Fair or not, it's how single plays affect win probability
by harmonica (2019-01-14 08:42:26)

In reply to: Alshon Jeffery, Cody Parkey  posted by IndianaLee


Parkey's missed field goal brought the Bears' win probability from ~85% to 0%. The Eagles' win probability before the Jeffery drop was probably something like 50%.

A missed field goal in the first half technically has the same impact to the score, but only affects win probability by a few percentage points.


Per ESPN, Saints had a 71.7% win probability before the INT
by ShermanOaksND  (2019-01-14 12:59:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

It went to 91.4% after the INT, and to 99.9% when Kamara got the first down that ended all Eagles hopes.

They also had the Bears at 65% win probability before Parkey missed the FG. That play clearly was more decisive.


They might need to hire Chuck to run some numbers for them.
by harmonica  (2019-01-14 14:49:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

NFL kickers were 76% from 40-49 this year, so I would think a 43-yarder would be around 80%. Even if they're accounting for Parkey's particular ability, 65% is doing him a disservice, as bad as he is.

I buy 72% for the Saints, although that seems a tad high. 91% after the interception is dead wrong, especially given 72% when the Eagles had the ball.


Nick Foles was outright bad
by D8NDomer  (2019-01-14 09:59:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

and the reason Iggles lost. Several times he underthrew open receivers. He concentrated on Ertz and ignored Tate. And he missed several other wide open receivers. He had one great throw on the second TD. Had he done that all night they win easily.


Didn't he throw to Tate on the 1st Eagles play on offense? *
by G.K.Chesterton  (2019-01-14 13:34:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Yeah, & maybe the second but
by D8NDomer  (2019-01-14 15:18:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

none thereafter, or maybe once in second half. Looked at Ertz constantly, & the DBs knew it. Either Foles or the OC called a bad game. & they still nearly won due to their defense.


Tate was targeted five times and had two recs for 18 yards. (link)
by G.K.Chesterton  (2019-01-14 16:46:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


He was good early
by Groundhog  (2019-01-14 13:17:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But the last 3/4 of the game, he really struggled.


One play that changed the game
by Cliff Claven  (2019-01-14 10:16:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Was Foles interception in the 2nd quarter.
Cliffy


The play that changed the game
by osbournecox  (2019-01-15 07:52:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Or at least turned the tide IMO, was the sack strip that the eagles didn’t recover. They would have had the ball at/inside the NO 30, having already been up 14-0. Instead they got the ball on their own 30 after a punt, punted themselves, then NO scored on the ensuing drive.


Even putting that aside, the change in expected point value
by tdiddy07  (2019-01-14 09:26:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

is big. Not that many single plays in a game carry a -3 change in expected point value.

Yes, a dropped pass in the end zone is a -6 change in expected value. And in the case of Jeffrey's a dropped pass in the red zone is probably greater than a -3 in expected point value.

Likewise, giving up a big play by a DB can have the same effect or missing an open receiver for a TD (a -6 in possible value change), but replacement level coverage will give those up over the course of the game and even a good qb frequently misses those receivers. So another thing to consider is the degree of difficulty of the error. A possible point value change isn't the same thing as an expected value change. If an average qb (or this particular qb, depending on what you want to look at) only hits that throw 50 percent of the time, then the expected point value of the play is 3 points and the failure to execute is a -3 change in value.

On the other hand, it is more rare to drop Jeffrey's ball than it is for a receiver to find a soft spot in the zone for a big gain. So Jeffrey's drop is much more blame worth in identifying the cause of the loss.

Of course, underlying all that is that we have no idea if the rest of the game would play out the same way if you change an earlier event. Which is where the likelihood of winning change you cite comes into play.