To analytics or not to analytics, that is the question

[RashanGary]

Its 4th and 3 from the 50 yard line
You're about to go 3 and out after a forced fumble
You're up 13-6 with 5 minutes left in the forth quarter
It's a defensive struggle. Your offense can't seem to get going
10 of your 13 points were scored directly off turnovers
Their offense has 60 total yards in the second half
Your defense is shutting them out and has 2 turnovers in the second half
Your punter is en feugo, pin pointing bombs

Analytics says go for it. Its 80% more effective with down, distance and field position

[hoosier]

It's not a question of yes or no analytics, it's how to parse the numbers in context. The numbers can't account for things like bad weather, who is injured, what's working and what's not, and so on. If same time and down & distance but the score was 44-37 and nobody could stop anyone, obviously the decision would look a lot different. In your scenario, it's a no brainer to kick it away.

[hoosier]

Another consideration here is who you are as a team. If the defense is what gets things going, let them close it out. If you're the 2011 Packers there might be an argument for going for it--but in this situation I would still punt.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Its 4th and 3 from the 50 yard line
You're about to go 3 and out after a forced fumble
You're up 13-6 with 5 minutes left in the forth quarter
It's a defensive struggle. Your offense can't seem to get going
10 of your 13 points were scored directly off turnovers
Their offense has 60 total yards in the second half
Your defense is shutting them out and has 2 turnovers in the second half
Your punter is en feugo, pin pointing bombs

Analytics says go for it. Its 80% more effective with down, distance and field position

How is that 80% calculated?

[Zool]

Assuming all things are at average levels (health, weather, momentum, etc), at 4th and 3 from the 50 I would punt. 4th and 3 from the 40 I would go for it. In a 2 point lead scenerio, I punt in both situations.

[pbmax]

Assuming all things are at average levels (health, weather, momentum, etc), at 4th and 3 from the 50 I would punt. 4th and 3 from the 40 I would go for it. In a 2 point lead scenerio, I punt in both situations.

You are apparently living in too close a proximity too Zimmer :D

[mraynrand]

"'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and analytics."

[RashanGary]

Analytics and stats open the eyes to reconsider things. But the value of the human mind and experience allows for so much more context. I do like analytics. I watch a lot of football. Guys like river boat Ron and Doug Peterson are the best at knowing when to go for it. And they’re the ones who have an analytics person giving them information during the game.

Both, however, say that they just use it for further consideration and don’t just blindly trust it.

I’m a fan but I think all over the interweb, things like pff player grades (which only account for a grade given by someone who doesn’t know the assignment of the player) (and also doesn’t account for the reality that said player may only be asked to do things he does well, which doesn’t factor in the reality that there are other players who can and do everything)

Like I said, stats open the eyes to look at something further, but experience and a capable human mind can get soooo much closer to understanding than any of these stats out there.

[texaspackerbacker]

Its 4th and 3 from the 50 yard line
You're about to go 3 and out after a forced fumble
You're up 13-6 with 5 minutes left in the forth quarter
It's a defensive struggle. Your offense can't seem to get going
10 of your 13 points were scored directly off turnovers
Their offense has 60 total yards in the second half
Your defense is shutting them out and has 2 turnovers in the second half
Your punter is en feugo, pin pointing bombs

Analytics says go for it. Its 80% more effective with down, distance and field position

Seriously? You're not just making this up? Analytics says go for it in that situation?

I've never followed analytics, but going for it then would be bonehead stupid IMO - and I say that as possibly the most optimistic person in here.

[pbmax]

I would love to know which calculator produced the 80% more effective number.

[Joemailman]

A factor would be the opposing QB. Not sure I'd want to kick it and give Tom Brady a shot to tie the game. I'd give Blake Bortles a shot.

[RashanGary]

A factor would be the opposing QB. Not sure I'd want to kick it and give Tom Brady a shot to tie the game. I'd give Blake Bortles a shot.

Absolutely! I’m sure there are countless other factors. Maybe the play before you lost your starting QB and both guards. Probably not in position to feel real confident about that 4th and 3 in front of you. But analytics says go!

Or maybe the opposing teams QB just went down. Is you analytics equation factoring that in?

So yeah, there are thousands of variables that cannot be accounted for with stats or analytics. Seems a lot of people are out there outsmarting themselves with over reliance on stats.

[RashanGary]

Not everyone is capable of having a feel for football. I’m sure analytics and stats do better than someone who’s never watched more than a quarter of football at a time.

But pretty much every head coach in the NFL is better than any stat or formula that will ever be created.

[mraynrand]

Not everyone is capable of having a feel for football. I’m sure analytics and stats do better than someone who’s never watched more than a quarter of football at a time.

But pretty much every head coach in the NFL is better than any stat or formula that will ever be created.

Not Barry Switzer or Richie Kotite!

[RashanGary]

Analytics are nice though. Sometimes the heat of the moment confuses or overwhelms even the best of us, and a analytics reminder may just open the mind to seeing how maybe you have gotten lost on the gravity of the moment.

I’m a fan of it in some sense. But the idea that we have to prove everything with a stat for it to be true.... it’s gone a bit far. Gruden said it well, he said, I don’t really care what Aaron Rodgers stats say. He’s not declining. He’s winning. Gruden went on to say, I don’t even know what half of those stats mean.

I’m capable of understanding them. But the more I understand, the more I see how limited and useless many of them are compared to my football knowledge and experience. The only thing they’ve ever done that helps me advabce my understanding of football is that stats have pushed me to look at new topics. But once I look, the old trusty noggan naturally factors thibgs in so the stat becomes less valuable there after.

[RashanGary]

Not Barry Switzer or Richie Kotite!

:lol:

Mike Sherman might make that list too. That guy was dug in to some ridiculous coaching behaviors

[pbmax]

Not everyone is capable of having a feel for football. I’m sure analytics and stats do better than someone who’s never watched more than a quarter of football at a time.

But pretty much every head coach in the NFL is better than any stat or formula that will ever be created.

There have been WAY too many punts on 4th and short from their own side of the field for this statement to be true.

Coaches until recently were in love with gaining 20 yards of field position by punting in the other teams territory and then getting a touchback.

And lets not talk about late in the game down 3 scores and kicking a FG to be respectable.

[mraynrand]

“Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have no wish to serve under them.” - Spock.

[RashanGary]

Favre told a story once... he said he asked a young QB what type of coverage that was. The QB went on and on about every little detail. Favre said, “no, it’s cover 2”

Young dude was over complicating shit. There are only so many coverages a defense can run that cover both the run and pass. If it’s cover 2, it’s cover 2. From there, tvibk about your best guys and their worst guys and attack.

I played QB a few years ago in a pick up game. Our team was getting shredded. I have kids so I’ve developed a magical touch pass that even a 7 year old can catch. So I instantly made everyone better when I took over. Cuz I was throwing a touch, catachable ball to people who don’t catch very well. But I lined up, saw weakness and stengths and attacked. It was that simple. I didn’t try to out math or science anyone. I was playing football. I out footballed them.

That’s how it works.

[RashanGary]

There have been WAY too many punts on 4th and short from their own side of the field for this statement to be true.

Coaches until recently were in love with gaining 20 yards of field position by punting in the other teams territory and then getting a touchback.

And lets not talk about late in the game down 3 scores and kicking a FG to be respectable.

Absolutely. It has helped coaches see some weak spots for sure. But it can go too far the other way as well.

[pbmax]

Absolutely. It has helped coaches see some weak spots for sure. But it can go too far the other way as well.

Everything can go too far. Unusually its pig-headedness, appeals to authority and stupidity leading the way though.

[RashanGary]

Peterson and riverboat Ron do a great job. They have analytics guys giving them info on every 4th down. I think it helps them remember not to fall into ruts. But both guys insist that they don’t even come close to following it blindly. It’s just one more piece of information they factor in.

When I watch their games, I’m impressed with their decision making. It’s impressive how effective both guys are at 4th down decision making.

[RashanGary]

Everything can go too far. Unusually its pig-headedness, appeals to authority and stupidity leading the way though.

I won’t argue with ya too far on this...

But what do you mean by “Appeals to authority??”

[RashanGary]

Because football is such a practical endeavor (blocking, tackling, running, catching, etc) I do think there is a certain personality type that tends to prevail. People who understand space and leverage and enjoy physical exertion tend to play football well. Hence, you will certainly find some over reliance on those practical qualities. In which case, analytics help to open the mind to getting out of ruts.

However, if you picture Sheldon from Big Bang theory trying to beat Brett Favre at the game of football, you can see why one mindset seems to be more effective than the other in accomplishing a physical feat using only ones body.

If the rules changed and you could use machinery, Sheldon would have a better chance using his science.

[texaspackerbacker]

A factor would be the opposing QB. Not sure I'd want to kick it and give Tom Brady a shot to tie the game. I'd give Blake Bortles a shot.

You should have said Aaron Rodgers in your example instead of Brady hahahahaha.

The answer to that factor is that there is five minutes left in the scenario. Let 'em get the ball at mid field and maybe tie the game. Then we come back and win it with a walk-off FG.

[pbmax]

I won’t argue with ya too far on this...

But what do you mean by “Appeals to authority??”

A claim that we do this because important or notable people have done it this way or approve. It’s an assertion that you are supposed to accept because other supposedly authoritative people accept it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

In sports, often takes the form of doing things by the book. But no one has written the book or checked its results.

One good thing about the public move toward analytics is that much of it is public and can be disputed openly.

[pbmax]

Bryn Swartz
John Elway literally traded for Joe Flacco. He watched him play football over the previous 11 seasons and said that this is a player he is interested in shipping out assets for.

Captain Comeback
Theory: Elway doesn't care for QB stats since people have used them to diminish his own career. So he'll highlight things like wins, SB MVPs, playoff moments (Rahim Moore blindspot) & physical traits like arm strength. Thus he values Flacco more than any studious analyst would.

[pbmax]

Joe Flacco is the answer to a lot of these questions.

He has everything a scout is looking for in a QB. He is very tall. He has a live arm and can throw deep and with touch short.

He stands in the pocket and takes hits.

But he sucks because he cannot find open receivers down the field unless coverage is broken.

But these old school scouts ARE using numbers to judge him. Height, velocity, completion percentage. Unfortunately those numbers are TERRIBLE predictors of success.

And so this wet blanket of a talent is wasting years when shorter, less rocket armed QBs could be winning games for them.

Keep this in mind next time some dope reporting on Packers drafting reminds you of their height requirement.

[run pMc]

Its 4th and 3 from the 50 yard line
You're about to go 3 and out after a forced fumble
You're up 13-6 with 5 minutes left in the forth quarter
It's a defensive struggle. Your offense can't seem to get going
10 of your 13 points were scored directly off turnovers
Their offense has 60 total yards in the second half
Your defense is shutting them out and has 2 turnovers in the second half
Your punter is en feugo, pin pointing bombs

Analytics says go for it. Its 80% more effective with down, distance and field position

You're at midfield with a chance to pin the other team's thus-far ineffective offense inside the 20 (or with good ST's the 5-10).
It's a close game but neither team can move the ball and you have the lead, so the clock is essentially your enemy.

I say you tell your punter to pooch it and trust your D to stop them from driving the length of the field.

(I would assume if Brady/Brees/Mahomes was playing they'd either have more than 6 points, or your D has about 12 sacks and 2 shutdown CBs.)

[Anti-Polar Bear]

:lol:

Mike Sherman might make that list too. That guy was dug in to some ridiculous coaching behaviors

4th and 1. Black Batman (the great Ahman Green) was making hay all day. A fucking yard. The math said go for the kill. Sherman punted. 4th and 26.

Suffice it to say, Sherman was a better GM than coach. 44-20 as GM. Never missed the playoffs. Poor man's Belichick.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Analytics are nice though. Sometimes the heat of the moment confuses or overwhelms even the best of us, and a analytics reminder may just open the mind to seeing how maybe you have gotten lost on the gravity of the moment.

I’m a fan of it in some sense. But the idea that we have to prove everything with a stat for it to be true.... it’s gone a bit far. Gruden said it well, he said, I don’t really care what Aaron Rodgers stats say. He’s not declining. He’s winning. Gruden went on to say, I don’t even know what half of those stats mean.

I’m capable of understanding them. But the more I understand, the more I see how limited and useless many of them are compared to my football knowledge and experience. The only thing they’ve ever done that helps me advabce my understanding of football is that stats have pushed me to look at new topics. But once I look, the old trusty noggan naturally factors thibgs in so the stat becomes less valuable there after.

Stats are certainly important to the shark (smart) gambler.

Punting on 4th and 1 or 3 when the math says go for it is being conservative. Conservatism achieves little in life and in football.

Alverez never won a National Title b/c he coached conservatively. Everyone and their baby's mamas can hand the rock off to Ron Dayne. Why not put Sorgi in at QB instead of that abomination Bollinger? When the Ohio State University plays the Pistol Force and is shutting down Dayne, watch Sorgi drops bombs to Chambers.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Btw, Seattle, 2015. Super Bowl on the line. Capers' D was picking off Lil Russell like virgins picking off chicks in a brothel.

The math said be as liberal as the Prodigal Son. Go for it! FGs ain't gonna win the game. Lo and behold, McCarthy ran 3 straight plays out of the fucking GOALLINE formation at MIDFIELD, and then punted.

Game should've been over at halftime. But fuck, McCarthy coached even more conservatively that day than Alverez ever did at any point in spacetime.

[pbmax]

4th and 1. Black Batman (the great Ahman Green) was making hay all day. A fucking yard. The math said go for the kill. Sherman punted. 4th and 26.

Suffice it to say, Sherman was a better GM than coach. 44-20 as GM. Never missed the playoffs. Poor man's Belichick.

You cook the hamburgers in the fryer, don't you?

[Zool]

4th and 1. Black Batman (the great Ahman Green) was making hay all day. A fucking yard. The math said go for the kill. Sherman punted. 4th and 26.

Suffice it to say, Sherman was a better GM than coach. 44-20 as GM. Never missed the playoffs. Poor man's Belichick.

Which of his FA signings or non-punter draft picks was your favorite?

[bobblehead]

Its 4th and 3 from the 50 yard line
You're about to go 3 and out after a forced fumble
You're up 13-6 with 5 minutes left in the forth quarter
It's a defensive struggle. Your offense can't seem to get going
10 of your 13 points were scored directly off turnovers
Their offense has 60 total yards in the second half
Your defense is shutting them out and has 2 turnovers in the second half
Your punter is en feugo, pin pointing bombs

Analytics says go for it. Its 80% more effective with down, distance and field position

Can analytics factor in the emotional drain of failing and then giving up points within minutes? Your leading and you can force a team to go the field when you have a lead already. Analytics be damned. They also say pass every down cuz numbers (derived from passing when you have been running effectively) say passing is better than running. What they don't account for is that a team playing pass every down is likely to kill your QB.

[pbmax]

Can analytics factor in the emotional drain of failing and then giving up points within minutes? Your leading and you can force a team to go the field when you have a lead already. Analytics be damned. They also say pass every down cuz numbers (derived from passing when you have been running effectively) say passing is better than running. What they don't account for is that a team playing pass every down is likely to kill your QB.

Talking heads love this point.

Here is how you do it, Belichick style:

"We wanted to put the team in the best position to win. We understand that punting/FG was the best option for us at that time. We talk about this to the players and they understand what we are doing and why. We try to not make decisions based on emotions in the moment, but what history has taught us about the most effective way to win the game."

Everyone loves putting second order effects in front of the idea of scoring more points. It's insane. The same logic leaves you kicking a FG down 21 points with 3 minutes left.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Which of his FA signings or non-punter draft picks was your favorite?

Sherman free agent signee, C-Jenks77, was instrumental in rushing QBs from the interior during that notorious SB 45-winning season. Trading a 2 for Alphonso Harris was the deed of a genius, not the mother of incompetence. AK-74, a Sherman draft pick, was JJ Watt before anyone had ever heard of Watt. Barnett was the greatest white MLB to don the Green and Gold since Nitschke. Go J-Walk!

Give Sherman how many fucking years Todd had hibernating, and give Sherman Todd's TV bailout cap money, and Pack woulda/coulda won more than a fluke SB, no doubt.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Can analytics factor in the emotional drain of failing and then giving up points within minutes? Your leading and you can force a team to go the field when you have a lead already. Analytics be damned. They also say pass every down cuz numbers (derived from passing when you have been running effectively) say passing is better than running. What they don't account for is that a team playing pass every down is likely to kill your QB.

Spokenth like a true conservative. ;)

Btw, those guys are pros. The fuck with emotions. Do your fucking job.

[pbmax]

Sherman free agent signee, C-Jenks77, was instrumental in rushing QBs from the interior during that notorious SB 45-winning season. Trading a 2 for Alphonso Harris was the deed of a genius, not the mother of incompetence. AK-74, a Sherman draft pick, was JJ Watt before anyone had ever heard of Watt. Barnett was the greatest white MLB to don the Green and Gold since Nitschke. Go J-Walk!

Give Sherman how many fucking years Todd had hibernating, and give Sherman Todd's TV bailout cap money, and Pack woulda/coulda won more than a fluke SB, no doubt.

4 years, 3 good signings. Impressive.

I remember that AK rookie season when he was so dominant he started six games.

[Zool]

Sherman free agent signee, C-Jenks77, was instrumental in rushing QBs from the interior during that notorious SB 45-winning season. Trading a 2 for Alphonso Harris was the deed of a genius, not the mother of incompetence. AK-74, a Sherman draft pick, was JJ Watt before anyone had ever heard of Watt. Barnett was the greatest white MLB to don the Green and Gold since Nitschke. Go J-Walk!

Give Sherman how many fucking years Todd had hibernating, and give Sherman Todd's TV bailout cap money, and Pack woulda/coulda won more than a fluke SB, no doubt.

I definitely doubt. He had a top QB, oline, and RB for years and did nothing.

[mraynrand]

4 years, 3 good signings. Impressive.

I remember that AK rookie season when he was so dominant he started six games.

Let me crunch some numbers here. Sherman FA signings were 1/3 successful - that’s 33.33 (repeating of course) successful.

[Zool]

PSL had one highlight in his entire coattail riding career as a head coach.

https://thewizardofodds.blogspot.com/2007/11/wake-up-coach-youre-aggie.html

[pbmax]

I do admire how Tank sticks to the script when it would be vastly easier to sell Sherman's coaching rather than his GM.

[texaspackerbacker]

52 wins and 28 losses as a coach says Sherman was doing something right and is wrongfully disrespected by a lot of people. As for his performance as a GM, I'm not gonna claim he was all that excellent a decision maker either on draft picks or free agents. What I always liked about him, though, was the way he handled the salary cap - getting about as close to the edge as he possibly could. The opposite of that was Ted Thompson being ultra-careful and not maximizing things. Between Sherman and Thompson, I absolutely will take Sherman.

[pbmax]

52 wins and 28 losses as a coach says Sherman was doing something right and is wrongfully disrespected by a lot of people. As for his performance as a GM, I'm not gonna claim he was all that excellent a decision maker either on draft picks or free agents. What I always liked about him, though, was the way he handled the salary cap - getting about as close to the edge as he possibly could. The opposite of that was Ted Thompson being ultra-careful and not maximizing things. Between Sherman and Thompson, I absolutely will take Sherman.

I think almost all would agree he was a good to very good coach who got a LOT of mileage out of an offense that lacked top flight receivers. He made some fantastic scheme choices and got Favre to buy in.

His work as GM was short sighted like almost all other coaches given that job mid tenure.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I think almost all would agree he was a good to very good coach who got a LOT of mileage out of an offense that lacked top flight receivers. He made some fantastic scheme choices and got Favre to buy in.

His work as GM was short sighted like almost all other coaches given that job mid tenure.

Sherman was a good coach, sure. He made pounding the rock great again. But the 4th and 26 game, along with the Moss-Moon game and Vick-Victory game (first ever playoff loss at Lambeau), are proofs that Sherman was a better GM than coach.

Sherman the GM never missed the playoffs. Sherman the coach often was outcoached in the playoffs.

I rest my case.

[pbmax]

Sherman was a good coach, sure. He made pounding the rock great again. But the 4th and 26 game, along with the Moss-Moon game and Vick-Victory game (first ever playoff loss at Lambeau), are proofs that Sherman was a better GM than coach.

Sherman the GM never missed the playoffs. Sherman the coach often was outcoached in the playoffs.

I rest my case.

We should do a dive into his playoffs. According to my memory, one team should have made it through (4th and 26). Another had been decimated by injuries (Falcons loss). Not sure about the other two.

[Zool]

I like the Pear Shaped Loser’s performance in super bowls. Stellar.

[mraynrand]

We should do a dive into his playoffs. According to my memory, one team should have made it through (4th and 26). Another had been decimated by injuries (Falcons loss). Not sure about the other two.

2004 GM Sherman killed 2004 coach Sherman ((Vikings loss). Rams were pretty good in 2001, but lack of running game and six Favre picks were way too much to sink the pack.

[pbmax]

That Rams game was close for a while but it came apart fast.

That was the game with Rossum as the dime DB, yes?