Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
SNF **CIN at BAL** (-3) (47.5) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ministry of Pain
- Start date
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
Right over the top of the upright….it counts…,I think
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
That PAT kick might have been in the top 5 plays tonight. 
karl.Racki
Footballguy
Wow. How was that good.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
No, the whole sequence plays out differently if the Ravens start from a different position, so we really have no way of knowing how their drive ends in that scenario.
As for your last comment there, typical. You analytics people are so in the tank for it that you can't handle that many are not.
Says the guy who just extrapolated the rest of the quarter on a hypothetical
You do realize you last line could EASILY be spun the other way?
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Are you saying math and statistical probability are superior to good old fashion know-how & gut feels?
That’s just crazy talk.
That said. I thought the bengals shoulda kicked the FG to tie it up at 13 earlier
karl.Racki
Footballguy
Nice D Cincy
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
If he didnt trip over Duvernay, he might have housed it
The problem with arguments on analytics is that EVERY time it doesn't work it becomes proof it doesn't work. The people arguing against it inherently don't care about the math and wanna talk about the gut. It's unwinnable. Like arguing with a certain population of supporters in the politics forum
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
I would like to all of the inputs to those analytics. as well as the sample size.Are you saying math and statistical probability are superior to good old fashion know-how & gut feels?
That’s just crazy talk.
That said. I thought the bengals shoulda kicked the FG to tie it up at 13 earlier
Bozeman Bruiser
Footballguy
Analytics cost Baltimore the game last week. Cost Cincinnati the game this week.
rockaction
Footballguy
Tuck's going to miss here. I have a feeling...a gut feel...they'll freeze him with know-how.
Truebluey
Footballguy
Foreshadowing?
rockaction
Footballguy
Oh, wait, you mean statistics and sample sizes mean something?
Not gonna be today
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
People used to do that all the time but I can't think of a single time where a team actually used it (IE fell on a bad snap and tried again).
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Shhhhhh. You will upset the math nerds.
rockaction
Footballguy
People always say that, but it takes longer than that to corral a bad snap, secure it, and call timeout.
He's the best Kicker in NFL history. Its really not even close.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Great game
I should have gone 2-0 easily with Higgins.
Now I’m in a nIl biter up 34 waiting out my opponent’s 2 CB, and a loss in the other.
Sucks. I hope Tee is back next week. That was totally unexpected. He played on this for a half last week. Inexplicable.
I should have gone 2-0 easily with Higgins.
Now I’m in a nIl biter up 34 waiting out my opponent’s 2 CB, and a loss in the other.
Sucks. I hope Tee is back next week. That was totally unexpected. He played on this for a half last week. Inexplicable.
The Gator
Footballguy
The result of the play is not analytics "fault".
Analytics = a stop light, telling you when to go or not.
Zac Taylor was at the stop light, drinking a jug of bourbon. The light turned green and he forgot what to do. So he throws the car into reverse and crashes into the car behind him.
The wreck was not the stoplight's fault.
imo
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Analytics or execution?
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I gave you a "like" for the fun analogy.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Ok, but Collinsworth was over the top witn his “not just kickers but one of the best all-time football players” schtick, right?
Pip's Invitation
Footballguy
And... they did.
Last note here re. anaylytics:
It's very easy to look at when a call like that goes bad and laugh at it. The problem is you ignore all the times it goes well. If Eagles had taken the 3 instead of going on fourth down earlier today, maybe they lose. The ultimate consequences of NOT going for it and taking the safe route are not as immediately obvious as the consequences of going and failing are. I think this is why so many people are "against" using analytics...it's so much easier to see the bad. But that's the ultimate beauty of math, of ANALYTICS....you don't trust your gut....it's based on a historical average, on data.
Yes....sometimes you need to make adjustments for conditions and in game trends, but generally the numbers don't lie.
Would this game have ended in a different result had Cincy taken the 3? Maybe. I tend to think not. I tend to think that next Baltimore possession ends in a TD...but none of us will ever know. It's certainly possible Cincy wins. BUt I can tell you this...the chances of Cincy winning were SIGNIFICANTLY higher if they converted that TD then they would have been if they'd accepted the chip shot 3....and historic data suggests their odds of losing or winning didn't change as much as anti-analyitcs folks think they did by trying and failing
It's very easy to look at when a call like that goes bad and laugh at it. The problem is you ignore all the times it goes well. If Eagles had taken the 3 instead of going on fourth down earlier today, maybe they lose. The ultimate consequences of NOT going for it and taking the safe route are not as immediately obvious as the consequences of going and failing are. I think this is why so many people are "against" using analytics...it's so much easier to see the bad. But that's the ultimate beauty of math, of ANALYTICS....you don't trust your gut....it's based on a historical average, on data.
Yes....sometimes you need to make adjustments for conditions and in game trends, but generally the numbers don't lie.
Would this game have ended in a different result had Cincy taken the 3? Maybe. I tend to think not. I tend to think that next Baltimore possession ends in a TD...but none of us will ever know. It's certainly possible Cincy wins. BUt I can tell you this...the chances of Cincy winning were SIGNIFICANTLY higher if they converted that TD then they would have been if they'd accepted the chip shot 3....and historic data suggests their odds of losing or winning didn't change as much as anti-analyitcs folks think they did by trying and failing
>>Using @NextGenStats
ball tracking data, Justin Tucker's game winning field goal crossed the upright with a y-coordinate (width of field) of 26.52. The exact middle of the field is y= 26.67 That is, if the uprights were half a yard wide, the kick would have still been good.<<
To tag along with this, I think people in general tend to have a singular results-based point of view. If something worked it was right, if it didn't then it was wrong. The problem is that only really works if it's the very last play of the game, so that there is no corresponding data to add afterward.
For head coaches, I think the issue becomes people second guessing decisions that were right but didn't work. Nothing is absolute. Sometimes, stuff just happens, and it throws a wrench into everything. I mean, if Lamar hits that bomb to Wallace, its probable none of this discussion comes into play.
Personally, I am a fan of analytics, but even from a non-analytic point of view. I like trusting my offense to get a yard or 2 when they need to. I'd honestly love to see a team just not kick extra points and go for 2 every time. Teams convert 2 pointers 49.4% of the time, while extra points, are 94.1%, so while close, the math says going for 2 every time in neutral situations is a statistically better approach.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I get what you are saying, and anyone who knows me knows that I am all for going for on 4th down sometimes, if it makes sense situationally. I loved it when Belichick went for that 4th down against the Colts in '09 as he knew his defense wasn't stopping Peyton Manning that whole second half, so he took the "all I need is TB12 to get me 1 yard" stance. It didn't work, but it felt like the right decision based on the game and the situation. On the flip side, go back to that Chargers/Chiefs game from last December where Staley blew it by going for it on 4th down too many times to where he left points on the table and they ended up losing the game and the division because of it.
Also, last night, if you are the Bengals and you know that analytically you are going for it on 4th down in that scenario, why in the hell are you running that "Philly special"-type play on 2nd down that has a risk of losing yards like that? They were fortunate to get almost all of it back on 3rd, but it seems to me that if you ahead of time you are going for it on 4th, your play calling on the first three downs should be a little smarter.
