So, you're telling me there's a chance (part 2) - UM's chances at the B1G East
A few weeks ago, user TaiStreetsMyHero wrote an excellent post quantifying the extreme longshot it was for Michigan to win the East. After crunching the numbers, the OP concluded Michigan stood a 0.00062% chance to win the East. In the thread, there was a spirited debate on whether the problem was better suited to be solved with a pure-math probability approach, or instead by using a simulation.
Well, I decided to put my money where my mouth is and simulate the end of the B1G East season and analyze the results.
First, since TaiStreetsMyHero posted two weeks ago, everything has gone right for Michigan.
We needed (and got) all of the following events*:
MSU lost to NW (41%)
MSU beat PSU (16%)
PSU lost to OSU(44%)
OSU lost to Iowa(20%)
UM beat Rutgers (95%) and Minnesota (87%)
In addition to all of those games going our way, they have also greatly increased the probability that PSU loses to Rutgers, Nebraska, or Maryland (used to be 1, 3, 4% is now 13, 14, and 18%)
Similarly, Rutgers/Maryland's win probabilities have increased against MSU.
Finally, Michigan's probability of beating Wisconsin and Ohio State have increased as well due to our rise in S&P.
*-All the numbers here are from Bill Connelly's predictions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now for the big reveal. I programmed in tiebreakers for UM/MSU/OSU/PSU. I did not add in tiebreaker scenarios for Rutgers (who is still not mathematically eliminated). For fun, I wrote up my code just before leaving work last night and ran simulations as I left so I could run a ridiculous number. So, after 50,000,000 simulations, these are the results:
B1G East champ:
| Div Champs (out of 50,000,000) | % | |
|---|---|---|
| OSU | 38,662,569 | 77.33 |
| MSU | 10,624908 | 21.25 |
| UM | 468,785 | 0.94 |
| PSU | 236,486 | 0.47 |
You may note that only 49,992,748 division champs have been accounted for in this simulation, which basically means that there is a 0.01% chance that Rutgers is involved in a tiebreaker, which of course implies there is an even smaller chance that Rutgers wins the B1G East.
Of course, we shouldn't scoff at that number because just a few short weeks ago that was basically Michigan's chance of coming in first. Now, we see our probability of winning the division has increased by a few orders of magnitude. With our now monstrous 0.94% chance of winning the division title, we simply need good fortune equal to about 7 consecutive flips of heads on a coin and we are in. Given our luck against rivals in the Harbaugh era, is that so much to ask?
EDIT: I think most of us are aware of Michigan's rooting interests, but thanks to ak47 for writing them up nicely:
So rooting interests for the rest of the season.
Root for psu to lose all of their games. This is fun and I can do this. (if you harbor some hope of the playoffs you'd probably prefer psu to go 2-1 because they only need to lose once to drop out of the tiebreaker but screw that)
OSU, beat msu this weekend, don't care what they do against illinois.
MSU, lose all of their games, we need them to lose 2 more times. Once again easy to do, once again if you have ridiculous playoff hopes 1-2 would be your ideal.
So outside of rooting for osu this weekend over msu you just get to root against teams you don't like. Should be easy enough.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:21 AM ^
But as you accurately assess - the odds are greater than 99-1 against that happening. Candidly though, if you told me we win out and finish 10-2 with a wins against both Wisconsin and OSU I'd take that in a New York second.
Youngest team in the country playing it's 3rd string QB and still finishing 10-2? That would be freaking awesome IMO and would assure us of playing in one of the Big 6 bowl games as much as it would piss off everybody doing the official rankings right now.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:34 AM ^
That is all that really matters at this point.
November 8th, 2017 at 4:48 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 5:30 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
*2nd string QB.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:16 PM ^
1. Speight
2. O'Korn
3. Peters
November 8th, 2017 at 12:51 PM ^
I kind of get what he is saying. If O'Korn would be playing if not for some injury, I would say Peters is the third string, but since he got put in over a benched O'Korn, that would make Peters the second string QB no? Either way, the overall point still stands, a backup QB led, uber young, 10-2 team would be very impressive.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:45 PM ^
Peters was 3rd string when the season began, that's how I look at it
November 8th, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^
My guess is that he was trying to imply that Peters should have been second all along and we should have gone to him before O'Korn.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:52 PM ^
O'Korn was the second string QB while he played. Peters became the second string QB when he overtook O'Korn. Hence, all non-Speight snaps have gone to the second string QB. Never have the coaches not started their second choice since Speight went down.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:37 PM ^
"Youngest team in the country playing it's 3rd string QB and still finishing 10-2?"
Where does this youth claim come from? Last I checked, Iowa, Penn St., and Michigan State were all younger, or equally young to Michigan. There are at least 52 other D1 schools that make that very same claim.
Iowa and MSU are, on average, more than 9 months younger than Michigan, which at this point in the season is basically a year of eligibility. Iowa has at least 10 non-redshirt freshmen making contributions not related to special teams. MSU is somewhere in the 14 freshmen contributing major non-ST minutes. Penn State, however, does not seem to be relying on their youth as much as the other two aforementioned, with only a handful getting any kind of meaningful playing time. I'd imagine that this PSU discrepancy is related to their scholarship issues.
Even if we compare depth-charts by class, which would correct any early-enrollee age-to-eligibility issues by showing what teams actually play on the field, Michigan is still older than Iowa or MSU on Offense, even taking into consideration that Peters is now starting. Michigan is also older on Defense compared to MSU, but Iowa's starting defense is older than Michigan's.
If we look at PSU's depth chart, They are playing a good deal of Juniors and Seniors, and stand to lose a lot of talent next year.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:48 PM ^
You join over a year ago and wait for my comment on our youth to weigh in with your first post.
Welcome!
And....FWIW....I was referring to our relative returning starter experience, not class age. Our placement at the bottom of D1 schools is well documented and discussed.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:58 PM ^
Completely legitimate. Most inexperienced, but definitely not *youngest*.
I can see how most inexperienced can be seen as a negative that can be overcome. I don't, however, see it as something that necessarily translates into a positive next season -- at least not moreso than another team who returns as many (or more) starters.
Unsurprisingly, both Iowa and MSU are near the end of that list, too.
I think a stat like that makes the most impact when looking at the Utah teams, who all have players who graduate at 26 years old. BYU is 106 of 129, whereas their age is 6th oldest out of 234 schools.
It would be great for CFB to have an age-per-play, and eligibility-per-play metric. That would seem to be a better indicator of returning value to a given school.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^
This SBNation article says we are 127th in returning experience.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:03 PM ^
returning experience and average age are two different criteria. Michigan is playing a lot of sophmores who had very little experience because seniors dominated the two deep whereas msu has played more true freshman but lost slightly less starters.
Honestly average age of the two deep is probably a better indicator of experience. Bama often ranks near the bottom of returning experience due to draft departures but starts a lot of sophmores and juniors who were just behind other 5 star nfl talents.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:43 PM ^
If the offensive line brings the pain the entire way in the running game, it'll happen my good man. Hoping the cheaters and wiscy are over aggressive and load the box so they can get bombed over the top and picked apart in the passing game underneath apart underneath. Last year the running game couldn't wear down the those two. This year they can. I'd run misdirection and counters all day against the idiots from cbus. The crowd could be the difference in that game though I might add. If all of you old and depression soaked alums decide to get into the game when the defense is on the field, that stadium could be deafening. If it weren't for your student section there wouldn't be anything there for noise. I've been to your games and you guys don't help the team out one bit or give them an edge unless the team is killing the opponent. I guess all of you geniuses haven't grasped that yet. Maybe you'll figure that out by gametime. Sad news for you chumps though. Not going to kill the cheaters on the scoreboard. So sack up for once you bonafide sissy candy asses.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:36 PM ^
in a heart beat. If we finish 10-2 I would consider that a very good season, especially with a win in Wisky and beating OSU. That would set us up for a very good bowl game and would mean our offense is continually improving which should be a spring board for next year and what could be great things.
November 8th, 2017 at 6:04 PM ^
youngest team and if we make it to 10-2, wow. I would also say, IF we make it to 10-2 this is Harbaugh's best coaching year of 3. We need to see BP throw for 15 of 20 for 200 yards or better vs MD. Need to show WI that we can be more than just a run centric team. Need to respect the QB. If WI and OSU does not respect pass, then 10-2 does not likely happen.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
No point looking at all the things that have to go our way to win the East.
Just win next game, repeat each week = As much as we can hope for at this point.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:13 PM ^
against MSU and PSU?
November 8th, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
Interesting that we actually seem to have a better shot than PSU. Would not have predicted that.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:04 PM ^
They're gonna lose to Rutgers this weekend!! I feel it!
November 8th, 2017 at 12:18 PM ^
It's because PSU only beats us in a tiebreaker. They need both MSU and OSU to lose twice, which is a really tall order all things considered. We still have the opportunity to beat OSU in a tiebreaker, which only requires us to win that game (well, and MSU and PSU to lose once each assuming OSU wins on Saturday; if MSU beats OSU, they'll probably have something ridiculous like a 99% chance to win the division).
November 8th, 2017 at 5:22 PM ^
of OSU and MSU. Which means that they'll still be effectively two games (at best) behind the East leader after this weekend, with only two games to go for that team.
Whereas, we have a good chance (the chance that OSU beats MSU) to only be one game behind the East leader after this weekend.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
Would be wild, but the East just continues to beat up on each other week after week.
November 8th, 2017 at 5:23 PM ^
by the West. NW beating MSU and Iowa beating OSU has given us a chance. If those two East teams had simply won those games, they'd be playing to virtually clinch the East title this weekend. Thank you, much-maligned West division!
November 8th, 2017 at 11:26 AM ^
I'll donate $200 to ChadTough. Not gonna happen.
(Yes for those wondering, I've already donated previously).
November 8th, 2017 at 3:24 PM ^
of $1.88. Very generous of you.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:28 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:50 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 1:06 PM ^
A nickel weighs 5 grams. Therefore 200 nickels ($10 worth) nickels weighs 1 kg or 2.2 lbs. Hard to imagine you could fit more than 1000 nickels ($50) which would weigh 11 lbs into your pockets. Would it really be worth touching someone else's pooh covered nickels and smelling foul (not to mention health concerns) for probably less than $50?
November 8th, 2017 at 2:23 PM ^
The Michigan Difference.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:43 PM ^
...was funny. I've got to follow you more.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:35 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 11:28 AM ^
mathematically. stats people gotta be getting mad action.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:54 AM ^
Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities, Please be a really attractive female in the Twin cities...
November 8th, 2017 at 12:11 PM ^
Even if the poster is an attractive female, it looks like she lives in Georgia.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^
Playing hard to get.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:36 PM ^
This whole sub-thread has so much win
November 8th, 2017 at 12:57 PM ^
And he apparently lives in Texas. Seems like the twin cities wouldn't be ideal place for the very attractive statistics nerd to be living. Also, very useful that this conversation was taking place between two people who rep states in the username/picture.
EDIT: Although I just now realized your image is of Minnesota. So much state action going on.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:09 PM ^
Puzzling that a poster named "Trueblueintexas" has a picture of MN and claims to have ties to the twin cities.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:28 AM ^
If you take into account the fact that MSU's probability of losing to a terrible team (oh hey @Rutgers) is much higher than forecasted, I bet our chances are even better than 1%.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:10 PM ^
The Sparty meltdown if they lose to Rutgers on the same day we beat OSU to go to the B1G Championship game would be epic.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:20 PM ^
Hopefully that game is also at noon. I don't see MSU losing to Rutgers, but if it starts at 3:30, and they go into it knowing Michigan will be B10 champs if they lose, it drops from 1% to 0%.
Is it bad to root for injuries...? Not like serious ones, but ones that just keep someone from playing for a couple games. If McSorely and/or Lewerke go down, our chances would start being very reasonable.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:31 PM ^
everyone is all like, yeah, MSU isn't gonna lose to Rutgers or Maryland...and they're correct that the odds are very low...unless Lewerke gets hurt. He's been outstanding and their offense would be a lot worse with Terry or anyone else. So like, I don't want to root for a guy to get hurt, but if he happened to suffer a boo-boo that put him out a few weeks....I wouldn't be disappointed, per se.
McSorley is similarly leveraged in the PSU offense/chances of winning.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:56 PM ^
Lewerke could be in danger this weekend with OSU's D-line.
Franklin has already shown he'll keep his starters in the game far longer than necessary to run up the score. I could see him trying to put up 50+ on Rutgers to get some credibilty back with the CFP committee. If McSorely or Barkley got hurt while running up the score, it would be sweet karma.
November 8th, 2017 at 5:25 PM ^
is if we improbably won the East after getting beat badly by PSU since it'd be a nearly exact role reversal from last year with them improbably winning it after losing huge to us.
November 8th, 2017 at 11:30 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:08 PM ^
It's still a long shot. Would need ND to lose once for sure and probably twice to be certain. Would also need the Pac 12 or ACC to cannabilize itself, most notable Washington and USC or Miami and Clemson losing again before their conference championship. Then you need one of Bama or Georgia to lose twice and not even make it to the SEC championship game.
November 8th, 2017 at 5:26 PM ^
we have like a 0.01% chance of making the playoff. There would have to be absolute carnage ahead of us and/or we'll have to win every game by like 40 because we have so far to go, and we don't have the SOS to make a case over any other 2-loss conference champ save maybe Washington.