Joe Judge Ranked 28th in fourth-down calls by ESPN

Judge makes Goldwater look like Eugene Debs.

Interesting that Belichick, McVay & Tomlin are below him.

With what we have been trotting out who would feel confident to go on 4th down. We have a lot to complain about but this is just nonsense.

Better than I thought

In comment 15476051 JerseyCityJoe said:

Quote:

With what we have been trotting out who would feel confident to go on 4th down. We have a lot to complain about but this is just nonsense.

That's specifically WHY you go for it. If you are going to have limited scoring opportunities, kicking on 4th-and-short in plus territory is wasteful.

In comment 15476051 JerseyCityJoe said:

Quote:

With what we have been trotting out who would feel confident to go on 4th down. We have a lot to complain about but this is just nonsense.

You don't seem to get how this works. And bad offense actually is a reason you would go for it because it's about maximizing your scoring opportunities. Our bad offense averages 5.2 yards per play and the worse you are the more you have to maximize your opportunities to score points, actually. This is why it's important to understand the math.

Field goals aren't automatic either. And we missed that one...

In comment 15476049 Sean said:

Quote:

Interesting that Belichick, McVay & Tomlin are below him.

Yeah I mean i'd look at it this way. You look at those guys and on this particular thing they probably have 100% autonomy and maybe aren't the best math guys themselves. But you know what, they are winners and they've earned the right to make those calls.

I'd guess a lot of the other guys are just going with what the math says 100% of the time. So with this methodology that's going to earn you a higher score.

JJ stands out as a guy that doesn't have enough success by a long shot to ignore the math. You could say that's the problem with the whole Giants organization...

.

I agree. Who in the organization is advocating to go for it on 4th down? It’s hard to imagine anyone in the front office having any sort of idea about this. That’s the sad thing.

I do also wonder JJ’s background in ST leaning him into playing the field position game more.

In comment 15476061 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

In comment 15476051 JerseyCityJoe said: Quote: With what we have been trotting out who would feel confident to go on 4th down. We have a lot to complain about but this is just nonsense. You don't seem to get how this works. And bad offense actually is a reason you would go for it because it's about maximizing your scoring opportunities. Our bad offense averages 5.2 yards per play and the worse you are the more you have to maximize your opportunities to score points, actually. This is why it's important to understand the math. Field goals aren't automatic either. And we missed that one...

I'm not going to deny that there's logic to the debate about when/how often to go for it on 4th down's and what teams should do it more vs less but there's one major thing that supports the "don't do it because our offense sucks" argument:

Judge just fired Garrett. To think he just woke up Tuesday morning and decided that he no longer had any trust for him is rather naive. The reality is he probably lost trust in him quite a while ago and was just trying to get through the season. With all that said, if you're a head coach and you don't trust your offensive coordinator to have a play that can get you the yards then you don't go for it. I understand Kitchens called the game Sunday but it was his first as OC and we're still using Garrett's playbook.

If Kitchens is the OC next year, our line is better, and this is still going on I'll be a lot less sympathetic towards Judge. As for this season I completely understand not going for it on 4th if you don't trust your OC.

Garrett returning this year at all is a separate conversation for another thread.

it's 3 yards you need. If you don't trust your OC to call a play that can get you 3 yards he shouldn't be your OC in the first place.

In comment 15476078 Biteymax22 said:

Quote:

In comment 15476061 NoGainDayne said: Quote: In comment 15476051 JerseyCityJoe said: Quote: With what we have been trotting out who would feel confident to go on 4th down. We have a lot to complain about but this is just nonsense. You don't seem to get how this works. And bad offense actually is a reason you would go for it because it's about maximizing your scoring opportunities. Our bad offense averages 5.2 yards per play and the worse you are the more you have to maximize your opportunities to score points, actually. This is why it's important to understand the math. Field goals aren't automatic either. And we missed that one... I'm not going to deny that there's logic to the debate about when/how often to go for it on 4th down's and what teams should do it more vs less but there's one major thing that supports the "don't do it because our offense sucks" argument: Judge just fired Garrett. To think he just woke up Tuesday morning and decided that he no longer had any trust for him is rather naive. The reality is he probably lost trust in him quite a while ago and was just trying to get through the season. With all that said, if you're a head coach and you don't trust your offensive coordinator to have a play that can get you the yards then you don't go for it. I understand Kitchens called the game Sunday but it was his first as OC and we're still using Garrett's playbook. If Kitchens is the OC next year, our line is better, and this is still going on I'll be a lot less sympathetic towards Judge. As for this season I completely understand not going for it on 4th if you don't trust your OC. Garrett returning this year at all is a separate conversation for another thread.

And I'm going to add, I'd like to see a more aggressive offense, I'm just saying I understand Judge not trusting Garrett in these situations. For Kitchens this week, again, it was his first game.

In comment 15476080 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

it's 3 yards you need. If you don't trust your OC to call a play that can get you 3 yards he shouldn't be your OC in the first place.

That goes with my comment on him returning this year and that being for another thread. I think since he was fired its pretty clear Garrett shouldn't have been the OC this year.

the problem is the fact that JJ is thinking about if he trusts his offense or not. He shouldn't even be wasting his mental capacity on that, someone should be telling him the math says go for it. He has responsibilities that he doesn't need to have and quite frankly his skill set is not well suited to have

In comment 15476084 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

the problem is the fact that JJ is thinking about if he trusts his offense or not. He shouldn't even be wasting his mental capacity on that, someone should be telling him the math says go for it. He has responsibilities that he doesn't need to have and quite frankly his skill set is not well suited to have

So if we're going for purely math we go for it on 4th down at the 30. We have 47% conversion rate and keep the drive alive. We then get into the red zone where we have a 43% TD frequency of scoring. You need to balance both those %'s to get a scoring rate which would give you a TD% of ~20% or 1.4 pts netted over the long haul in that situation. Graham Gano is kicking at 88% this season which nets 2.64 pts every time you kick from a nominal kicking difference.

So why is going for it an easy math problem he shouldn't have to think about?

and you certainly are not qualified to do it. I'm sure many data scientists worked many hours to make ESPNs calculation. How this is lost on people is astounding

Again, it's not even a tough call. It's a slam dunk go for it call.

In comment 15476104 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

and you certainly are not qualified to do it. I'm sure many data scientists worked many hours to make ESPNs calculation. How this is lost on people is astounding Again, it's not even a tough call. It's a slam dunk go for it call.

You're not making a strong argument, and I say that as someone who is forward thinking when it comes to NFL analytics and not a fan of Judge's conservatism.

Even in baseball (sorry to open that can of worms) the analytics demand human decision making at the granular level.

has an effect on your expected points on the drive.

most straightforward items. Because there are clear swings and patterns in the expected points because they are such important bi-forcation points.

If everyone was still holding out I could understand. But if you clicked on my NYT article it pointed out that even in 2014 coaches were going for it on 4th and 3 from the 35. I'm not saying all math and analytics applications are obvious, I'm saying the problem of going for it on 4th and 3 from the 35 is. And JJ picked the wrong answer.

In comment 15476104 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

and you certainly are not qualified to do it. I'm sure many data scientists worked many hours to make ESPNs calculation. How this is lost on people is astounding Again, it's not even a tough call. It's a slam dunk go for it call.

2 things:

First, you’re giving ESPN way more credit than you should. Remember, they’re journalists, yes they have access to more data than I do but its going to be used to fit the narrative they want to spin.

Second, they’re using league averages to make their assumptions. We are far below the league averages in all of the applicable categories so their assumptions don’t translate 1 :1 to our situation.


And again, this is coming from someone who wants to see more aggression.

This has NOTHING to do with Gettleman. Rip on him for a bunch of other stuff but not this. He worked with Ron Rivera who was taking chances before it was accepted and how he got his nickname Riverboat Ron. Does Gettleman get credit for Rivera being aggressive?

What’s Joe Judge good at beside speaking coach cliches at the pressers? Seriously, he should have Pat Hanlon’s job. Or he should head up our first cheer leading squad. Maybe both?

but I hate the conservative, not to lose way he coaches. I can't figure out if it's because he has no confidence in his QB and OL or if he would coach the 2008 (first 12 games) Giants the same way?

In comment 15476046 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:

Quote:

Judge makes Goldwater look like Eugene Debs.

That's perhaps the most brain-dead analogy I've seen on here, at least since your last attempt to look even remotely compos mentis.

In comment 15476073 PakistanPete said:

Quote:

.

For the profoundly handicapped.

he almost blew the game

The statistics that say you’’ve got X likelihood to get the first down are formulated across all teams over some period of time. Statistics say all things being equal here are your chances. But coaches know all things are not equal. Have you seen our run game? Our OL? Do you think we have a better likelihood than average of success or worse? Are we more likely to win if we fail and put our D in a bad spot? The coaches have to weigh that out. If we had a good likelihood of success I’d say yes. But I don’t think so.

Remember that year Fassel got very aggressive early in the year? He kept trying to go for it, and the team didn’t back his bravado up. It culminated in the pick six late in the first half of the Cards game. He backed off after that.

Now if I was the Eagles this past week, I’d have gone for any 4th under 5 yards, running the ball, consistently.

I hate judges conservatism. I sometimes thought (last year) that he was protecting a young and bad team. This year it continues and it drives me nuts. If he does not outgrow that INTELLIGENTLY he won’t be a HC long.
The coaching this year has been bad and I blame at least 2 losses on the coaching. Maybe more

In this case I agree that was a bad call to kick

But to make these decisions based purely on math is a terrible idea. In addition to the objections above which I agree with there is weather, injury, momentum, does the math account for how much time is left I. The game, or who is calling the plays or defensive play caller, home or away. Feild conditions.

Numbers are a tool. A guide but cannot account for the human element of the game or dynamic conditions in which it is played

FWIW I believe judge has an analytics team available on the headset during game day. I can’t remember where I heard that tho (probably here)

On 25 percent of running plays the giants get 0 yards or less. I def would