“hey guys, let’s call an unnecessary time out and blow the gd game!?”

[utahsportsguy]

#coachwhittstrategy

[UteFanatic]

The coach Whitt strategy was the only reason we were even in the game until the last play.

[EagleMountainUte]

He certainly got the team to that point and then totally FUBARed it. 

[UteFanatic]

True.  But it beats getting blown out at home by a 3-7 UMass team.  LOL

[EagleMountainUte]

Not even in the same realm of comparison but yes not being a BYU fan is nice. 

[javadave]

Why do we always have to bring TDS into it? They are basically an FCS team at this point. 

[EagleMountainUte]

#silverlinings #notabyufan #coveredthespread

[UteFanatic]

Because they suck and it’s fun to mock them.  

[RiseasUtes]

Yeah, except that we are playing for something still.  Their season was lost awhile ago.  Now we have to beat CO next week just to make a bowl game.  We had the lead for much of the night and blew it.  We need to figure out how to finish games, both our players and coaches.

[EagleMountainUte]

We will see if Whitt earns his paycheck because that loss was absolutely f**king guttering.  A lot of players gave their bodies for you to play with and you screwed it up. 

[UteFanatic]

The team is young.  The offense has showed major promise.  The secondary has overperformed given the expectations. Vegas had us at 5.5 wins before the season so I’m trying to be pragmatic.  Next season will be Whitt’s true litmus test.  If there isn’t improvement from this year, then his seat should start heating up.

[eyesonU]

So this is how we are making ourselves feel better? When do we grow up and take a look in the mirror. I actually like whit and think he has done a good job transitioning the program, but you can’t stick your head in the sand over this one. He blew it. Plain and simple. What’s his mantra, no excuses? Does that apply to only the players?

[UteFanatic]

A game is never decided by just one coaching decision. We as fans always focus on the final few plays and never think about the hundreds of decisions that got the team to that point.

[Tony (admin)]

Sure. Let’s look at it a different way. Tiger Woods missing a 3-foot putt on the first hole of the US Open is not equal to missing the same putt on the final hole to force a playoff.  The situation is not the same. 

[UteFanatic]

Statistically, those two missed putts could be equal.  That’s my point.

[Tony (admin)]

The count the same as far as stats, but the 2nd mistake can’t be recovered from. The first one can.

[UteFanatic]

Well, yeah, the game doesn’t go on forever.  It still doesn’t mean that first missed putt was any less impactful than the last one.  

[EagleMountainUte]

Golf is a bad comparison because it has no odds that I can see.  Your defense played mostly ok but Browning caught fire after getting his bell rung and drove down the field to tie it.  Statistically you went against the odds so many times so burning your second time out with 22 seconds left means you increase or decrease your odds of winning?? Playing in OT on the road against Browning wasn’t ideal either obviously.  But it was better odds than allowing them to throw a few times vs hoping for a TO or bad punt.

[Tony (admin)]

Ok fine. How about basketball? You miss a free throw in the first minute of the game. Then with .2 seconds left in the game you have a freethrow to put it into overtime and you miss that one.  I suppose those two events are equal as well?

[shakeitsugaree]

This is a form of recency bias – assigning greater meaning to events based on one’s perception of importance.

A missed putt is a missed putt, regardless of when it occurs. They all count the same.

Another comparison can be made from baseball: if a player has a poor batting average (BA) with runners in scoring position (RISP), does it mean he isn’t ‘clutch,’ and folds under pressure? No, it does not. Using advanced statistics (wRC+), we see that hitting performance is outside of BA w/RISP, meaning a player will perform based on his career averages regardless of emotional meaning assigned to a situation.

Points scored in the first quarter count just as much as points scored in the last quarter; mistakes made in the first half are just as impactful as mistakes made in the last seconds.

[Tony (admin)]

From an purely statistical standpoint yes, a field goal missed in the first quarter equals the same amount of points as one missed in the 4th quarter with 2 seconds left. However, the first one can be overcome by plays following the event, where the mistake on the last play cannot. That’s the point.

[shakeitsugaree]

I understand your point, what I am saying is that your point is based on emotion and not predictive outcome.

[eyesonU]

 Obviously there is more than one call that defines a game. I’m simply pointing out that the timeout was a mistake at a critical juncture of the game. 

[Tony (admin)]

I get the argument, but when it is at the end of the game it is not the same.

[EagleMountainUte]

What about the redzone trips where he played to kick a FG? Or the end of the half? At least 8-12 points right there.

[Tony (admin)]

Why stop there with your argument?  What about what he chose to eat for breakfast?  

[EagleMountainUte]

I don’t really like that jacket he chose to wear either. 

[Tony (admin)]

That’s better.

[EagleMountainUte]

Utah wore white and he was black with silver.  You know what I mean?

[TexanUte]

UtahFanatic – I would suggest studying advanced football analytics and you will see the fallacy in your argument. Tony and BattlegroundUte are absolutely correct. Not all plays have equivalency and different points of the game have different statistical leverage with regard to the ultimate chance of victory. Do a thought experiment – If Ty Huntley turns and hands the ball to the other team on purpose on the first play of the game and the opposition runs for a TD do the Utes still have a chance to win? The answer is yes, somewhat diminished from the start of the game one play earlier but yes. Now do the same thing on the last play of the game with the same tied score. Do the Utes have a chance then? No. Same play and same outcome but the plays affect the win probability differently. Utes would have had a coin flip chance of winning if it goes to overtime. WA was already committed to going to OT when Utes stopped clock for them. Stopping the clock gave WA a chance to not even take it to the coin flip OT proposition. Bad coaching choice bottom line. Not surprising since Whitt has a an issue with in-game management.

[shakeitsugaree]

@texanute: which statistics are you referring to that have ‘time on clock’ as a component?

[EagleMountainUte]

Which was worst the Huntley INT he recovers from or throwing a pick late in the game to that long haired linebacker? The late one because it drops your probabilities drastically. The timeout isn’t the same comparison but we are using those as examples. All of the things happened already to get Whitt to that point of 22 seconds left and he called a timeout. It made no sense and decreased your win probability drastically. Maybe it is about the same? Both are very low win probabilities. 

[shakeitsugaree]

Which was worst the Huntley INT he recovers from or throwing a pick late in the game to that long haired linebacker?

They are the same

[EagleMountainUte]

Yes statistically they are you see that. But when and what circumstances matter.  

[shakeitsugaree]

No, this is the point. The ‘when and what circumstances’ are assigned by you, and are not predictive of outcome.

Throw picks, you increase your chance of losing – true in the first quarter, true in the fourth quarter.

[TexanUte]

Win probability and the magnitude of swing is absolutely influenced by point in time and not the viewers subjective assignment as you suggest. Bayesian statistics..context matters

[TexanUte]

Very respectfully you are so wrong you will never see it but here is a statistical analysis link to help you think it through on your own:

http://www.sportsquant.com/turnovers.htm

Your quote: “Throw picks, you increase your chance of losing – true in the first quarter, true in the fourth” is an example of a fallacy. Not true whatsoever. Absent of a pick six a pick at the end of the half has zero value on win probability but a pick at high leverage moment late in 4th can have a huge effect on win probability percentage.

[shakeitsugaree]

My question was regarding the specific metrics that use ‘time on clock’ as a component; I am not aware of any, and the website you linked to doesn’t have any either. Can you clarify?

Also, while the information in your website you referenced is quite old (2010), the author of the website does seem to have a grasp of statistical analysis, as evidenced by this quote:

Since specific interceptions vary in the extent to which they harm the offenses (as do specific fumbles), this discussion will focus on the average value of a turnover. The question we’ll attempt to answer is whether or not a fumble is more costly than an interception (or vice versa) on average.

This is the point – the impact of a specific event is washed out by the totality of events leading to the final outcome. Discussing whether event A ‘lost the game’ or event B ‘shifted momentum’ are emotional responses that have no logical basis. Your David Annis seems to agree:

As with many complicated questions, there’s no simple answer to the question “are all turnovers the same?” Those inclined toward such arguments can easily make the case that fumbles are more harmful than interceptions. However, since many of the most damaging turnovers are interceptions, one can make the case that they are more difficult to overcome. This disagreement between average behavior and extreme behavior is not uncommon. The answer to the question, in such cases, depends on what you value as important. (In decision theory terminology, the answer depends on the choice of the objective function.)

Being that the objective function in football is to score more points than your opponent, I think my statement: “Throw picks, you increase your chance of losing – true in the first quarter, true in the fourth” agrees with the statement above.

[KJU]

I agree with you if a pick is thrown at a “high leverage moment”. But what if the pick in the first quarter changes the momentum and or score so that “high leverage moment” doesn’t occur? Once you change something in the game the Bayesian prior is changed.

[shakeitsugaree]

Are you referring to ESPN’s black box statistics? Until a formula is published for these, I don’t give them a lot of merit.

As far as Bayesian statistics, again, I’m unfamiliar with ‘time on clock’ as being a variable in any football metrics, Bayesian or not. Can you clarify?

[leftyjace]

[TexanUte]

Sorry I forgot about this thread. Win probability greatly affected or swung as a function of time or more precisely time remaining in game. Assumptions: All games start off tied. An interception or fumble at the beginning of the game only slightly swings win probability. Now fast forward to the end of a tie game. A turnover in sure FG range for the other team greatly swings the win probability. Same turnover event but far different implications for win probability. Similarly place on field dramatically affects expected points added for the same turnover event, e.g. fumbles, INTs.

[shakeitsugaree]

What you are referring to is a descriptive, not predictive, statistic. It takes the summation of the game’s events up to a discrete point in time and tells you the obvious – but it is still based on the events in the game up to the point at which you are looking at it.

Think of it like this: Utah is up 75-3; Huntley throws a pick as the time on the clock expires to end the game. That pick is meaningless. However, if Utah had been behind by 6, that pick was crushing. Context does matter, which is why a game is better looked at as the sum of its parts rather than any one individual event.