Article here: Fake Spike For What?
Non-football action stills courtesy of the awesome rodgersphotobombs.com
Aaron Rodgers and the Two-Minute Drill
- Thread starter mascho
- Start date
Article here: Fake Spike For What?
Non-football action stills courtesy of the awesome rodgersphotobombs.com
The numbers are taken from the PFR box score, linked in the article. Home team win expectancy was 0.1 before the TD, 0.2 after.Mystic Merlin said:
That may be actually when the win expectancy dropped, but that's not how it's written, especially since the concluding paragraph says the fake spike moved the needle most in terms of win probability.
One other nit, Mark, from a reformed journalist graduate: you seem to use the royal (or editorial) we pretty frequently. I know some of your pieces may have been joint efforts, in which case your co-author or co-analyst has or should have received credit. If the work is yours alone, you should not fall into the "we" trap. Jaworski might introduce tape segments that way, but he probably does have other people doing the work for him, but more importantly, it's not good journalism. As Twain supposedly said, "Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms ought to have the right to use the editorial we.”
One other nit, Mark, from a reformed journalist graduate: you seem to use the royal (or editorial) we pretty frequently. I know some of your pieces may have been joint efforts, in which case your co-author or co-analyst has or should have received credit. If the work is yours alone, you should not fall into the "we" trap. Jaworski might introduce tape segments that way, but he probably does have other people doing the work for him, but more importantly, it's not good journalism. As Twain supposedly said, "Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms ought to have the right to use the editorial we.”
It makes a bit of sense. With the TD scored and a few seconds left Miami could have returned the kickoff or scored on the crazy lateral play they tried. Had the Packers used more time on the TD play the Miami win expectancy might not have changed. Again, these are the PFR numbers which I know some have taken issue with in the past.
The question is not about Miami's WP after the TD. It's the idea that Green Bay would be expected to score the TD (and not give up a kickoff return TD) 999 times out of 1000.
Don't want to derail this too much, but here is the discussion of PFR's win probability model: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/win_prob.htm
They reference Brian Burke's win probability model, which has a Win Probability Calculator. If I'm reading their graph right the Packers win probability was 82% after the fake spike play (i.e., before the TD). http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/game-wp-graphs-by-week/index.php?gameid2=56251&week=6
They reference Brian Burke's win probability model, which has a Win Probability Calculator. If I'm reading their graph right the Packers win probability was 82% after the fake spike play (i.e., before the TD). http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/game-wp-graphs-by-week/index.php?gameid2=56251&week=6
