It was raised as part of discussing Eli (and his luck in SB42) that the Pats may (or may not) have been quite lucky in the course of their run.
One dimension to get at that question is the idea that while rates of fumbling are matters of coaching and skill and are repeatable, the rate of recovery once a football is on the ground (summing recoveries of your own plus opponents' fumbles) is pretty much random. So by that measure, have we been lucky?
Year: total own fumbles + Opponent fumbles recovered by NWE / total NWE+Opponent fumbles = %
2000: 13 + 13 / 23 + 27 = 52%
2001: 16 + 13 / 29 + 23 = 56%
2002: 14 + 11 / 24 + 21 = 56%
2003: 14 + 12 / 25 + 31 = 46%
2004: 11 + 16 / 24 + 31 = 49%
2005: 10 + 8 / 19 + 13 = 56% -- seriously, we only forced 13 fumbles?
2006: 12 + 13 / 27 + 24 = 49%
2007: 8 + 12 / 14 + 25 = 51% -- seriously, we only fumbled 14 times?!
2008: 7 + 8 / 17 + 17 = 44%
2009: 8 + 10 / 17 + 28 = 40%
2010: 4 + 13 / 9 + 20 = 59%
2011: 9 + 11 / 14 + 21 = 57%
2012: 7 + 21 / 14 + 42 = 50% -- 3x disparity? whoa
2013: 18 + 12 / 27 + 21 = 63% (!)
2014: 12 + 9 / 16 + 19 = 60% (!)
2015: 7 + 9 / 14 + 29 = 48%
2016: 18 + 10 / 27 + 26 = 53%
2017: 9 + 6 / 13 + 15 = 54% -- YTD, obviously
18-year total: 197 + 207 / 353 + 433 = 51.3%
Summary:
- The Pats have a sliiiiiightly above expectation recovery rate, so they've been a wee bit lucky, but probably within the noise range. This represents 11 more recoveries in those 17.7 years than what would be even (50%).
- Total recovery rate of their own fumbles: 55.8%. Recovery rate of their opponents' fumbles: 47.8% (i.e., opponents recover 52.2% of their own fumbles against the Pats)
- The one meaningful thing - going back to what's a skill - is that the Pats fumble 19% less, overall, than their opponents.
So if you go by fumbles, the Pats have been pretty skilled, but not particularly lucky.
What about in other respects?
One dimension to get at that question is the idea that while rates of fumbling are matters of coaching and skill and are repeatable, the rate of recovery once a football is on the ground (summing recoveries of your own plus opponents' fumbles) is pretty much random. So by that measure, have we been lucky?
Year: total own fumbles + Opponent fumbles recovered by NWE / total NWE+Opponent fumbles = %
2000: 13 + 13 / 23 + 27 = 52%
2001: 16 + 13 / 29 + 23 = 56%
2002: 14 + 11 / 24 + 21 = 56%
2003: 14 + 12 / 25 + 31 = 46%
2004: 11 + 16 / 24 + 31 = 49%
2005: 10 + 8 / 19 + 13 = 56% -- seriously, we only forced 13 fumbles?
2006: 12 + 13 / 27 + 24 = 49%
2007: 8 + 12 / 14 + 25 = 51% -- seriously, we only fumbled 14 times?!
2008: 7 + 8 / 17 + 17 = 44%
2009: 8 + 10 / 17 + 28 = 40%
2010: 4 + 13 / 9 + 20 = 59%
2011: 9 + 11 / 14 + 21 = 57%
2012: 7 + 21 / 14 + 42 = 50% -- 3x disparity? whoa
2013: 18 + 12 / 27 + 21 = 63% (!)
2014: 12 + 9 / 16 + 19 = 60% (!)
2015: 7 + 9 / 14 + 29 = 48%
2016: 18 + 10 / 27 + 26 = 53%
2017: 9 + 6 / 13 + 15 = 54% -- YTD, obviously
18-year total: 197 + 207 / 353 + 433 = 51.3%
Summary:
- The Pats have a sliiiiiightly above expectation recovery rate, so they've been a wee bit lucky, but probably within the noise range. This represents 11 more recoveries in those 17.7 years than what would be even (50%).
- Total recovery rate of their own fumbles: 55.8%. Recovery rate of their opponents' fumbles: 47.8% (i.e., opponents recover 52.2% of their own fumbles against the Pats)
- The one meaningful thing - going back to what's a skill - is that the Pats fumble 19% less, overall, than their opponents.
So if you go by fumbles, the Pats have been pretty skilled, but not particularly lucky.
What about in other respects?