Week 14 Discussion

[FantasyFreak]

I hate that Goedert is 88 and Ertz is 86. Have Wentz and Goedert vs Ertz tonight. Thought Goedert caught that at first.

[BlackOmega]

Been a good night thus far, players not scoring as much as expected may win me a couple of games I thought I'd lost. Certainly don't want OT to give those players a chance to get more points! So a late FG for the Giants set up by a long Eli scramble won't hurt me at all

[bjd5211]

Well they would have to go for 2 again, but risk missing that one too. The whole point of going for 2 is to reduce the number of possessions it takes to tie the game, but being down 14 is a 2 possession game whether you go for 2 or not, so they would gain no advantage and risk putting themselves in a bigger hole.

Right! And if “your into analytics” like he said about it your odds are actually lower.

The book says to go for two when you are down by 8. The EV of going for two is > than kicking the PAT. I thought this forum would know that?

They were down 14 and scored a TD which brought it to 8, going for 2 doesn't bring them any closer they need another TD either way and risks them having to go for it again if they don't get it.

[PR0v3]

Right! And if “your into analytics” like he said about it your odds are actually lower.

The book says to go for two when you are down by 8. The EV of going for two is > than kicking the PAT. I thought this forum would know that?

They were down 14 and scored a TD which brought it to 8, going for 2 doesn't bring them any closer they need another TD either way and risks them having to go for it again if they don't get it.

Yes, but if they get the 2 point conversion they can win the game outright. This isn’t really up for debate, it’s a fact at this point that going for 2 is the correct play if you are trying to win the game. NFL coaches are just extremely conservative, and fans don’t understand math.

[bjd5211]

And if you don't get it you are putting yourself in a greater hole.

[PR0v3]

And if you don't get it you are putting yourself in a greater hole.

NFL PAT success rate = 94.4%. 100 PATs = 94.4 points.

NFL 2-point conversion rate is generally in the 45-60% range. 100 2 point conversion attempts = 90-120 points.

Going for two scores more points in the long run, it’s really not up for debate. It’s better to go for two when down 8.

[Phaded]

Yeah whoever wins the East is one and done. lol

[purplepride28]

That last ertz td just eliminated a guy out of the playoffs in our 16man league. He was up by 6.6 before ertz 3 yard touchdown and was still up by .3 before the overtime td which at that point was the only thing to lose it for him since they were on the 2 haha

[bjd5211]

And if you don't get it you are putting yourself in a greater hole.

NFL PAT success rate = 94.4%. 100 PATs = 94.4 points.

NFL 2-point conversion rate is generally in the 45-60% range. 100 2 point conversion attempts = 90-120 points.

Going for two scores more points in the long run, it’s really not up for debate. It’s better to go for two when down 8.

In the long run sure, but this is one game, that potential less than 50% conversion is possibly crippling in this specific situation with the amount of time that was remaining, you'll be chasing those points all game if you don't get it.

[steelman]

And if you don't get it you are putting yourself in a greater hole.

NFL PAT success rate = 94.4%. 100 PATs = 94.4 points.

NFL 2-point conversion rate is generally in the 45-60% range. 100 2 point conversion attempts = 90-120 points.

Going for two scores more points in the long run, it’s really not up for debate. It’s better to go for two when down 8.

That's the logic gamblers use to get themselves in trouble.

Yes, over the long term it balances out, but in the short term, it's far less successful to go for 2 than it is to kick the PAT. The Steelers experimented with this a few years ago. The only way the odds work out is if teams go for it every time, no exceptions. Otherwise you're trying to time the odds rather than just playing the long term statistics. In the end, it cost the Steelers too many times and Tomlin abandoned the plan.

Long term odds and immediate odds don't always align. Flip a coin 10 times. If the first 9 times it lands on heads, what are the odds it lands on heads again? It's 50/50 obviously, but long term, what are the odds heads comes up 10 times in a row? It would be far, far less than 50/50. That's why if you want to take advantage of the long term odds, you need to go all in. Go for 2 every time or you're not playing the odds properly.

[PR0v3]

And if you don't get it you are putting yourself in a greater hole.

NFL PAT success rate = 94.4%. 100 PATs = 94.4 points.

NFL 2-point conversion rate is generally in the 45-60% range. 100 2 point conversion attempts = 90-120 points.

Going for two scores more points in the long run, it’s really not up for debate. It’s better to go for two when down 8.

In the long run sure, but this is one game, that potential less than 50% conversion is possibly crippling in this specific situation with the amount of time that was remaining, you'll be chasing those points all game if you don't get it.

Crippling? If you miss you just go for two the next time. Obviously you might miss both times, but you are more likely to miss one of the two PATs than you are to miss both two point conversions. You aren’t eliminating the risk of a crippling point chasing situation by kicking the PAT.

[Phaded]

^^...that's not how percentages or probabilities work...

If it worked like that, teams would be doing it.

[bjd5211]

NFL PAT success rate = 94.4%. 100 PATs = 94.4 points.

NFL 2-point conversion rate is generally in the 45-60% range. 100 2 point conversion attempts = 90-120 points.

Going for two scores more points in the long run, it’s really not up for debate. It’s better to go for two when down 8.

In the long run sure, but this is one game, that potential less than 50% conversion is possibly crippling in this specific situation with the amount of time that was remaining, you'll be chasing those points all game if you don't get it.

Crippling? If you miss you just go for two the next time. Obviously you might miss both times, but you are more likely to miss one of the two PATs than you are to miss both two point conversions. You aren’t eliminating the risk of a crippling point chasing situation by kicking the PAT.

Lol no, you are far more likely to miss two straight 2 point conversions than missing a PAT.

[PR0v3]

In the long run sure, but this is one game, that potential less than 50% conversion is possibly crippling in this specific situation with the amount of time that was remaining, you'll be chasing those points all game if you don't get it.

Crippling? If you miss you just go for two the next time. Obviously you might miss both times, but you are more likely to miss one of the two PATs than you are to miss both two point conversions. You aren’t eliminating the risk of a crippling point chasing situation by kicking the PAT.

Lol no, you are far more likely to miss two straight 2 point conversions than missing a PAT.

Actually you are correct.

If you give a 50% two point success rate, the odds of missing twice is 25%. If you kick two PATs at a 95% success rate, the odds of missing at least once is 10%. Really not that “far more likely” though. It’s about 15% more likely.

What I meant to say is that if you go for two twice, the odds you come away with more points is greater than kicking two PATs, at the average NFL success rates. Kicking the PAT reduces variance, but that comes at the price of eliminating the chance of actually winning the game. There is no free lunch.

If you convert two point conversions at a rate greater than half that of a successful PAT attempt, which most teams do, it is incorrect to not go for two unless in very specific situations.

[PR0v3]

^^...that's not how percentages or probabilities work...

If it worked like that, teams would be doing it.

Going for two is higher variance at the average 2 point/PAT success rates. Variance is irrelevant in the long run. EV is points on the board. Higher EV = more points. More points = good.

NFL teams don’t do it because they are extraordinarily risk averse. They will willingly sacrifice points for the benefit of less public scrutiny. We know this because this is what happens basically every game. See: tonight.