I know it really didn't matter in the grand scheme of things but, I do not understand why coaches chase points in the 3rd quarter. Why are you going for 2 there?
When it was 20-12 last night, I was pissed it wasn't 20-13.
Cashman’s analytical team determined it was the right move
because momentum shifted, they scored. Felt like missing the 2pts took away some momentum. But maybe because Im a fan. Thought score get the extra point, and come back out for another drive.
were 100 percent confident they were not going to let the 49ers score again so the next time they got the ball they were going to take the lead and never look back.
This is why I don't like analytics.
First, the 50 percent success is for ALL teams in all situations. And no where does it say one time you missed six in a row and them made 9 or your next 12. What has the success rate been for the GIANTS when they are big underdogs and trailing. How many of the successful 2-point tries are by the top 10 teams in the league, and against the worst?
Second, it doesn't factor in that the odds are the other team is going to score again. And if the analytics people are right, the other team would then go for 2 when they score and probably make your 2-point conversion moot.
There is a reason and use for analytics. But the analytics people use them in a vacuum. There was no way SF was not going to score again. When you are trailing you go for two when you NEED it. It's not like the other team thinks you're kicking it and gets surprised with the wrong players on the field. When you are winning you can give more weight to the analytics.
It's like the Yankees. They built a team for the regular season based on analytics that include stats against the worst pitchers in the league to ensure making the playoffs. They should have built a team based on the analytics versus just the best pitchers they will see in the playoffs.
and weren't going to win the game by being conservative. I like being a little aggressive there. Probably needed to be a little more creative with the play call though.
A 2-point conversion there cuts the game to a 3-pt deficit
so a FG can tie the game. There's an obvious benefit to hitting the 2pt there. The difference between being down by 3 instead of 4, is more significant than being down by 5 instead of 4. Even if you miss the 2-pt conservsion, you can get another shot to make up for it be converting a 2-pt conversion later.
I don't really see a good argument against going for 2 other than being completely risk adverse.
RE: A 2-point conversion there cuts the game to a 3-pt deficit
so a FG can tie the game. There's an obvious benefit to hitting the 2pt there. The difference between being down by 3 instead of 4, is more significant than being down by 5 instead of 4. Even if you miss the 2-pt conservsion, you can get another shot to make up for it be converting a 2-pt conversion later.
I don't really see a good argument against going for 2 other than being completely risk adverse.
Your logic, and that of all the analytics people, is looking at the situation in a vacuum. It only makes sense if you think the 49ers aren't going to score again. With 25 minutes to play.
And remember, even if the odds are 50 percent (which I don't believe is the case for every team, but for the entire league; better teams have higher success, worse teams less success), it doesn't mean if you miss the first you will DEFINITELY make the second. AND the odds change depending on how good the defense is. At best, it still means your chance is only 50 percent on the now NEEDED second.
Also, after missing the first chance your odds of making one of the two have actually fallen to 33 (maybe 25, can't remember my statistics class too well). It's like flipping a coin. Just because it comes up heads the first time, doesn't mean it will come up tails on the second because the chance of it being heads is 50 percent on any one flip. You could get heads three times and tails on the fourth and now the analytics say the heads rate is 25 percent. Yet it is still 50 on any given flip.
getting 2 gets you within a FG. Getting 1 changes nothing - you're still a touchdown or two FGs (two drives, which were not abundant last night).
I thought it was an obvious thing.
Do not agree at all...so they miss the conversion, forced the Niners to a FG to make it 20-12 instead of 20-13. It's the 3rd quarter. Don't chase points in the 3rd quarter.
Odds of us scoring a TD were slim to none. We scored when we got the ball on like their 30. We weren't going to have all these opportunities to score so when we scored the TD and we can bring it to a 3 point game you take the shot. The problem wasn't going for it. The problem was the play. We all know the defense is going to use the small area to their advantage. They knew we were running short routes all game. You have to give Jones options and that means running and passing. Work the difference levels of the D by rolling out and flooding the zone. Give Jones the opportunity to run in as well.
a player, or coach, on the opposing defense, especially one as good as the 49er’s, I want my opponent to go for 2. Then, I have some control to stop them and a good chance to prevent any points from being scored. If they kick the extra point, I have little to no control of stopping them. A team struggling to score points like the Giants, IMO, should only go for two when they have to late in a game.
If you don’t get it, you’re chasing points the rest of the night. Now it didn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, but take points when you can get them.
Funny you should say that. It really had the feel of a Yankee game last night.
This is why I don't like analytics.
First, the 50 percent success is for ALL teams in all situations. And no where does it say one time you missed six in a row and them made 9 or your next 12. What has the success rate been for the GIANTS when they are big underdogs and trailing. How many of the successful 2-point tries are by the top 10 teams in the league, and against the worst?
Second, it doesn't factor in that the odds are the other team is going to score again. And if the analytics people are right, the other team would then go for 2 when they score and probably make your 2-point conversion moot.
There is a reason and use for analytics. But the analytics people use them in a vacuum. There was no way SF was not going to score again. When you are trailing you go for two when you NEED it. It's not like the other team thinks you're kicking it and gets surprised with the wrong players on the field. When you are winning you can give more weight to the analytics.
It's like the Yankees. They built a team for the regular season based on analytics that include stats against the worst pitchers in the league to ensure making the playoffs. They should have built a team based on the analytics versus just the best pitchers they will see in the playoffs.
I don't really see a good argument against going for 2 other than being completely risk adverse.
I don't really see a good argument against going for 2 other than being completely risk adverse.
Your logic, and that of all the analytics people, is looking at the situation in a vacuum. It only makes sense if you think the 49ers aren't going to score again. With 25 minutes to play.
And remember, even if the odds are 50 percent (which I don't believe is the case for every team, but for the entire league; better teams have higher success, worse teams less success), it doesn't mean if you miss the first you will DEFINITELY make the second. AND the odds change depending on how good the defense is. At best, it still means your chance is only 50 percent on the now NEEDED second.
Also, after missing the first chance your odds of making one of the two have actually fallen to 33 (maybe 25, can't remember my statistics class too well). It's like flipping a coin. Just because it comes up heads the first time, doesn't mean it will come up tails on the second because the chance of it being heads is 50 percent on any one flip. You could get heads three times and tails on the fourth and now the analytics say the heads rate is 25 percent. Yet it is still 50 on any given flip.
Because they only have minimal faith in the O currently. They figure maybe we get 2 FGs as the defense tries to gut it out and maybe make a play.
I thought it was an obvious thing.
I thought it was an obvious thing.
Do not agree at all...so they miss the conversion, forced the Niners to a FG to make it 20-12 instead of 20-13. It's the 3rd quarter. Don't chase points in the 3rd quarter.