Buffalo Bills 2019-2020

[JujuFish]

10 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

If it was changing the type of score or number of scoring drives needed, then it would have been worth it. It didn't. The drives themselves, and situations they're in, are more relevant to me than the coin flip at the end if they're successful.

What is the downside to going for it when they did?  You still haven't successfully argued this.  A failed 2-pointer at the end is a guaranteed game over.  A failed 2-pointer with 7 minutes left in the game means you at least know and can try to make 2 scoring drives.

[Taro T]

8 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

If the 2 point conversion is a necessary coin flip, I'd just rather flip the coin on the last play of the game. 

 

 

The upside of the two point success with 7 minutes left wasn't worth its downside. 

Because it didn't materially change the gameplan from an extra point kick.

But, as SDS was trying to point out, losing that (40% chance of losing) coin flip early gives the team time to account for needing to score twice.  Losing it at the end, doesn't allow for any recovery except the on-sides hail Mary combo play; which is very unlikely.

Had Buffalo missed the 2 pointer today, they could have gone for the field goal (when needing 2 scores) towards the end while keeping both remaining time outs and then had a choice of kicking deep and trying for the hail Mary with a few seconds left (assuming they force the 3 and out) or going for the on-sides kick and having to go ~50 yards with 2 time outs left.

In your version, the Bills end up losing by 8 rather than 7 based on the way the rest played out.  And had they gotten that TD at the end with say ~10 seconds left, then when they miss the 2 pointer, they only have the on-sides kick/HM left to try to win.

[SDS]

Maybe you would believe 538. Note the chart at the end that tells you whether to go for 1 or 2 points when down by eight points as the game progresses.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-to-go-for-2-for-real/amp/

[SDS]

9 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Baltimore's blitzing, our O-line's inability to pick it up, and Josh's inability to hit a throw downfield are all connected.  You can make them stop doing that by burning them.  Baltimore basically dared us to beat them deep today and Josh didn't make the throws. Again.  How many were there with NFL open guys that he just flat out missed. 4? 5?  If you think Pittsburgh is going to bring less pressure at home on a Sunday night you should probably rethink that.  I don't see the Patriots letting up either. They will take away Brown with GIlmore 1 v. 1, stack the box to stop Singletary and dare Josh to beat them with out his 2 best weapons.  This offense, and Josh Allen, need to grow up in a hurry or you're staring that Jets game in the face needing to win (and possibly get help) to avoid an epic meltdown.

Correct, you beat the blitz by making them pay for fewer defenders downfield. I’d force Allen to beat me long all day. 

[sodbuster]

According to Thad Brown, if the Seahawks win tonight it eliminates the only negative tiebreaker outcome in a 10 win Bills universe, and it's "win and in" for the rest of the season.

[SDS]

So, I read the 538 chart wrong. I was reading the down by 8 scenario and not the down by 9 scenario. They actually talk about this case specifically, acknowledging the logic behind going for two, but saying the data doesn’t suggest th e effect is big. (However, it definitely does not say you go for one).

 

[#freejame]

I was surprised they went got two when they did too. It’s a two possession game if you miss, one possession game if you kick. I think you’re overthinking it. 

[SDS]

1 hour ago, #freejame said:

I was surprised they went got two when they did too. It’s a two possession game if you miss, one possession game if you kick. I think you’re overthinking it. 

You’re probably right. I doubt the analytical experts at 538 and ESPN’s statistical department thought about that. They probably just missed it while over thinking it. Good call. 

[Eleven]

A smart team goes for two in that situation 95% of the time.  There would have to be a freaky weather situation or an injury or something to justify kicking.  Geez.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Eleven

[#freejame]

1 hour ago, SDS said:

You’re probably right. I doubt the analytical experts at 538 and ESPN’s statistical department thought about that. They probably just missed it while over thinking it. Good call. 

Because we all know Nate Silver has never gotten anything wrong before. A two possession deficit is worse than a one possession deficit, regardless of quarter. I fail to see how that’s even a question of debate. 
 

Like you said, two point conversions are a coin flip. Why risk needing an extra possession until you need to? Not to mention your chart shows it’s not better to go for two when down 9. You just admitted it. Why are you fighting your own sources? 

[SDS]

43 minutes ago, #freejame said:

Because we all know Nate Silver has never gotten anything wrong before. A two possession deficit is worse than a one possession deficit, regardless of quarter. I fail to see how that’s even a question of debate. 
 

Like you said, two point conversions are a coin flip. Why risk needing an extra possession until you need to? Not to mention your chart shows it’s not better to go for two when down 9. You just admitted it. Why are you fighting your own sources? 

I'm fairly certain every single sentence you wrote is wrong. lol Congrats???

It's clear you haven't bothered reading the piece. Nate Silver didn't even write it and the prediction engine is from ESPNs NFL analytics staff. I was not the one that said it was a coin flip (although league-wide the success rate is around 50%). The rest has been covered previously. The stats community agrees with the logic that going for two earlier when down by nine is better, but ESPNs win probability engine that was used by 538, shows it more even than expected. Even then, Brian Burke, who wrote that engine, tweeted today:

 

 

[#freejame]

17 minutes ago, SDS said:

I'm fairly certain every single sentence you wrote is wrong. lol Congrats???

It's clear you haven't bothered reading the piece. Nate Silver didn't even write it and the prediction engine is from ESPNs NFL analytics staff. I was not the one that said it was a coin flip (although league-wide the success rate is around 50%). The rest has been covered previously. The stats community agrees with the logic that going for two earlier when down by nine is better, but ESPNs win probability engine that was used by 538, shows it more even than expected. Even then, Brian Burke, who wrote that engine, tweeted today:

 

 

I know Nate Silver didn’t write the piece, but it’s his site and it was a joke...I didn’t realize that two being more than one was wrong, learn something new every day. You did say you were wrong about the chart, and then you repeated it again. Bills lost either way, it doesn’t matter. But being down one possession with always be better than being down two, keep telling yourself otherwise though. It was a good call because it worked, but had they missed and then scored a touchdown it would have been absolutely panned. 

[#freejame]

The case to be made to go for two (just in case someone doesn’t want to click through the 538 article):

https://mobile.twitter.com/bburkeESPN/status/820784936236019712 

transcribed: Go for 2 now, you'll likely have to eventually. You'll know the outcome sooner rather than later and have time to restrategize.

restrategize meaning oh *****, we missed the two and now we need two stops and probably an onside to win this game now. Such a fantastic argument, thank Christ there was an expert to tell me that.

[#freejame]

How to decide when to go for 2

AFTER TD	+1	+2 (VS. +1)	BETTER OPTION	MARGIN AFTER TD	+1	+2 (VS. +1)	BETTER OPTION
-15	0.5	1.0	Two	0	8.4	1.8	One
-14	1.0	0.4	One	1	1.8	6.5	Two
-13	0.4	1.1	Two	2	6.5	5.0	One
-12	1.1	1.3	Same	3	5.0	2.9	One
-11	1.3	2.2	Two	4	2.9	3.1	Same
-10	2.2	2.9	Two	5	3.1	5.2	Two
-9	2.9	3.3	Same	6	5.2	3.3	One
-8	3.3	5.2	Two	7	3.3	2.9	Same
-7	5.2	3.1	One	8	2.9	2.2	One
-6	3.1	2.9	Same	9	2.2	1.3	One
-5	2.9	5.0	Two	10	1.3	1.1	Same
-4	5.0	6.5	Two	11	1.1	0.4	One
-3	6.5	1.8	One	12	0.4	1.0	Two
-2	1.8	8.4	Two	13	1.0	0.5	One
-1	8.4	8.4	Same	14	0.5	0.7	Same

 

The chart that literally shows it’s the same. You asked upthread the Randal what happens if the Bills miss the two point attempt in his scenario. That’s easy, they lose on the last play of the game. Had they missed the two during actual game play, we would have lost anyway, but what we would have double the amount of scoring drives we needed to win. Keep telling me I can’t read though when your own link shows there’s no benefit and thinking things through with basic math shows it doesn’t make much sense. I’m sure you watched the game, did you see a team that was going to drive down the field twice after scoring late because that’s not the game I watched. Sometimes context actually does matter in sports. 

[SDS]

1 minute ago, #freejame said:

The case to be made to go for two (just in case someone doesn’t want to click through the 538 article):

https://mobile.twitter.com/bburkeESPN/status/820784936236019712 

transcribed: Go for 2 now, you'll likely have to eventually. You'll know the outcome sooner rather than later and have time to restrategize.

restrategize meaning oh *****, we missed the two and now we need two stops and probably an onside to win this game now. Such a fantastic argument, thank Christ there was an expert to tell me that.

If you want to get into this I would be glad to, because I’m ready to die on this hill after having to read such asinine statements.

Your 1 vs 2 possession argument is straight off the short bus. Hey, no ***** ***** it is better to have not missed the two point conversion and have the chance to tie the score later.  You just changed the entire argument. If you can’t see this then let me give you an equivalent scenario:

Knowing that going for the two point conversion on the second TD is going to fail, it is better to go for it on the first TD.

See how that works? See how when I automatically assign failure to your option, it makes the other one the obvious choice? The problem is no one is making these trivial arguments (well you and RF are). There is only one case to be considered here, what situation would you rather be in if you don’t convert your two point conversion. That is the scenario. There is not another one.

The charts in that article say there is a small difference favoring the two-point conversion. Maybe too small to be consequential without knowing more detail. I thought this would be larger. So did the author. 

But do you know what the chart and the supporting article doesn’t say? Do you know what it unequivocally doesn’t say?

That going for the extra point on the first TD would produce a better expected outcome. 

[Wyldnwoody44]

Jesus, it's a game we lost because of a simply anemic offense, that ended on 4th and goal anyways, who cares if we went for 2 or didn't.... We lost because we sucked on the O side and we weren't getting that tying TD anyways. 

The play calling was awful, the O line was bad and Allen was, a rookie (idk what else to call it) 

[SDS]

20 minutes ago, #freejame said:

How to decide when to go for 2

AFTER TD	+1	+2 (VS. +1)	BETTER OPTION	MARGIN AFTER TD	+1	+2 (VS. +1)	BETTER OPTION
-15	0.5	1.0	Two	0	8.4	1.8	One
-14	1.0	0.4	One	1	1.8	6.5	Two
-13	0.4	1.1	Two	2	6.5	5.0	One
-12	1.1	1.3	Same	3	5.0	2.9	One
-11	1.3	2.2	Two	4	2.9	3.1	Same
-10	2.2	2.9	Two	5	3.1	5.2	Two
-9	2.9	3.3	Same	6	5.2	3.3	One
-8	3.3	5.2	Two	7	3.3	2.9	Same
-7	5.2	3.1	One	8	2.9	2.2	One
-6	3.1	2.9	Same	9	2.2	1.3	One
-5	2.9	5.0	Two	10	1.3	1.1	Same
-4	5.0	6.5	Two	11	1.1	0.4	One
-3	6.5	1.8	One	12	0.4	1.0	Two
-2	1.8	8.4	Two	13	1.0	0.5	One
-1	8.4	8.4	Same	14	0.5	0.7	Same

 

The chart that literally shows it’s the same. You asked upthread the Randal what happens if the Bills miss the two point attempt in his scenario. That’s easy, they lose on the last play of the game. Had they missed the two during actual game play, we would have lost anyway, but what we would have double the amount of scoring drives we needed to win. Keep telling me I can’t read though when your own link shows there’s no benefit and thinking things through with basic math shows it doesn’t make much sense. I’m sure you watched the game, did you see a team that was going to drive down the field twice after scoring late because that’s not the game I watched. Sometimes context actually does matter in sports. 

You are not good at this. You just tried to tell me that losing on the last play of the game is better than effectively “losing” earlier, but with still a chance to win. 

You literally had victory in your hands. You had the two correct choices to chose from. Certain defeat or a most likely defeat with a small chance of victory. And you chose certain defeat.

God bless the internet. 

[SwampD]

Did I mention that our receivers suck.

 

Cuz they really suck.

[#freejame]

Scenario 1A: Bills are down 9, go for two, make it to be down 7 (one possession game) 48.2% conversion rate NFL wide

Scenario 1B: Bills are down 9, go for two, miss and are still down 9 (two possession game) 51.8% probability 

 

Scenario 2A: Bills are down 9, kick PAT, make it to be down 8 (one possession game) 94.4% conversion rate NFL wide

Scenario 2B: Bills are down 9, kick PAT, miss and are still down 9 (two possession game) 5.6% probability 

 

Which scenario gives the higher probability that it will be a one possession game with 8 minutes remaining? Who watching that game thought the Bills had two more scoring drives in them? I didn’t, but maybe I wasn’t paying close enough attention to the underlying analytics of our performance . Why risk effectively taking yourself out of a game with 8 minutes left?

Edited December 9, 2019 by #freejame
Isn’t it crazy an argument can be made without personal attacks

[JujuFish]

5 hours ago, #freejame said:

Why risk effectively taking yourself out of a game with 8 minutes left?

Because you still have a chance if you go for it early and miss. How is this hard to comprehend? Small chance >> no chance!

Edited December 9, 2019 by JujuFish

[#freejame]

14 minutes ago, JujuFish said:

Because you still have a chance if you go for it early and miss. How is this hard to comprehend? Small chance >> no chance!

Did you watch the game yesterday? What made you think the Bills has two more scoring drives in them? The fact that they didn’t even had one should be enough of an argument. This wasn’t some shootout yesterday. It was a hard nose defensive game against the best team in the league. Don’t put yourself in a position to be down two scores instead of one in the fourth quarter in that scenario. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by #freejame

[Eleven]

There's an argument to be made that a team should always go for two, now that the PAT line has been moved back.  There is little difference between the expected points per attempt between going for 1 or 2, so why not go for 2?  Not sure I agree with it, but it's arguable.

 

There is absolutely no argument that the Bills were wrong yesterday.  I've read through three pages of this and nothing can convince me that it was a mistake.

 

And it worked.  And it's Monday now.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Eleven

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, #freejame said:

Did you watch the game yesterday? What made you think the Bills has two more scoring drives in them? The fact that they didn’t even had one should be enough of an argument. This wasn’t some shootout yesterday. It was a hard nose defensive game against the best team in the league. Don’t put yourself in a position to be down two scores instead of one in the fourth quarter in that scenario. 

Except they DID have A scoring drive in them after the drive with the 2 pointer.  Had they NEEDED 2 scores they certainly would've kicked the field goal (which would've made the failed drive a scoring drive) in the red zone and tried to get the ball back for a final crack at it.

[LGR4GM]

Bills need a reciever and another o lineman or 2. Was happy they kept the game close yesterday but too many drops and allen was under constant pressure. 

[inkman]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Bills need a reciever and another o lineman or 2. Was happy they kept the game close yesterday but too many drops and allen was under constant pressure. 

The Ravens were sending 6/7 all day.  How are 5 linemen supposed to block them?  In my eyes, it was a scheme issue. The Bills should have kept more blockers in to protect or design super quick patterns.