Semi-OT: 538 Breaks Down the Deflategate Report
FiveThirtyEight has a nice breakdown of the Deflategate Report. It is presented in the form of a conversation between two of their contributors.
For those who aren't familiar with 538, it was originally an independent website created by Nate Silver, who rose to fame in the statistics community with incredibly accurate, data-based projections of the 2008 presidential race. Since that time, he has only grown in acclaim.
He eventually teamed with the NYTimes, but that relationship ended after a year or so. Now, 538 is an ESPN-sponsored site. If that seems strange, know that Nate Silver's original passion is baseball. He LOVES baseball statistics. 538 covers all sorts of topics, but sports is a big part of the coverage.
Anyway, with that introduction, here is the commentary:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/
I would also encourage interested MGoBloggers to check out the Sports section of 538. It has a lot of interesting articles:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/sports/
EDIT: To be clear, I have ZERO affiliation with 538. I just think it's a great website.
EDIT2: Changed my commentary on the NYTimes affiliation based on a comment below.
much like the inconsistent, biased NFL report that often uses its own subjective opinions to color the evidence.
1. Used a research firm accused of being corrupt, as it often helped big corporations weather messy disputes. (and now to extricate the embattled NFL commissioner recently accused of mishandling multiple scandals).
2. Was pearheaded by a current NFL Director who for 20 years worked in the front office of an NFL team with an axe to grind vs. the Patriots. (with countless mutual recriminations—starting with Belichick’s leaving the Jets for NE, then spygate accusations by a Jets HC who himself participated in the taping as Belichick’s assistant, and most recently the Jets’ acknowledged tampering in taking away from the Pats the best defensive back in the NFL.
3. Often used opinion to justify its conclusions. For example, it condemns the Patriots for refusing a single follow up interview of an employee without noting that he had already been interviewed four teams. By contrast, it praises referees for claiming to recall measurements that they never even recorded. For example, “(The head referee) Anderson doesn’t remember whether he tested the Patriots or Colts footballs first, and Anderson couldn’t recall if he properly initialed kicking ball No. 1 prior to the game. Also, though Anderson didn’t record the pressure measurements before the game, he claimed to remember all but two of the Patriots’ balls were at least 12.5 psi, but he wasn’t sure about maybe one, maybe two or maybe just most of the Colts’s balls were 13 PSI. The report incredulously concludes: “We credit Anderson’s recollection of the pregame measurements taken on the day of the AFC Championship Game based on both the level of confidence Anderson expressed in his recollection and the consistency of his recollection.”
4. Spun a story that discounts inconsistencies. For example, when an NFL VP informed the Patriots of the investigation the morning after the game, he said one of the Pats’ balls was measured at 10.1 psi. “Not only was that absurdly low, it was blatantly false but Wells didn’t seem to mind.”
5. Failed to prove guiilt—especially of Brady--according to Yahoo’s Dan Wetzel. But it repeatedly condemns him for a completely reasonable reluctance to not turn over his cell phone or other electronic communication…”really, who, let alone an internationally famous individual with an even more internationally famous spouse, would do that voluntarily? We're talking about the inflation levels of a football. As Brady once noted about the entire scandal: "This isn't ISIS. No one's dying." While the NFL can sanction Brady for not fully cooperating, this is a weak charge to imply guilt.
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/20…
https://twitter.com/PP_Rich_Hill/status/596093924474789890
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/tom-brady-probably-isn-t-innocent-in-defla…
“For starters, Tom Brady is an NFL quarterback who likes his footballs more deflated than inflated, and during (a prior game) he became particularly upset (with footballs that) were too big, and plump.. balls were was found to be inflated at 16 PSI--far higher than the legal maximum, and far higher than Brady was comfortable with. (Brady) had already) voiced this preference (for softer ones) to Pats’ equipment assistant John Jastremski, but it was hard for him to keep up when the referees were continually so careless, ..failed to record pregame PSI levels, and (often) simply inflated game balls to whatever level they arbitrarily deemed fit. At the very least, refs didn’t account for specific quarterback preferences (which were the reason several QBs, like Peyton Manning, had persuaded the league to change policy and allow teams to control their own balls). (Imagine that) you gave MLB pitchers a choice between throwing a baseball or softball, they’d throw the baseball every time. All Brady wanted was a smaller, just as legal football.
Jastremski was desperate to make Brady happy, because he wanted Brady to like him. Of course he did. We’re talking about Tom Brady. So, Jastremski recruited Officials’ Locker Room Attendant James McNally, a.k.a. the guy in charge of the game balls on game day. McNally had previously helped Jastremski under similar circumstances, but wasn’t a very eager participant. He had been with the Pats for more than 30 years. The novelty had worn off. He wasn’t honored to assist the great Tom Brady with some next level gamesmanship.
If anything, it was a chore. (And since), McNally was undoubtedly the alpha male (who) got a kick out of teasing his co-worker (about) how much the relationship with Brady meant to (him), McNally would verbally demean Brady, threaten to put MORE air in the balls; all as if to let Jastremski know: “Brady might be YOUR boss, but he’s got nothing on me.”…(So) Jastremski floated out incentives like signed memorabilia and free Uggs — and ultimately McNally fell in line. (Then, by the time of) the AFC Championship, the last home game of the season, and the last time of the year that McNally (would see) Brady--Jastremski had told Brady about the promises, and how it might be nice to acknowledge the work that McNally had done (and give him) two signed footballs and a signed jersey.
From there, McNally grabbed the balls, brought them to lead official Walt Anderson and reminded him about Brady’s desire to keep the PSI at or around 12.5. Anderson checked the balls, didn’t write down any of the results, and put them back in the bag. Soon after that, the start of the Patriots-Colts game was delayed 15 minutes because the NFC Championship Game was running late. It was chaos in the officials’ locker room. At one point, even though he wasn’t supposed to (maybe he was confused by the delay?), McNally grabbed the bag of balls and carried them out to the field — stopping only briefly along the way to use the bathroom.
From there, well, the whole Wells Report is a messy blur — shoddy science projects, corrupt research firms, out-of-context and potentially edited text conversations. By the end, Wells concludes that it’s more probable than not that McNally and Jastremski participated in a deliberate effort to release air from Patriots game balls. He concluded that it is more probable than not that Brady was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities….and all because an innocent quarterback wanted to avoid getting stuck with another 16 PSI football?"
http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/wells-report-an-insult-to-tom…
is opinion not analysis, including the ENTIRE NFL report.
No one really knows dick about what really happened except that several of the Patriot's footballs ended up being measured during the Colts games and measured low. That's' the only real fact that we have. Everything else is just conjecture.
and yes probably scuffed a ball or two. Monitor the balls more closely... next...
Floyd Mayweather is punching every woman he knows, concussions are a big issue in football
and people are concerned about the OUTRAGE of slightly deflated balls. Okay then.
Or follow the betting leading up? The media was wall to wall coverage of that fight and his history with women. And they do the same thing with PEDs in any sport. Just look at the people not in the Baseball Hall of Fame that were not suspended for PEDs in their playing career.
When you mix arguably the GOAT of QBs, cheating, and mysterious text messages, it's a big deal. If the balls were only "slightly deflated", why did Tom make such a big deal about it? There must be a reason for his OUTRAGE when they were not deflated to his liking.
What were the PSI measurements "pregame" for the footballs? The table in the 538 measurements show the halftime measurements. I don't understand why they are making a big deal about it.
If the Colt's Balls were checked in at 13.5 PSI (Luck likes a harder ball) is it that shocking that in the colder wet air during halftime that the Colt's balls average around 12.5 PSI?
Likewise, if the Patriot's Balls were checked in at 12.5 PSI (Brady likes a softer ball) is it that shocking that in the colder wet air during halftime that the Patriot's balls would average around 11.3 PSI?
538 points out the difference in PSI at halftime between the Colt's and Patriot's balls - while ignoring that there was supposedly a difference in their balls at the pregame check in (Luck likes 13.5, Brady likes 12.5).
Did the NFL address this point and 538 overlook mentioning it?
There is no evidence that there is any competitive advantage resulting from the PSI of these FBs. It is clear by the current process and the specific handling of this case that the NFL does not see it as a competitive advantage (or care about it if they think there is). This is much ado about nothing, and the NFL is milking this for publicity and/or deflection of much more damaging/complicated issues.
With a surplus of good RBs, the Pats have been able to bench any RBs prone to fumbling.. That is likely to lower the Pats fumble rate. There also may be other factors. Thus, one cannot assume that the Pats' low fumble rate has anything to do with ball pressure. One cannot even say with certainty that ball pressure affects fumble rate. It is also unproven that the Pats even had systematically lower pressures.
Some of the 538 guys making these assumptions are on very thin ice.
What is glossed over is the fact that Brady complained about balls being like, WAY overinflated during the Jets game, as high as 16 psi. This is a full 2.5 psi over the league's own stated max, and certainly NOT what Brady wanted. So you mean to tell me that despite their clear carelessness in prior games for the inflation level of the footballs, Brady is guilty here for probably maybe telling someone to deflate balls to his liking (which doesn't even say whether he specifically asked for/wanted them to be below the league's minimum of 12.5 psi)? That this is somehow an example of RAMPANT CHEATING? And I'm supposed to care ?
Right.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Minor quibble. Would be nice for the OP to summarize the article and/or comment on it instead of just talking about what 538 is.
I think the report was poorly done and that so called persuasive evidence isn't all the persuasive. It paints a picture of someone getting bitched at because a ball was inflated by over 2 psi above the league rules and then bitching about Brady complaining about it. The stats used are bullshit and incomplete which makes that entire analysis completely useless. Garbage in, garbage out. I really find it hard to believe that a well-known lawyer and law firm would draft and issue this report. It reeks of advocacy more than independence. There very well could have been tempering by the Pats but I don't think the NFL had enough evidence to provide it
Forget for a moment the questions about the objectivity of an analysis done by a firm that has typically represented the parochial interests of large corporations, similar to the NFL. Consider just a few obvious statistical flaws in its analysis.
The statistical analysis—alleged to be highly significant-- falsely assumes that the errors of successive measures for a given referee and team are independent. Yet, if there are covariates that alter changes in pressures—like temperature, atmospheric pressure etc—then the pressure changes for different balls will be correlated. Depending on the degree of correlation, that will alter the significance of the results. To take an extreme example, if the 12 pats ball pressures were perfectly correlated, then knowing one would determine all others. In effect, you would have a sample size of n=1 relevant measures. It would be like the ref saying—well, we measured a single ball for the Pats and found it more deflated than the one from the Colts.
In fact, there are a ton of other possible sources of variation in pressure changes—not just atmospherics. The analysts discuss some of these--concluding for each case that it was “not significant.” But in my quick cursory look, I did not see an analysis of the cumulative effect of all these sources on overall variation—which might have been immense.
Also, there is scant analysis of the times of measurement—which differed for the Pats and Colts. There is also no analysis of inter-observer disagreement in pregame and halftime measures. Note that two referees recorded the halftime pressures and a third guesstimated the pregame pressures.
In fact, the analysis makes the incomprehensibly ridiculous assumption that that the Pats initial measures were all 12.5, the Colts 13.0. That is, the firm employed by the NFL assumed absolutely no variation in the initial measures—as if the head ref making them found the exact same pressure in each ball. Equally troublesome is the fact that these estimates are based on subjective recall from this single referee who works for the NFL-- whose investigation in turn is headed by a former Jets manager that has had a longstanding feud with the Patriots.
Note that if the initial pressure readings for the four Colts balls were higher than reported: either due to faulty recollection of unrecorded readings, carelessness among rushed referees or a host of other factors including biased recall, any differences between the Pats and colts' pressure changes would be far murkier than reported,
https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/investigative-and-expert-r…