Results 37 to 48 of 187
Thread: You guys are allergic to math
-
09-24-2019, 11:17 AM #37Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Pasadena
- Posts
- 14,123
- Blog Entries
- 4
Re: You guys are allergic to math
This thinking is one of the big reasons why Belichick and the Pats have been so successful.
This is from a 2015 article
“Owner Robert Kraft worked with a former colleague in the 1990s to create statistical models for player valuation. And for the past 15 years, Belichick has relied heavily on his football research director, Ernie Adams, a former Wall Street trader who collaborates with the coach to develop a variety of cutting-edge approaches to team building and game play.
Belichick recently told The Boston Globe: “Ernie’s really a great sounding board for me personally and other members of our staff. Particularly coaching staff. Strategy, rules, decisions. Ernie’s very, very smart.”
“One major strategy employed by the Patriots has been an arbitrage system in personnel, whether multiplying draft picks via draft day trades or moving their veteran players (such as defensive tackle Richard Seymour in 2009, receiver Randy Moss in 2010 and offensive lineman Logan Mankins in 2014) before they lose value. Based in part on such moves, the Patriots have had unmatched success in the Belichick era, with four Super Bowl rings and counting.”
Owner Robert Kraft has always been the gregarious side of the Patriots, compared to Belichick’s Gregg Popovich, but Kraft’s business acumen and Ivy League education fit this approach like a glove. Assets, depreciating value, return on investment, elastic demand, and all those other words that your portfolio manager uses that you don’t really understand all come into play in the team’s final roster.
Also, it’d be completely logical to expect that NFL teams employing a heavy dose of analytics post more wins, hoist more Lombardi trophies, and get more parades.
-
-
09-24-2019, 12:26 PM #39
Re: You guys are allergic to math
I was told by Bc to stop by and receive lessons in remedial math. Where do we start?
-
09-24-2019, 01:19 PM #40
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Loba has an excellent post in a different thread that hits on this point, but when there's such a small difference in expectation, the secondary considerations are magnified (don't listen to me bumble through, go read about why Loba played the lottery despite negative expected value).
Shared Google Folder with Ravens spreadsheets, nextGen charts, and more! Please share my content! (attribution to Twitter requested)
Knight of the Kingdom of Perfect Play, Student of The Bill James School of Stamping Out Bullshit. Main Sources: PFR, particularly the Play Index; for cap stuff, RSR's Brian McFarland (secondary: OverTheCap, Spotrac)
-
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Math can’t capture gamers, the way players play through injuries, because you can’t quantify those things. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist and it doesn’t mean they aren’t very important.
-
09-24-2019, 03:56 PM #42
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Um. I guess that MATH does not work for passing vs rushing.
Hairbaugh cant have it both ways man.
Not bad for a RUNNING BACK!!! Now that is funny.
#FIREROMAN
-
09-24-2019, 04:37 PM #43Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Posts
- 6,759
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Nice read. None of these are taking into account the Mahomes factor in going for it on 4th in you're own territory.
The expected points of we made the first down from our 38 IF we made the first down at the 40 would be 1.3.
Punting would be a -.5
Failing to convert using this person's NFL data then gives the Chiefs Expected Points of 2.5 right away.
This is where analytics can easily fail due to variables entering the equation. While a chart on Expected Points throughout NFL history is one set of data
Patrick Mahomes completely is a outlier. His expected points from the opponents 38 are not just 2.5. Probably over 4.
That changes the decision dramatically
-
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Analytics can be a good research point. One of my key issues with analytics and the way they are portrayed is that they aren't perfect either. It's like somebody trying to tout how marijuana is better for the body than opiates. That doesn't mean that marijuana doesn't carry its own health risks. Just because analytics says it was the best percentage chance, doesn't mean it automatically was and was automatically the right decision. Yet, that's how analytics are portrayed.
"Please take with you this final sword, The Excellector. I am praying that your journey will be guided by the light", Leon Shore
-
09-24-2019, 04:47 PM #45
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Shared Google Folder with Ravens spreadsheets, nextGen charts, and more! Please share my content! (attribution to Twitter requested)
Knight of the Kingdom of Perfect Play, Student of The Bill James School of Stamping Out Bullshit. Main Sources: PFR, particularly the Play Index; for cap stuff, RSR's Brian McFarland (secondary: OverTheCap, Spotrac)
-
09-24-2019, 05:05 PM #46Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Posts
- 6,759
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Yeah, should have stated that But again the EP can be skewed by Koch dropping in the coffin corner. Mahomes probably has his EP pretty set no matter what field position he starts at.
I still think you don't give him a short field early in the game. I like going for it on 4th, just not to that extreme even if the math favored it by only 1% against league history. Add Mahomes and the field position and it's a bad choice
-
09-24-2019, 05:09 PM #47Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
- Posts
- 666
Re: You guys are allergic to math
Somewhere in the roots of this whole analytics argument is a reasonable estimate of the probability of success for a two point conversion.
I think JH and his analytics department have over estimated this success rate for his offense.
They need better two point plays and execution for the "analytics" argument to make sense.
They should definitely not have Hollywood on the field on two point conversions, too small to block, too small to throw a fade or back shoulder to, too small to make a high leaping grab in the back of the endzone… but there he was doing nothing and challenging no one in the JH/ Roman 2 point offense.
-
09-24-2019, 05:16 PM #48Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Sep 2016
- Posts
- 3,199
Re: You guys are allergic to math
If we are quoting from this article, it was written in 2014, using stats from 2003-2008. So completely worthless.
And taking into account Mahomes is very easily statistically, and all it does is further back up the point of going for it because his expected value on any drive is going to be higher than any other qb. Therefore keeping it away from him is always going to be gto for us.
Bookmarks