are now complete with following Sparty’s capitulation to the missioneers of BYU. The statistical databases - now founded on hard, objective data - have begun to divulge the true nature of the combatants.

The impetus of this diary is the desire to characterize the competitive landscape of the Big Ten Conference through the synthesis of total win probability distributions for each of the teams. The distributions are derived from the relative expected points ratings from Bill Connelly (S&P+), ESPN (FPI), and occasionally Ed Feng (The Power Rank). The key is that the ratings are based on expected points, which are in turn translated into win probabilities. Each of these three ratings are generated from their respective advanced statistical analyses and metrics. In doing so, they achieve varied results ... some more pleasing than others depending on your point-of-view.

Anyway, here you will find further ruminations on said statistics into still more statistics as a means for enabling further discussion, jumping to conclusions, flying off of the handle or goading your rival. Also included is a fresh look at the all-important head-to-head win-differential probability distribution for the matchup between a select pair of contenders in the B1G East.

Schedules, Spreads & Win Probabilities

B1G East Schedule Rundown

The table of schedules below shows the overall schedules for all seven teams in the B1G East based on the Bill Connelly’s S&P+ weekly ratings. The last table simply shows a rank-ordering of the B1GE teams based on their  expected in-conference win totals, it’s not a projection of divisional standings based on projected wins, losses, and tie-breakers.

S&P+

2016wk06 S&P+ B1GE conf pwins

After weathering the chaos that is the Indiana Hoosiers, the Buckeyes’ managed to maintain their claim to being the only team in B1G East that is favored in all of its remaining games, although the claim is by much thinner margin than last week. This is  because UM, by virtue of its unprecedented throttling of Rutgers last week, is now ranked #2 overall by S&P+, one spot ahead of OSU. As such, despite having the benefit of being favored in all its remaining games, the Buckeyes do not top the B1GE in total expected wins. That distinction also goes to the Wolverines, who have edged the Buckeyes on that count by precisely 0.4 wins. At about 8.2 expected wins, Michigan is the only team in B1G expected to exceed 8 wins. As inferred above, the only game U-M is not a favorite in remains in Columbus at the end of November. As for OSU, what had appeared to be potentially tough road games for OSU - at Wisconsin and at Penn State - stand at just under two score margins (and a three score margin versus Sparty). It’s those two road games coming up for OSU that may make or break the Buckeyes’ prospects heading into The Game. It’s worth noting that both Wisconsin and Penn State will have the benefit of playing OSU at home and coming off a bye. It remains to be seen how the Badgers will respond coming off a loss.

PSU, however, has reeled off 2 wins since getting the snot smacked out them in Ann Arbor, and has improved its expected total to nearly 6.3 wins, ahead of Indiana by 1.6 wins. Indeed, PSU exhibited some zone-read hijinks on offense in making soup of the Terrapins (at least when they weren’t punting from the Terps’ 36). The bottom line is that PSU is an underdog in only one of its remaining games and is a virtual lock to be bowl eligible, and that’s good news for those keen on the idea of James Franklin continuing as head coach of the Nittany Lions.

Meanwhile, the Indiana defense continued to display an emergent saltiness in the Hoosiers visit to Columbus, which has something to do with the erosion of the Buckeyes’ fancy-stats lead. The Hoosiers expect just under 4.7 Big Ten wins, and are underdogs in three of its remaining games, which should get them into a bowl game. Maryland is now on the bubble after its first loss, being an underdog in 5 more games. However, the Terps expect nearly 3.8 B1G wins, which is closer to a clinching 4 B1G wins than three. On the heels of MSU screwing the pooch versus BYU for its third loss in a row, prospects for MSU to qualify for bowl eligibility are sinking fast. Sparty is an underdog in four of its remaining B1G games. As for LOLRutgerz, The Scarlet Knights will be seeing red for the rest of the season, en route to levels of B1G ineptitude not seen since the Northwestern teams of the early 1980’s that set the NCAA record for consecutive losses at 34.

FPI

2016w06 FPI B1GE conf pwins

The FPI results differ slightly, the most notable difference that Michigan holds the #1 spot in all the land. In turn, M tops all teams in the B1GE with just over 8.2 expected wins, ahead of OSU by nearly 0.6 wins. Nonetheless, FPI results still show OSU to be favored in all of its remaining games; so of course the only game in which U-M is not favored is The Game. The margin, however, is only a half point. The second tier of bowl-contenders in the FPI rundown still has three teams: PSU, Maryland and Indiana. PSU is an underdog in only one more game; Maryland in 3 games; and MSU, four games. That would be sufficient to send Maryland bowling, as well as keep Sparty home. Indiana is an underdog in five games, but has almost 4 expected wins (nearly identical to Maryland), so that loss to Wake Forest could do the Hoosiers in. Their best chances are to pick off Maryland or Penn State.

Here’s a link to the results based on the Power Rank-ings.

B1G East Expected Conference Wins

The bar plots below show the expected total overall wins distributions for teams in the B1G East, in alphabetical order. Noted above each bar is the probability for that number of wins (you may need to click & embiggen to read it). The bar with the highest value is the most likely outcome (the mode). Also flagged on each plot is the expected overall win total (the mean). The last line plot is just an overlay of the same data from the other seven bar plots.

S&P+

2016w06 S&P+ B1GE conf pdfs

What this round of distributions shows is that Michigan and Ohio State are tied for the highest modes at 8 wins, with UM now skewed significantly toward an undefeated 9 wins, and OSU skewed slightly toward 7 wins. The next highest mode is Penn State at 6 wins, followed by Indiana at 5 wins and Maryland at 4 wins. MSU teeters between 2 and 3 B1G wins, while Rutgers is not likely to get more than 1 win. Clearly, the B1GE will be decided between U-M and OSU by significant margin. UM now has the edge for the best chance of having an undefeated season at 34.0% (up from the 18.8% before obliterating Rutgers) or about 2:1 odds, followed by OSU with an 23.2% likelihood (9:2 odds). At this point, the overlaid S&P+ distributions show the groupings of the Big Two and fairly spread out remainder of the B1GE, with at least four and possible five teams likely to be bowl eligible. Lagging behind are Sparty and the Black Sheep... er… Knights. Rutgers is the only team at this point registering any significant likelihood of going winless in the Big Ten at 32.3%.

FPI

2016w06 FPI B1GE conf pdfs

The FPI results are quite similar to the S&P+ results above. Both UM and OSU register modes of 8 wins, with OSU skewing toward 7 wins and UM skewing significantly toward 9 wins. UM registers a 37.1% chance to win out, whereas the OSU likelihood to go undefeated has dropped to 20.0% from 27.6% last week. From there, a clear separation of 2 wins exists to the next closest contender, Penn State, who also stands another 2 wins ahead of Indiana and Maryland, with modes of 4 wins. Sparty lags further behind with a mode of 3 wins, still 2 wins ahead of Rutgers.

Here’s a link to the results based on the Power Rank-ings.

B1G West Schedule Rundown

The next table of schedules shows the overall schedules for the B1G West based on the Bill Connelly’s S&P+ weekly ratings. Again, the last table simply shows a rank-ordering of the B1GW teams based on their  expected win totals - it’s not a projection of divisional conference standings per se.

S&P+

2016w06 S&P+ B1GW conf pwins

The  S&P+ results have the contenders in the B1GW, in order of overall expected wins, as Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota. Nebraska, expecting about 5.9 wins, has an edge of 0.6 wins over Wisconsin. From there, Iowa, Minnesota and Northwestern follow at about 0.5 win intervals. No team is favored in all of its remaining games. Wisconsin is an underdog in only one remaining game, whereas Nebraska and Minnesota are underdogs in 2 games each. Iowa, however, is an underdog in four, including two near toss-ups with with Wisconsin and Nebraska to end the season.

Meanwhile, Northwestern is favored in 2 remaining games - hopes of a bowl-bid remain ethereal. There’s still Illinois and Purdue, whom the Cats are favored to beat. Illinois is favored in only one remaining game. Purdue, after defeating Illinois last week, is favored in none of its games for the remainder of the year, its position as cellar-dweller will be shared with Illinois.

FPI

2016w06 FPI B1GW conf pwins

FPI also expects only Nebraska, Wisconsin and Iowa to have winning B1G records.  Nebraska is the leader per FPI expecting about 6.3 wins, a nearly 0.4 win edge over the Badgers. Iowa is another 1.0 wins back. Northwestern stands 0.6 win behind the Hawkeyes, and 1.0 wins ahead of the Gophers. No team is favored in all of its games. Wisconsin, however, is an underdog in the fewest remaining games: one. Nebraska is a two-game dog. Minnesota, three games; Iowa and Northwestern, four.

Here’s a link to the results based on the Power Rank-ings.

B1G West Expected Conference Wins

The bar plots below show the expected overall win distributions for the B1G West teams, in alphabetical order.

S&P+

2016w06 S&P+ B1GW conf pwins

The story here is how close the race remains in the B1G West. Five teams have modes of 4, 5 or 6 wins. Nebraska is currently the only team with a mode of 6 wins. Wisconsin and Iowa share the 5 win mode, with Wisconsin leaning strongly to the higher side and Iowa biased to the lower. Minnesota and Northwestern share the 4 win mode with Minnesota nearly perfectly balanced, and the Cats skewed to the low side. It appears highly unlikely that any team will have an undefeated season. Nebraska, currently the only undefeated team in the B1GW, has the best chance of a one-loss season at 7.3%, followed by Wisconsin at 1.8%.

FPI

2016w06 FPI B1GW conf pwins

The FPI results tell a similar story, but with a bit more separation among the top five, and a tighter grouping between Nebraska and Wisconsin. Both have the same mode of 6 wins, with the Huskers distribution leaning toward 7 wins, and the Badgers more symmetrical. Iowa maintains sole possession of the 5 win mode with a skew toward 4 wins. Conversely, the Cats hold the 4 win mode and are leaning toward 5 wins. Meanwhile, Minny is on the bowl-eligibility bubble in the 3 win mode. As such, those five teams are at least hopeful bowl-game qualifiers. The other two do not have promising post-season prospects.

Here’s a link to the results based on the Power Rank-ings.

Michigan vs. Ohio State Wins Differential

The win-differential distribution simply shows the likelihood of one team (say, Michigan) finishing with a conference record that is some number of games better or worse than another team (say, Ohio State). Keeping in mind that in the event of a tie, the winner of the head-to-head match up determines the tiebreaker … the probability of the teams having identical conference records (i.e. a win differential of zero) heading into the final head-to-head meeting is then pro-rated in proportion to the win probability of the head-to-head game. The same principle also applies to the probabilities of either team having a one-game lead going into the head-to-head (i.e. win differentials of +1 and -1). This is because a team trailing by one game would still clinch the tie-breaker by winning the final head-to-head game. Thus, the total likelihood of Michigan finishing ahead of Ohio State is the sum of all the maize-and-blue shaded bars (i.e. U-M wins two or more games than OSU), plus a proportional split of the -1, 0 and +1-differential bars. It’s worth noting that this total likelihood does not indicate the likelihood of making it to the B1G Championship, as it says nothing about how other teams in the B1G East do, or even how Michigan or Ohio State do in the absolute sense. For example, if both teams were to finish tied in the B1G at 6-3, which means that UM and OSU would be losing 3 games each, other teams are clearly winning those games - and so another team may well be the B1GE representative in Indy.

S&P+

Beginning as usual with the results of the S&P+ analysis, the chart below shows that the most likely outcome (41.5% likelihood) is that U-M and OSU have identical records heading into Columbus. Thus, as in days of yore, The Game would likely decide who has the better team, and who will play for the B1G Championship. Looking at the head-to-head matchup, OSU is favored with a win probability of 54.1%, so it collects 22.4 point share of the 41.5 points for the likelihood of winning coming in tied (and finishing ahead one game). U-M collects the remaining 19.0 points.

The second most likely scenario, with a 33.2% likelihood, is that UM comes into Columbus one game ahead of OSU. Of this possible outcome, OSU collects another 18.0 point share for the likelihood of winning coming in behind by one game (thus finishing in a tie, but OSU winning the tie-breaker).

The next most likely scenario, with an 11.0% likelihood, is that UM comes into Columbus trailing by one game. Of this, UM collects a 5.1 point share for its likelihood of winning (thus finishing in a tie, but UM winning the tie-breaker).

The other outcomes are relatively straightforward in that either team would have already clinched finishing the season ahead of the other team. In total, UM has a 52.4% likelihood of finishing the season ahead of OSU - an 11:10 chance or about as close to even as you can get.

2016w06 S&P+ UM-OSU conf diff pdf

FPI

Continuing on, here is the same chart based on the FPI ratings following the week 6 results. This shows a somewhat wider margin for UM in the race against OSU to the B1GCG. As with S&P+, the most likely outcome is that the teams head into Columbus with the same record. In the head-to-head matchup, OSU’s home field advantage gives them the narrowest of margins with a 51.3% likelihood to win the game. Tosum it all up - according to FPI, UM has a 56.5% likelihood of beating out OSU at season’s end, or a little better than a 5:4 chance.

2016w06 FPI UM-OSU conf diff pdf

Here’s a link to the results based on the Power Rank-ings.

So there you have it. After a down-tick following UM’s narrow victory over Wisconsin and OSU’s drubbing of Rutgers, the tables have turned at least part way around. Michigan obliterated Rutgers on the road even more thoroughly than OSU did at home. The rest of the table-turning remains in how competitive OSU’s matchup with Wisconsin will be. Wisconsin will be coming off a bye, looking to remove the bitter taste of defeat from their collective mouths, while making its own push toward a spot in the B1GCG and a likely rematch (for them).

The prospects for Michigan football to play in the Big Ten Championship Game are as good as they’ve ever been - better than the proverbial puncher’s chance, it’s now Michigan that is the team to beat, and I like Michigan’s chances.

Yours in football, and Go Blue!

Comments

ChiCityWolverine

October 13th, 2016 at 5:11 PM ^

I'm a big fancystats guy, but can we all talk about Penn State being #17 in S&P? Seems utterly ridiculous halfway through the season now that there is enough data to smooth out some noise. 

Ecky Pting

October 14th, 2016 at 7:11 PM ^

Yea - Bill Connelly mentioned Penn State when he posted the new table on Twitter. Moved up 21 spots - biggest upswing on the S&P+ list this week. PSU's breakdown is #39 offense, #14 defense and #12 special teams which are decent. What's odd is that looking at the detailed breakdown of the PSU offense, all of the component numbers are in the top 10, and significantly better than say, Michigan's, yet Michigan is the #37 offense. Seems like given the component numbers, PSU Offense should be top 5.

Team
Off. S&P+
Rk
Rushing

S&P+
Rk
Passing

S&P+
Rk
SD

S&P+
Rk
Michigan
34.4
37
121.2
21
120.3
26
115.1
26
PSU
34.2
39
126.1
10
147.4
2
128.5
5

 

Team
Off. S&P+
Rk
PD

S&P+
Rk
Success

Rt+
Rk
IsoPPP+
Rk
Michigan
34.4
37
124.8
29
124.5
18
119.5
25
PSU
34.2
39
154.1
8
140.2
4
137.1
5