Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Studs vs Duds: Heart Attack Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 466999"><p>Page 2 states:</p><p> </p><p>"One amazing thing about the recommended strategy is that for very short yardage-to-go on fourth down (e.g. less than 1 yard), punting is never optimal." This statement is unqualified and precedes the second analysis that weeds out 4th. quarter stuff.</p><p> </p><p>These guys can't even endorse their own broad conclusion, just cuz.</p><p> </p><p>In conclusion they state, "in computing the expected values of given field positions for punts and first downs, the data is based on outcomes that occurred with “conventional” coaching decisions. For example, a good number of the times that Team A fails to score and punts, Team B then punts back. So I suspect that the estimated expected points from a given field position is underestimated because of the overuse of the punt. We really want our expected values of field positions to be based on the optimal coaching strategy, and then we could use those expected values to find even more optimal coaching strategy."</p><p> </p><p>In short, they go a step further than what I said. I said we need to see somebody do it ALL THE TIME to see if it works. They say, in effect, we need to see the whole league do it all the time to see how it works.</p><p> </p><p>Their statement that overuse of punts underestimates expected points from any given field position is unsupported and amounts to conjecture until it can be tested, which it never will be unless the punt is banned. The inference in this last conjecture is that overuse of punting is believed to reduce overall scoring, but that's the point they're trying to prove in the first place. Or maybe not!? If the conjecture is correct, there would be fewer possession in total so there might be less overall scoring. Oh well.</p><p> </p><p>The argument beyond page 2 has some characteristics of being circular. I remain unconvinced.</p><p> </p><p>With the data and interest in the game these guys have, I think their time would be better served looking into the influence of giveaway/takeaway on game outcomes. As powerful as it is known to be, I believe it is underestimated. As weighted as the QB rating is to INT %, it may still be underweighted. It would be particularly interesting to see if turnovers can be weighted by field position...I suspect turnovers in your own territory work out to be more damaging than those in the opponents end.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 466999"] Page 2 states: "One amazing thing about the recommended strategy is that for very short yardage-to-go on fourth down (e.g. less than 1 yard), punting is never optimal." This statement is unqualified and precedes the second analysis that weeds out 4th. quarter stuff. These guys can't even endorse their own broad conclusion, just cuz. In conclusion they state, "in computing the expected values of given field positions for punts and first downs, the data is based on outcomes that occurred with “conventional” coaching decisions. For example, a good number of the times that Team A fails to score and punts, Team B then punts back. So I suspect that the estimated expected points from a given field position is underestimated because of the overuse of the punt. We really want our expected values of field positions to be based on the optimal coaching strategy, and then we could use those expected values to find even more optimal coaching strategy." In short, they go a step further than what I said. I said we need to see somebody do it ALL THE TIME to see if it works. They say, in effect, we need to see the whole league do it all the time to see how it works. Their statement that overuse of punts underestimates expected points from any given field position is unsupported and amounts to conjecture until it can be tested, which it never will be unless the punt is banned. The inference in this last conjecture is that overuse of punting is believed to reduce overall scoring, but that's the point they're trying to prove in the first place. Or maybe not!? If the conjecture is correct, there would be fewer possession in total so there might be less overall scoring. Oh well. The argument beyond page 2 has some characteristics of being circular. I remain unconvinced. With the data and interest in the game these guys have, I think their time would be better served looking into the influence of giveaway/takeaway on game outcomes. As powerful as it is known to be, I believe it is underestimated. As weighted as the QB rating is to INT %, it may still be underweighted. It would be particularly interesting to see if turnovers can be weighted by field position...I suspect turnovers in your own territory work out to be more damaging than those in the opponents end. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Staff online
Poppa San
* Team Owner *
Members online
RicFlairoftheNFL
sschind
kf323
DoURant
mradtke66
Poppa San
Pkrjones
Latest posts
R
2024 1st Rd pick #25 Jorden Morgan OL
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
1 minute ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
7 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: OldSchool101
7 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 3rd Rd #91 Ty’Ron Hopper LB
Latest: Dantés
9 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Dantés
20 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Studs vs Duds: Heart Attack Edition
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top