|
Post by HC16 on Oct 23, 2018 21:37:37 GMT -5
Going for two the first time around and converting it greatly increases your chances to win the football game. It’s just math. Obviously ”AND CONVERTING IT” What are the odds ? As Lou said, the odds are (roughly) 50% chance of completing a two point conversion. Assuming you score a second touchdown while keeping the other team scoreless, the following scenarios are possible when down 14. I'll assume every extra point is made for simplicity. You complete the first 2 point conversion and kick the extra point (you win) 50% You miss the first two point conversion and make the second (OT) 25% (a 50% chance of a 50% chance) You miss both conversions (you lose) 25%. All told, you have a 75% chance of winning or forcing OT by going for 2 the first time as opposed to a 100% chance of going to OT by kicking both times. If we run on the assumption that a team will win roughly 50% of their OT games, the team that kicks the extra points has a 50% chance to win while the team which goes for 2 the first time has (roughly) a 62.5% chance to win (50% in regulation, 12.5% in OT). So, by going for two the first time, you improve your odds of winning. By kicking the extra point the 1st time and going for 2 the second, you have roughly a 50% chance of winning and a 50% chance of losing and no chance at OT, so going for 2 the first time is still the decision which gives you the best chance at winning. There are obviously some assumptions (like getting a stop on D, but you need that anyway) but the percentages (generally) hold up as described above. That's what KY and SOV are getting at. The actual chances at winning by using this strategy are ~60.5% (like KY said) vs a little less than 50% (missed extra points). I just simplified for easier to understand ratios.
|
|
|
Post by HC16 on Oct 23, 2018 21:40:43 GMT -5
I think the clock management was much than going for 2 anyway, regardless of how you view that strategy.
|
|
|
Kalif 2018
Oct 23, 2018 21:53:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by HC92 on Oct 23, 2018 21:53:26 GMT -5
With under 5 minutes left, 4:47 in this case, you basically have to assume the other team isn’t going to score again or you’re screwed (as happened to the Giants here when they gave up a field goal and then successfully ran out the clock on themselves down 11). Anyway, if the Giants wanted to play to win in the end, they needed to convert a two-point conversion following one of their final two touchdowns. I believe that taking the extra point on the first TD and then deciding whether to play for the win or the tie makes more sense than “playing for the win” with 4:47 left for at least three reasons. First, the defense is more fatigued after another scoring drive so your chances of converting are likely slightly higher after another offensive series. Second, if you don’t make the first two point conversion, you’ve taken away the chance to win in regulation and given yourself a 45-50% chance just to tie. Third, you have more facts available at the end of the game to decide whether to play for a win or tie. What if Matt Ryan got concussed and Julio Jones sprained his ankle on their final drive. You might want to play for the tie then as your odds of winning in OT are likely now greater than 50/50. The “go for two” down 8 with 4:47 left crowd here and elsewhere has yet to convince me but I’m willing to listen if there’s a good argument to be made. “You just don’t get it” isn’t all that persuasive.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Oct 23, 2018 21:56:24 GMT -5
Correct, but the % of 1 pt attempts has to be higher than making one 2 point attempt. Historic averages: Pct of successful extra points = 94.4% Pct of successful two-point conversions = 47.9% Expected value of a kick attempt = .944 points Expected value of a 2-point attempt = .958 points
|
|
|
Kalif 2018
Oct 23, 2018 22:04:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by HC92 on Oct 23, 2018 22:04:18 GMT -5
Thanks, ‘16. Always good to have an actuary who can explain things in English. Too tired to think it all the way through at the moment but I appreciate the explanation.
|
|
|
Post by HC16 on Oct 23, 2018 22:05:07 GMT -5
With under 5 minutes left, 4:47 in this case, you basically have to assume the other team isn’t going to score again or you’re screwed (as happened to the Giants here when they gave up a field goal and then successfully ran out the clock on themselves down 11). Anyway, if the Giants wanted to play to win in the end, they needed to convert a two-point conversion following one of their final two touchdowns. I believe that taking the extra point on the first TD and then deciding whether to play for the win or the tie makes more sense than “playing for the win” with 4:47 left for at least three reasons. First, the defense is more fatigued after another scoring drive so your chances of converting are likely slightly higher after another offensive series. Second, if you don’t make the first two point conversion, you’ve taken away the chance to win in regulation and given yourself a 45-50% chance just to tie. Third, you have more facts available at the end of the game to decide whether to play for a win or tie. What if Matt Ryan got concussed and Julio Jones sprained his ankle on their final drive. You might want to play for the tie then as your odds of winning in OT are likely now greater than 50/50. The “go for two” down 8 with 4:47 left crowd here and elsewhere has yet to convince me but I’m willing to listen if there’s a good argument to be made. “You just don’t get it” isn’t all that persuasive. The argument to go for 2 the first time is that in a large number of attempts, it will work out more often than alternative strategies. Obviously, there are not a large number of attempts. That's why they play games instead of just running forecasts and declaring a winner. It ultimately comes down to what do you want to rely on, intangible things like fatigue or possible injuries to key players or a process which the odds based on years of history (to remove the effects of those intangible things) say is the best chance for success. Personally, I think a combination is the best. I just think you start with going for two the first time and only change if you're supremely confident of some other factor shifting the odds in converting or winning in OT. In general though, you have a better chance by going for two unless something substantially decreases your odds of converting a 2 pt conversion down to ~36% (at which point kick the extra points and try your luck in OT).
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Oct 23, 2018 22:22:21 GMT -5
With under 5 minutes left, 4:47 in this case, you basically have to assume the other team isn’t going to score again or you’re screwed (as happened to the Giants here when they gave up a field goal and then successfully ran out the clock on themselves down 11). Anyway, if the Giants wanted to play to win in the end, they needed to convert a two-point conversion following one of their final two touchdowns. I believe that taking the extra point on the first TD and then deciding whether to play for the win or the tie makes more sense than “playing for the win” with 4:47 left for at least three reasons. First, the defense is more fatigued after another scoring drive so your chances of converting are likely slightly higher after another offensive series. Second, if you don’t make the first two point conversion, you’ve taken away the chance to win in regulation and given yourself a 45-50% chance just to tie. Third, you have more facts available at the end of the game to decide whether to play for a win or tie. What if Matt Ryan got concussed and Julio Jones sprained his ankle on their final drive. You might want to play for the tie then as your odds of winning in OT are likely now greater than 50/50. The “go for two” down 8 with 4:47 left crowd here and elsewhere has yet to convince me but I’m willing to listen if there’s a good argument to be made. “You just don’t get it” isn’t all that persuasive. The argument to go for 2 the first time is that in a large number of attempts, it will work out more often than alternative strategies. Obviously, there are not a large number of attempts. That's why they play games instead of just running forecasts and declaring a winner. It ultimately comes down to what do you want to rely on, intangible things like fatigue or possible injuries to key players or a process which the odds based on years of history (to remove the effects of those intangible things) say is the best chance for success. Personally, I think a combination is the best. I just think you start with going for two the first time and only change if you're supremely confident of some other factor shifting the odds in converting or winning in OT. In general though, you have a better chance by going for two unless something substantially decreases your odds of converting a 2 pt conversion down to ~36% (at which point kick the extra points and try your luck in OT). Pretty sure the Kalif jinx substantially reduced the Giants’ chances of winning regardless of whether they went for two or one. The jinx is even stronger now that they have cut him a second time.
|
|
|
Post by HC16 on Oct 23, 2018 22:31:14 GMT -5
Pretty sure the Kalif jinx substantially reduced the Giants’ chances of winning regardless of whether they went for two or one. The jinx is even stronger now that they have cut him a second time. Hahaha this is an idea I can definitely support.
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Oct 24, 2018 7:25:16 GMT -5
The Giants needed 2 TDs and two XP kicks or 1 conversion to tie. I believe the probablility of making one of 2 two point conversions is higer than making 2 kicks.
Since the NFL moved the extra point kick back a few years ago, the success rate for kicking a single extra point dropped to about 94.5%.
The chance of making a 2 point conversion is 48%.
I can't do the math right now - in part becasue I have to remember exactly how to do it - but to help clarify, perhaps someone could break down the probability as follows:
Given the probability above and two extra point attempts,
what is the probablility kicking twice results in:
0 points 1 point 2 points
and what is the probablility going for 2 points twice results in
0 points 2 points 4 points
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 24, 2018 7:34:06 GMT -5
As in interesting as this thread is, I have gotten so fed up with the Giants again this year that I just can't get involved in it. One good point could be that it makes me want to watch HC/Lehigh just to forget the Giants for a while. PS: How does most of this thread rates to KR (unless he is the one catching the 2 point conversion)?
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 24, 2018 9:01:15 GMT -5
The Giants needed 2 TDs and two XP kicks or 1 conversion to tie. I believe the probablility of making one of 2 two point conversions is higer than making 2 kicks. Since the NFL moved the extra point kick back a few years ago, the success rate for kicking a single extra point dropped to about 94.5%. The chance of making a 2 point conversion is 48%. I can't do the math right now - in part becasue I have to remember exactly how to do it - but to help clarify, perhaps someone could break down the probability as follows: Given the probability above and two extra point attempts, what is the probablility kicking twice results in: 0 points 1 point 2 points and what is the probablility going for 2 points twice results in 0 points 2 points 4 points what is the probability kicking twice results in: 0 points= .003025% = approx. 3/10ths of 1% = 1 in 331 1 point = 10.3% (rounded) 2 points= 89.3% (rounded) and what is the probability going for 2 points twice results in 0 points = 27% 2 points = 50% 4 points= 23%
|
|
|
Post by Ignutz on Oct 24, 2018 9:31:37 GMT -5
The Giants needed 2 TDs and two XP kicks or 1 conversion to tie. I believe the probablility of making one of 2 two point conversions is higer than making 2 kicks. Since the NFL moved the extra point kick back a few years ago, the success rate for kicking a single extra point dropped to about 94.5%. The chance of making a 2 point conversion is 48%. I can't do the math right now - in part becasue I have to remember exactly how to do it - but to help clarify, perhaps someone could break down the probability as follows: Given the probability above and two extra point attempts, what is the probablility kicking twice results in: 0 points 1 point 2 points and what is the probablility going for 2 points twice results in 0 points 2 points 4 points what is the probability kicking twice results in: 0 points= .003025% = approx. 3/10ths of 1% = 1 in 331 1 point = 10.3% (rounded) 2 points= 89.3% (rounded) and what is the probability going for 2 points twice results in 0 points = 27% 2 points = 50% 4 points= 23% I thought this thread was about Kalif Raymond!!
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 24, 2018 10:00:20 GMT -5
Me too! And, hey, for all you actuaries and math geniuses on here, data is worthless - only information has value (yes, I understand you almost always need the former to get the latter). Here's the thing. Probabilities based on overall league data and history mean little if, for example, on your team, the place kicker is lousy and the QB bad or the coaches don't have great plays to call. Based on your numbers, I assume you are not using the current Giants roster data but rather NFL data. The Giants might be better (most doubtful) or worse (most likely) at either/both 1 point and 2 point PATs. That's the data/information the head coach needs. What's the expression? "Past history does not guarantee future success."
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 24, 2018 12:35:42 GMT -5
Shouldn’t we all just be happy that Kalif landed a spot as an NFL place kicker?
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 24, 2018 12:42:07 GMT -5
Shouldn’t we all just be happy that Kalif landed a spot as an NFL place kicker? Did Kalif ever kick?
|
|
|
Kalif 2018
Oct 24, 2018 20:10:57 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by cmo on Oct 24, 2018 20:10:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Kalif 2018
Oct 24, 2018 20:29:28 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Sons of Vaval on Oct 24, 2018 20:29:28 GMT -5
Good piece. Again, a no brainer to go for two. It’s funny that members of the media questioned him for it, while they should have praised him. In fact, what they should have asked him is: “Why don’t more coaches go for two in that situation?”
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Oct 26, 2018 10:21:42 GMT -5
Please move this back to Kalif
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 26, 2018 15:24:24 GMT -5
...as well it should. They had their chance early on.
|
|
ge
Climbing Mt. St. James
Posts: 71
|
Post by ge on Nov 21, 2018 18:40:28 GMT -5
Kalif worked out with the Lions with two other players this week. The Lions declared Marvin Jones out for tomorrow's game against the Bears.
|
|
|
Kalif 2018
Nov 21, 2018 19:02:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by HC92 on Nov 21, 2018 19:02:53 GMT -5
The Lions promoted a WR from the practice squad on Saturday and replaced him on the practice squad with a linebacker.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Dec 17, 2018 6:41:08 GMT -5
I generally try not to celebrate failures of athletes but I do hold Kyle Lauletta personally responsible for possibly ending Kalif’s NFL career so I will here.
Lauletta played the 4th quarter of a blowout win last week and was 0-5 with a pick. Nearly had a second pick and also missed an open receiver downfield with a terrible throw. He was inactive this week.
If Lauletta was even semi-competent, Kalif would have had two long TDs in the 4th preseason game and gotten some attention from other teams even if the Giants had still cut hm. End of rant.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 18, 2018 13:48:48 GMT -5
I generally try not to celebrate failures of athletes but I do hold Kyle Lauletta personally responsible for possibly ending Kalif’s NFL career so I will here. Lauletta played the 4th quarter of a blowout win last week and was 0-5 with a pick. Nearly had a second pick and also missed an open receiver downfield with a terrible throw. He was inactive this week. If Lauletta was even semi-competent, Kalif would have had two long TDs in the 4th preseason game and gotten some attention from other teams even if the Giants had still cut hm. End of rant. You are more influential than I had thought nypost.com/2018/12/16/kyle-lauletta-is-not-happy-after-giants-demotion/
|
|
ge
Climbing Mt. St. James
Posts: 71
|
Post by ge on Dec 28, 2018 16:30:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Dec 28, 2018 17:54:34 GMT -5
What an up and down NFL career he's had. Good luck, Kalif!
|
|