<H3 class=GenericStory_Message data-ft='{"type":"msg"}'>I love Belichick's call/shove.

Decision A - Go For it.

They make it 60% of the time and if they don't then Colt's score 90% of the time from the Pats 30 yard line.

That makes Decisioin A 70% play.

Decision B is to punt.

I say the Colt's score 50% of the time getting at their 30.

Decision A = 70% win rate for Pats.

Decision B = 50% win rate for Pats.

I like the math of decision given the assumptions above. Argue the assumptions and it could change the decision but I like call. It is like a shove with a lot of fold equity and the 40% chance he gets called (they miss the first down) they still have some outs.

Anyone else like the shove?</H3>

I think you need to adjust your ranges

What do you think the ranges are?

 

Originally Posted by YouAreWet

Cue Cool Story Bro

lol @ cue

 

Originally Posted by KYDERBYFAN1

What do you think the ranges are?

When you consider fumble equity, it moves it at least two percentage points in either direction.

Agree. I just spent 5 minutes bitching about keyshawn johnson on MNC

The only safe play against Peyton Manning is to take all the balls and go home crying because this game isn't fair.

 

Originally Posted by KYDERBYFAN1

I didn' think adding the 10% was exactly correct is and 10 of 200 for 5%....can you explain the math? Curious.

.6 is the probability pats convert
.4 is the probability they don't
.1 is the probability that, given they don't convert, they still win (preventing peyton from scoring)
1 is the probability that, given they convert, the pats win (aka always)

.6 *1 + .4 * (.1) = .64 = total probability pats win if they go for it

<h2> Belechick Understands Probability Better than Media </h2> <span>Like him or loathe him, Bill <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Belechick</span> flies his own path. His late fourth quarter decision to go for a first down rather than punt on 4<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">th</span> and 2 from his own 28 has sent media columnists into a Monday morning tizzy of epic proportions. CBS <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Sportsline's</span> Pete <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">Prisco</span> writes about the "unusually dumb decision." SI.<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">com's</span> Peter King seethed
<blockquote>All in all, I hated the call. It smacked of I'm-smarter-than-they-are hubris. Let Manning, with the weight of the world on his shoulders and no timeouts under his belt, drive 72 yards in two minutes, with his mistake-prone (on this night) young receivers and the clock working against him. Sure he could do it. But let him earn it. This felt too cheap. It was too cheap. <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Belichick's</span> too smart to have something so Grady-<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Littlish</span> on his career resume, but there it is, and it can never be erased.</blockquote>Of the major media outlets I looked over, only Yahoo's Shutdown Corner link even flirted (and too quickly rejected) any real analysis that goes beyond the conventional -- you don't go for it from your own 28 -- kind of "analysis."

In contrast, Advanced NFL Stats breaks down the key elements, showing that the decision makes sense quantitatively:
<blockquote>With 2:00 left and the Colts with only one timeout, a successful conversion wins the game for all practical purposes. A 4<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">th</span> and 2 conversion would be successful 60% of the time. Historically, in a situation with 2:00 left and needing a TD to either win or tie, teams get the TD 53% of the time from that field position. The total WP [win probability] for the 4<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">th</span> down conversion attempt would therefore be:

(0.60 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.53)) = 0.79 WP

A punt from the 28 typically nets 38 yards, starting the Colts at their own 34. Teams historically get the TD 30% of the time in that situation. So the punt gives the Pats about a 0.70 WP.</blockquote>One can quibble with the exact numbers, but the framework for the analysis (rather than the media's reliance on mere convention) is correct. What the ANS framework highlights that the media misses is that their is a risk to punting just as there is a risk to going for it. Pushing a risk farther down the line doesn't make it disappear or make it less. As <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">ANS</span> notes, the numbers probably work out more in favor of going for it when customized for this particular game.

I went back and looked at the 4<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">th</span> <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">quater</span> stats: the Colts had already gained 175 yards in the quarter with two drives longer than what would have likely been needed here in clock times of 2:04 and 1:49 (without employing any special clock-stopping strategies). <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">Prisco</span> and former <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">Patriot</span> Teddy <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">Bruschi</span> <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">thought</span> it "insulting" to the defense -- well, exactly what about it's 4<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">th</span> <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">quater</span> performance would have inspired confidence. Just as important, the Patriots had already gained about 470 yards of offense in the game, nearly 7 yards per play.

Rather than "stupid," "dumb," or "insulting," this is is the kind of decision making that has made <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">Belechick</span> better than most NFL coaches. Risk aversion, media response (even if coaches deny it), or lack of analytical skill drives many coaches toward applications of "conventions" even when those conventions don't make sense. <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">Belechick</span> is willing to go with the analytics and live with it. After all, it's not how it turned out after the fact that makes it a good or bad decision, it's the likelihood going in.
___________________________________________

gg Media, gfy plz

</span>

LOL.. i read the situation the same way.. lol

the most annoying thing is all the guys pretending they're using math to back up their own argument like that clownshoe wojciechowski:

"Bill Belichick flunked football math"

I dont think the Pats convert that fourth down 60% of the time though. More like 50%. I dont think Peyton Manning drives 75 yards 50% of the time either. More like 35% I think the chances of Indy blocking the punt or returning the kick are extremely small. something like 2% if that. I think if the colts stop the Pats on fourth down the chances of them scoring is like 85-90%. I bet if you plug in the numbers I gave which I honestly believe are more accurate then the ones you guys are plugging in then you might have a different opinion. If I believed the numbers you guys are running to be accurate then I would agree with the decision. But I think the mancrushes on manning and Brady skew the numbers in their favor when they shouldnt. Im sorry but the pats dont convert that fourth 60% of the time which seems to be the general concensus. manning doesnt drive 75 yards for a TD in that spot more than 50% of the time which also seems to be the general concensus.
edit: Sorry for being so annoying. i realize it

post full of math fail. edited but still below, I did the colts win % for punt. sigh

 

Originally Posted by TpocketT

Well by your numbers, Pats win like 35-37 % if they punt and 55%+ if they go for it. Adjusting with your #s for the Colts, the Pats would only need a 30% success rate on this 4th down try for this to be +WIN EV. Its obviously not even close that his decision was right, and I get kinda tilted at the idea that other coaches think this math is wrong/bad/hard, cause its pretty fucking basic. Bunch of retarded people judging him that haven't done a basic math problem since they graduated high school.

wrong, with my numbers the pats win 63-65% of the time if they punt. How the hell do you figure that adds up to 35-37%?