Re:The Resulting Fallacy Ruins Decisions: An Interview with ...
by everdev on Friday December 08, 2017 @12:31AM
(#15876889)
Exactly. But it's hard to make a living criticising bad play calls that go well. That's why I think there are so many bandwagon analysts.
Same with Atlanta passing while in field goal range last Super Bowl and getting a holding penalty and a sack that forced them to punt and gave the Patriots a chance to tie.
Re:The Resulting Fallacy Ruins Decisions: An Interview with ...
by hkmurakami on Friday December 08, 2017 @01:35AM
(#15877090)
How do the stats change when the opposing team knows what you know about these stats? That's a very relevant dampening factor.
Re:The Resulting Fallacy Ruins Decisions: An Interview with ...
by lazyasciiart on Friday December 08, 2017 @02:56AM
(#15877365)
From memory, the explanation for the play was that everyone expected them to go with Lynch, so they tried the pass for the surprise factor, and still had the fourth down to go with Lynch if the pass failed. So yes, very much affected by knowing that the opponent knows your stats.
wilson doesnt throw many interceptions, but Lynch almost never fumbles, Wilson was 4 times more likely to turn over the ball than Lynch was. write that down, if they turn the ball over they loose the game. the play they choose increased their risk of loosing over 400%.
wilson scores 28% of the time from the 10 (dont have 1 or 5 yard stats), lynch scores 42% of the time from the 5. he even scores more than wilson from 10 yards out (37%), which is not even a valid comparison because they only need 1 yard.
There is just no way to cut it, it was a bad decision.