Pete Prisco Predicts Cards Win NFC West

[rohinaz]

Lol. For someone who spouts about "advanced statistics" you sure do miss the basic facts. The 49ers allowed ~14 pts/game last year and didn't allow a rushing touchdown until week 16. Meanwhile, the Cards have a coach who could barely surpass mediocre with a HOF QB and a currently field the worst Qbs in the NFL. But of course that is luck too, right?

I enjoy browsing posts from a number of posters here but I continually see you post this same argument so I have to call it out. Check out some of the consistent winners and losers in the NFL. The Patriots and Green Bay in the former category for example, and Washington and Oakland in the latter. I do not know the numbers off the top of my head, but I can tell you right now that over the last 5 years or so, NE and GB have both surely been near the top in the league in turnover differential. On the other hand, WAS and OAk, consistent losers, surely stay in the basement in that category. Good teams tend to win the TO margin, bad teams don't.

Certainly there are exceptions, as there are with any rule. These exceptions don't bolster your argument however, they only demonstrate that it is a straw-man. I believe the Steelers were under by quite a decent amount last year, for example. Yet they still managed a playoff berth, albeit at a lukewarm 9-7 (or 10-6?). The point I am establishing here, in addition to my previous point, is that TOs themselves do not make a team good or bad, let alone GREAT or AWFUL.

I am 49er fan, but also a realist. Do we win the NFCW? The chances are overwhelmingly in our favor. We possess the best pass rush in the NFL, do not allow rushing yards, and do not throw stupid INTS as do Skelton and Jackson. But we also have a tougher schedule (or so it seems at the moment) and probably will not generate quite as many turnovers (but should still be well on the positive side of the ratio), so I see a 10-6 or 11-5 season as more probable, which should still seal the NFCW with relative ease. Meanwhile, AZ and SEA have quite dismal offenses, especially at QB, and lesser defenses. STL is a notch lower, a massive project altogether.

I expect a desperate, futile response in hopes of saving face in which case it would be a waste of time to reply. The fervor with which you constantly defend this senseless claim as irrefutable evidence make such a response imminent, I'm sure. But I hope, to yourself, you can mull over what the evidence suggests, which I have laid out in this post: (1) good teams generally win the TO ratio, and at the same time, (2) TOs don't make a team good or bad, great or awful. Surely they can affect the W-L total to a degree but teams that enter the playoffs under the TO ratio demonstrate this. The 49ers are a good team, the cards are not, it really is that simple. "Advanced metrics" are not necessary.

Here is to an injury-free season. Can't wait. Cheers

nfcwest123

Alex Smith sucks, everyone knows that but some 49er fans. He had the best year of his career and it was average at best, several rookie QB had better stats, Kolb was ahead of Smith statisticly before he got hurt.

49ers D was really good last year, but so was the cards the 2nd half of the season. 'Cards have a coach you who could barley pass mediocracy with a hof qb'? So if you consider losing the SUPERBOWL in the last 90 seconds a form a mediocre coach, what are you saying about harbaugh? he couldnt even reach the SB he must be horrible right?
If alex smith returns to his horrible self 49ers will be a below 500 team. Throw capernick in there, he cant be any worse.

[49fanSince70]

While the Cards defense finished strong, they were hardly facing quality offenses in their last 9 games.

St. Louis, twice
Philadelphia
San Francisco, twice
Dallas
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Seattle.

only Dallas and possibly Philadelphia had decent offenses.

[49fanSince70]

A decade of futility has been relieved. Most of them are absolutely adamant that it's all on their coach as well.

I thought Harbs would maybe flake out a bit, most college coaches don't make the transition that easily. We'll see what happens though, every team steps up for a 1st year coach. They'll have to actually sustain before I totally buy in to what they think they have re-discovered.

What was really remarkable about Harbaugh and the other 49er coaches was that they got the team to the elite level with a short offseason. There is only one way to explain that: coaching talent.

I agree that a +28 turnover margin is not likely to be repeated. I disagree with the premise that the margin was the sole reason for their success last year because I actually watched the games. They won with an old formula, running, stopping the run, and letting the other team make the mistakes. By and large it worked.

Last year the 49ers improved the defense with great free agent signings and by having a great draft. This year they kept all their defensive starters and added a lot of talent on the offense side. Add that to a full offseason to install the offense and it will ascend to mediocrity. With Akers and Lee still providing great kicking and punting, the special teams will remain special. I'm thinking 10-11 wins with a better balanced team. The Seahawks seem like they'll be the 49ers principle competition, but Harbaugh has pretty much pwned Carroll (you remember, the guy who turned tail and ran from USC after all the violations he commmitted hurt their program).

So yeah, keep going on about the +28. That was last year. This year the 49ers will win in many exciting, new ways.

[DowntownBrown]

Yeah, obviously predictions mean nothing. However, it's refreshing that some "experts" are actually looking into the REASON the Niners won 13 last year (+28 TO margin, NOBODY hurt) and realizing that is UNREPEATABLE. The scores he predicts were mostly of the 17-16 variety (which is how the Cards are going to have to play games this year, with a defense that keeps them in every game and a QB that does just enough to not LOSE.) I think a sweep of SF is possible, but not likely. However, he also predicts us to lose at STL, and I'm not sure that will happen. Everyone who just assumes SF is so good just because they ran away with the West last year isn't digger deep enough into the factors that played out. They are NOT going to get that lucky again.

I doubt the 49ers win as many games this season. The problem is even if they drop back to 9 or 10 wins it will still be more than the Cards can muster. Our QB is sorry and our depth is nada.

[bugsby]

here you go:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1...sound-familiar

He predicts EVERY score from EVERY game.

Highlight: He predicts the Cards to sweep SF, including what would be a winner-takes-the-West Game 17 showdown at San Fran.

Lowlight: He predicts the Cards to lose at home in WC game to Dallas. (Obviously he hasn't been paying attention because Arizona OWNS the Cowturds in Glendale.)

This doesn't seem so far fetched anymore.

[WVcardsFan]

Here's another guy who is much smarter than me understanding what I've been preaching since January:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...ason-greatness

[49fanSince70]

Here's another guy who is much smarter than me understanding what I've been preaching since January:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...ason-greatness

The major flaw in that article is that he's not allowing for a likely increase in scoring for the 49ers next year. Their redzone percentage was terrible last year; if that 'regresses to the mean' (which seems to be some kind of religion for that writer and his ilk) they will score a lot more points next year. He stated that Smith's interception rate will likely increase in a higher risk/reward offense, but failed to allow for the
concomitant increase in scoring. I'm looking more at fundamentals. Last year the front office addressed the defense, added 5 new starts, and transformed them into an elite unit. While I certainly don't expect the offense to become elite after this offseason, it will undoubtedly be much better. Since they'll regress *upwards* to the mean.

[wit3card]

The major flaw in that article is that he's not allowing for a likely increase in scoring for the 49ers next year. Their redzone percentage was terrible last year; if that 'regresses to the mean' (which seems to be some kind of religion for that writer and his ilk) they will score a lot more points next year. He stated that Smith's interception rate will likely increase in a higher risk/reward offense, but failed to allow for the
concomitant increase in scoring. I'm looking more at fundamentals. Last year the front office addressed the defense, added 5 new starts, and transformed them into an elite unit. While I certainly don't expect the offense to become elite after this offseason, it will undoubtedly be much better. Since they'll regress *upwards* to the mean.

There is no regress upwards to the mean for Pointing.

That is only the case if you did more point under a QB and a team, but SF didn't, so they can't regress upwards they could get better, but Smith didn't show till now that he can do that. And on the other side if you get 3 points more per game average that doesn't help if the other team makes 5 points more, you loose more.

But we will see how it plays out ;).

[WVcardsFan]

The major flaw in that article is that he's not allowing for a likely increase in scoring for the 49ers next year. Their redzone percentage was terrible last year; if that 'regresses to the mean' (which seems to be some kind of religion for that writer and his ilk) they will score a lot more points next year. He stated that Smith's interception rate will likely increase in a higher risk/reward offense, but failed to allow for the
concomitant increase in scoring. I'm looking more at fundamentals. Last year the front office addressed the defense, added 5 new starts, and transformed them into an elite unit. While I certainly don't expect the offense to become elite after this offseason, it will undoubtedly be much better. Since they'll regress *upwards* to the mean.

Actually, the 49'ers showed a statistical anomaly in point differential last year (due mostly to their ridiculous short-field luck.) They had the 26th ranked offense, yet scored the 11th most points. So, actually, even with a supposed improvement in the red zone, the metrics would predict a reduction in overall scoring.