tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post6719885354812498453..comments2018-06-02T14:19:34.554-04:00Comments on Advanced Football Analytics (formerly Advanced NFL Stats): The End-GameUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-63775791763198181712015-01-18T23:31:46.526-05:002015-01-18T23:31:46.526-05:00"Agreed, but do you think more than 1 NFL coa..."Agreed, but do you think more than 1 NFL coach ( maybe Belichek) would go for 2 here? "<br /><br />Dunno about NFL coaches, but one of the greatest college coaches of all time (Darrell Royal) won two of the biggest games of his career 15-14 using this logic.Daniel Bhttp://wolff.to/area/title.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-5287629953521832832015-01-18T23:29:43.352-05:002015-01-18T23:29:43.352-05:00"What are your thoughts on scoring when down ..."What are your thoughts on scoring when down 14 points in the final 5 minutes. Go for 2 or 1? "<br /><br />Even if you make the 1xp all the time and make the 2xp only 40% of the time, then as long as OT is 50/50 you still come out ahead by going for 2.Daniel Bhttp://wolff.to/area/title.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-54963262094166633322014-08-15T15:11:56.101-04:002014-08-15T15:11:56.101-04:00@David Kravitz: This is because WP and EP are calc...@David Kravitz: This is because WP and EP are calculated using actual game data, so is a reflection of how teams actually play. To take an extreme example, if all QBs starting throwing like Peyton on a good day if they were down by 1 and had broken arms if they were up by 1, then yes, it would be worth giving up the 2 points according to the data.<br /><br />The reason the data is paradoxical is because teams don't behave rationally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-42308388922762953312013-02-18T01:53:01.193-05:002013-02-18T01:53:01.193-05:00David Kravitz: I don't think your statement re...David Kravitz: I don't think your statement regarding two possibilities is correct. The point is that when you are up by 1 you should play the way teams play when they are down by 1. That will improve WP.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17368467391159539298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-31694431520561481712013-01-08T14:04:57.816-05:002013-01-08T14:04:57.816-05:00Does this trailing paradox hold at point different...Does this trailing paradox hold at point differentials of +/- 2? If not, why not?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-63099958375559505682012-12-17T17:59:40.868-05:002012-12-17T17:59:40.868-05:00Fascinating article. I always had a gut feeling t...Fascinating article. I always had a gut feeling that being behind by 1 or 2 early in the 4th quarter was actually a good thing. It's cool to see the data actually bear this out.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15387960789025807476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-76747587083029442112012-01-09T08:40:12.598-05:002012-01-09T08:40:12.598-05:00I think that the fact that -1 is above +1 with 10 ...I think that the fact that -1 is above +1 with 10 minutes left needs to be discussed more. Most of the analysis on this site is done by saying "do what maximizes the win probability" which is certainly valid. However, win probability with 10 minutes left says that the best thing to do, if it was available, would be to give the other team 2 points for free, and then continue playing. Obviously this is not the right decision (even if it was possible), however this tells that one of two things is wrong:<br />1. Not every decision should be made to maximize WP.<br />2. WP is not (entirely) valid as computed here.<br />These are the only two possibilities.David Kravitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04327956475721102278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-28088866156269302082011-12-23T10:21:19.274-05:002011-12-23T10:21:19.274-05:00*kicking two, not two kicking. Sorry about that :...*kicking two, not two kicking. Sorry about that :)Devin Bacheldernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-56854437539537194772011-12-23T10:18:36.548-05:002011-12-23T10:18:36.548-05:00While I agree with your conclusion on the 2-pt ana...While I agree with your conclusion on the 2-pt analysis, I don't agree with how you got there. Comparing the 70% chance of being ahead or tied to the 50% of being ahead or tied after overtime is not the best comparison. What should really be compared are the probabilities of winning alone. Kicking two extra points gives a 99% chance of being tied or ahead which would appear to be even better than the 70%. The probability of winning should be isolated to provide the proper comparison.<br /><br />By going for two, the probability of being tied is .25 and the probability of winning in regulation is .45, as you had noted, while the probability of going to overtime is .25 and given overtime, the probability of winning is roughly .5 (I'm assuming that the probability of being tied after overtime is quite small). So the total probability of winning is:<br /><br />.45 + (.25 x .50) = .575<br /><br />Since this is greater than the probability of winning when two kicking extra points (roughly .50), then going for two while down by 14 is the optimal solution.Devin Bacheldernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-72790374580154611992011-09-16T14:55:06.391-04:002011-09-16T14:55:06.391-04:00I'm not sure, but I'd love to see the pres...I'm not sure, but I'd love to see the press conference after the game in which a coach tries to explain the logic to the media!Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-80724982587219650642011-09-16T14:42:07.780-04:002011-09-16T14:42:07.780-04:00Agreed, but do you think more than 1 NFL coach ( m...Agreed, but do you think more than 1 NFL coach ( maybe Belichek) would go for 2 here?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-64819105481987675522011-09-13T11:10:53.678-04:002011-09-13T11:10:53.678-04:00Slam dunk--You go for 2. Assume a 0.45 chance of 2...Slam dunk--You go for 2. Assume a 0.45 chance of 2-pt conversion and .99 chance of 1-pt XP.<br /><br />Convert 2-pt then get XP = <br />0.45 * 0.99 = 0.45...ahead by 1<br /><br />Fail on first 2-pt, convert on second =<br />0.55 * 0.45 = 0.25...tied<br /><br />Fail on both 2-pt = <br />0.55 * 0.55 = 0.30...down by 2<br /><br />In total, by going for the 2-pt conversion, you have a 70% chance of being tied or ahead, and only a 30% chance of being behind.<br /><br />That's much better than the 50% chance you get by kicking both XPs, and taking your chances in OT.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-7518255394732684842011-09-13T10:56:19.165-04:002011-09-13T10:56:19.165-04:00What are your thoughts on scoring when down 14 poi...What are your thoughts on scoring when down 14 points in the final 5 minutes. Go for 2 or 1?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-21068221431139707732010-10-09T00:11:21.149-04:002010-10-09T00:11:21.149-04:00Thanks. It's because the graph is for the win ...Thanks. It's because the graph is for the win probability for the team <i>with possession</i>.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-68220235588417710822010-10-09T00:09:07.734-04:002010-10-09T00:09:07.734-04:00Interesting article. To help a non-statistician m...Interesting article. To help a non-statistician make sense of the graph 'Win Probability by Lead' when looking at the +1 and -1 lines (crux of the article), how can BOTH lines be above the 50% probability of winning the game between 20 and 5 minutes remaining in the game? Both teams can't have a better than 50% chance of winning -- shouldn't the two lines be mirror images of each other (symmetrical) above and below the 50% line?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-49725413360318395732009-12-03T01:52:20.995-05:002009-12-03T01:52:20.995-05:00Trailing teams in any sport (even by tiny margins)...Trailing teams in any sport (even by tiny margins) tend to outperform relative to expectation (that is, relative to pre-game expected performance). This can be seen dramatically by the fact that 2nd half lines in sports betting are never simply a fraction of the whole-game line. They are consistently adjusted to reflect the (correct) expectation that trailing teams will outperform.<br /><br />How much of this is due to strategy changes vs. emotional factors is unclear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-16891736050828193612009-11-18T18:27:28.787-05:002009-11-18T18:27:28.787-05:00I've always thought that championship-winning ...I've always thought that championship-winning teams are much more likely to play the way you suggest: keeping the pressure on and not becoming too conservative. As a longtime Chargers fan I always thought that Marty Schottenheimer's biggest weakness was playing too conservatively in the end of close games.<br /><br />I'd love to see this analysis extended to see if the way teams approach these situations correlates with their overall success. Do championship teams better resist the temptation to become conservative?Pete McCabenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-49009507822491346882008-08-14T17:35:00.000-04:002008-08-14T17:35:00.000-04:00it kills me when teams lead by 3 or less and run t...it kills me when teams lead by 3 or less and run the ball on 1st and 2nd down late in the game, haven't tried to calculate its effective or anything, but to the naked eye that just seems like the most predictable playcalling in the game,<BR/><BR/>seems like whenever the playcaller mixes it up with a playaction or just straight pass they get a few first downs and kill the clock<BR/><BR/>just my take on itPhilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15837333926742421707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-51966212656865318152008-08-14T00:01:00.000-04:002008-08-14T00:01:00.000-04:00Another great article as always. This is one of t...Another great article as always. This is one of the things that always seems to be true but hadn't really been proved out before. I think the defense is as big of a factor in this anomoly as the offense. Defenses become a more conservative and vanilla with the lead at the same time the offense is becoming more aggressive. Back to your previous article where you discussed the optimal run/pass %'s if you knew the offense was going to be more aggressive and pass more the defense should be more aggressive as well but they do the opposite thus making the offensive strategy even more succesful. If it is true that according to your other article that the offensive strategy didn't matter if the defense adjusts then it is up to the defense to recognize what the offense is doing and adjust their game plan when behind accordingly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com