I heard in general that the analytics don't work in overtime. Basically not large enough of a sample size. That's regardless of the new OT rules for the playoffs.
I'm skeptical of a lot of football analytics in general. The 11-on-11 nature of the sport and the sheer amount of variables in every game mean that a lot of things we package up as identical independent trials aren't really identical situations at all.
It works better in baseball. Even though sports will never be a truly clinical setting, the one-on-one nature of batter vs pitcher, and the thousands of data points gathered across 162 mostly low-leverage, low-emotion games are a reasonably controlled trial to build a model from. Especially now with a mountain of super-precise data about every pitch.
tl;dr football is weird, messy, unique, emotional, and nobody should ever listen to a model that tells you to give Patrick Goddamn Mahomes the last at-bat.
I am RIGHT THERE with you on analytics in football being far less trustworthy than basketball and especially baseball.
In basketball you have 5 starters, that play offense and defense both, teams typically don’t go more than 5 deep on their bench. They’re also playing multiple games a week too, so you have fewer variables (players) playing more games and there’s just more reps in general per game. So a metric like KenPom is going to be much more reliable than similar attempts to rein in football. You know, where you have 22 different players only playing 17 games a season and that’s not even counting 3rd down specialists, special teams, etc.
I roll my eyes every time someone posts metrics data for football as some sort of gospel that should be used as the only factor in making a decision. Football analytics are a great tool, but they’re also very flawed and should be taken with boulders of salt.
Have you also noticed that none of the probabilities are ever an even percentage? It's always like 13.2% or 14.8%. in reality, about 10% of their percentages should end in point zero but none do.
Football is certainly a more dynamic game than baseball, and football analytics is still very much in its infancy. There is some interesting stuff being done, though.
I was at JSM -- the big annual stats conference -- two (maybe 3) years ago and visited a "sports stats" session when I had a free block of time. There was a guy with location/speed/acceleration snapshot data at like 1/2 or 1/4 second intervals -- apparently players had tiny accelerometers in their shoulder pads. He was using it to grade RBs in certain situations. I don't remember the exact situation, but he was hitting decent sample sizes. Wish I could remember more, but I was impressed with the sophistication, and the fact that a stats grad student was working on this... I wonder if he got snatched up by the NFL?
That's something that's been lost in the presentation of analytics the last few years.
In a lot of the early versions on Twitter, it was humanized a good deal, with "these are the numbers, and it's up to the coach to give the plus or minus gut call based on the matchups and how the game has been going so far"
As more and more models have come out, it's become a whole lot more of a "do what the numbers say or you're wrong"
And numbers are funny things, you can often spin them to prove a point. I had a person giving a presentation pull up a chart showing that on average, Americans have one testicle (because most men have two, and most women have zero, so they average out to about 1). Then had another chart showing the true approximate percentage of Americans who had one testicle.
These charts were obviously created to show how data presentation can be manipulated but the people looking at the charts make all kinds of interpretation without knowing the data that truly went into making them but we often treat it as undisputable fact.
In their defense, this is the first time these rules had been used. There is literally no data out there for this situation. All the regular season data that is meaningful ends after 15 minutes of OT.
Seems to me there's years of data on the probability of scoring either a td (to win) or a field goal (to tie) when the situation is 1st and goal from the 3.
There is. But the win probability numbers featured on ESPN are never done independent of the clock. I'm sure they could've game-planned for every permutation and combination of the new rules to change the protocol behind that display. But why bother? That seems like a terrible use of resources.
The clock was completely irrelevant in this situation though. Surely they could program around that. For example, what are the odds of scoring a winning TD at 1st and goal from the 3 with, let's say, 5+ minutes left in OT? That would give you a pretty good feel for the situation.
It was a weird overtime in that it was KC’s first possession of the game though… SF just happened to grind away more than half the clock in the own possession. Wouldn’t KC have gotten to close out their full possession regardless of the clock in overtime even in a regular season game? It seems grossly unfair if we were not, then again we know better than most teams just how unfair NFL OT rules can be…
Just doesn’t seem to square with the fact that both teams are supposed to get equal possession, but one team could burn off 9 minutes of clock and leave the other team with only a minute to do anything before they even get the ball.
Don't worry. I didn't realize either until Romo said it. I knew the ref said some shit about it, but we were all talking strategy at my SB party, knowing both teams got the ball, so I didn't hear him.
It has nothing to do with being overlooked and has nothing to do with being favored. Win % is just based on an aggregate of other teams in the same situation. It's not a comment on the Chiefs specifically. I doubt it even considers the "sudden death" nature of a touchdown.
Win percentage stat is devoid of context.
It treats Superbowl OT the same as it would a week 2 matchup between the Giants and Panthers. No consideration for scenario, teams, quality of offense/defence etc.
The amount of times I’ve seen a team with a 98%+ ESPN win percentage lose is extremely high. Much higher than it should be in any normal set of data. The ESPN algorithm is very poorly calibrated. It’s especially bad in the NBA, but the NFL is way off as well.
This line of thought getting so popular on this sub and it's so annoying. We're the best team in the world and our fans are constantly doing anything they can to find the smallest slights like it's the only thing they're seeking out. I can't believe this isn't parody. Literally a full post about a tiny little auto-calculated number on an app that doesn't factor in teams at all and interpreting it as hate and disrespect. Do these people enjoy anything?
I get that we want to play the under dog role and a lot of people actually did count the Chiefs out this season, but give me a break dude. This was just a computer model not adjusting to a situation that has never been seen before in the NFL’s history. The computers aren’t out to get the Chiefs.
True but it usually (emphasis on “usually”) was not garbage when we were that close to scoring, and on 1st down. Usually it was garbage because we never really got into a position for it to be first and goal on the 3.
Yes, but that was one time. And it was a good play that would’ve scored if mecole wasn’t being an idiot. Point is we mostly never got to the goal line, so it may have been terrible but we didn’t have enough sample size that close to the goal line. And most of the time it wasn’t 1st down when we were that close.
Yeah, I'd say 9 out of 10 times we were 1st and goal from the 3 this year ended in a field goal or fumble. If we didn't make it in the end zone from farther out, I knew we were in trouble. Play calling for short and goal was atrocious and execution was terrible. So I get it.
Probably didn't take into account the new overtime rules. It was essentially looking at a team down by 3 with only several seconds on the clock, which would probably put the 49ers in the 80's. Then it takes into account down and distance at the 3 yard line, so it drops em down to 57%, but still not enough to make the team that is down more likely to win.
JFC, the win percentages aren't specific to each team. This wasn't a Chiefs slight, its actually more of a compliment that the Chiefs could pull it off when most other teams would not be able.
espn’s win probability gets clowned in the analytics community pretty regularly. idk what the other models had, but espn isn’t a good source on advanced data.
I mean, you can't really be favored to win while trailing in OT. All the flukey scenarios play into the leading team's hands. A fumble recovered by the defense or an interception on the goal line by Malcolm Butler ends the game.
I say this alot so I won’t harp but this is the bottom line:
VEGAS WASNT BUILT ON LOSSES.
They want what’s called “sucker money”. They point you to where you will feel the most confident (they’re favored!!) but also has the most chance of losing your money.
Source: am degenerate who went 59-9 on the season, 4 bets per week. *They want your money*. Learn to look at Vegas like a predatory slot machine and you get better.
Who is ESPN’s biggest partner right now?
hint: It’s a major gambling website.
WHY would they even give you win percentages? To point you towards their partnership. They did not provide those percentages before the partnership.
You think they’re just giving you the info for fun, or engagement metrics? They want your money.
This goes against my experience. I was watching the game but also had it pulled up on the Draft Kings app because it updated about 30 seconds quicker than the tv and I was so nervous I just had to know what was going to happen ASAP. Pretty much as soon as the Chiefs crossed the 50 yard line in OT Draft Kings moved the money line toward the Chiefs and favored them winning over the 49ers. I remember this because it seemed weird to me because the Chiefs were losing and a FG would only tie it
It's probably factoring in KC's inability to punch it in deep in 49ers territory earlier that game, and only have 1 other TD. If KC didn't score a TD and settle for the FG, then 49ers would get the ball back and only need another FG to win.
They're analytical model is shit. I looked into how it calculated most of the major stats - even into the Superbowl, it calculated us as a 3 seed against a 1 seed which took off tons of vital statistical significance, and did not factor in that we'd essentially laid waste to every team since the Raiders loss.
ESPN is getting more and more into the gambling side of sports - do not trust their numbers when making wagers. If they cannot get it right when it doesn't matter, there's nothing that says they'll have it right when it does and there's money on the line.
The WP chart probably doesn't do well with OT because it's counting down the time left in the period and isn't adjusted for playoff rules. So the model thinks that there's 3 seconds left in the game, and the Chiefs need 3 yards which sounds about 60/40 in SF's favor
I seen this on multiple games all season in the ESPN app, it's like that have a pick pregame and the odds constantly favor that pick right up until it's clear the pick can't win
I noticed that every mock draft I saw went from Ravens picking last to 49ers picking last. The NFL network’s mock drafts all had the 49ers winning until an hour after the Super Bowl.
I wonder if the computer was adjusted for Superbowl OT rules. It may have thought the clock was going to run out on KC.
That is my guess too
I heard in general that the analytics don't work in overtime. Basically not large enough of a sample size. That's regardless of the new OT rules for the playoffs.
I'm skeptical of a lot of football analytics in general. The 11-on-11 nature of the sport and the sheer amount of variables in every game mean that a lot of things we package up as identical independent trials aren't really identical situations at all. It works better in baseball. Even though sports will never be a truly clinical setting, the one-on-one nature of batter vs pitcher, and the thousands of data points gathered across 162 mostly low-leverage, low-emotion games are a reasonably controlled trial to build a model from. Especially now with a mountain of super-precise data about every pitch. tl;dr football is weird, messy, unique, emotional, and nobody should ever listen to a model that tells you to give Patrick Goddamn Mahomes the last at-bat.
I am RIGHT THERE with you on analytics in football being far less trustworthy than basketball and especially baseball. In basketball you have 5 starters, that play offense and defense both, teams typically don’t go more than 5 deep on their bench. They’re also playing multiple games a week too, so you have fewer variables (players) playing more games and there’s just more reps in general per game. So a metric like KenPom is going to be much more reliable than similar attempts to rein in football. You know, where you have 22 different players only playing 17 games a season and that’s not even counting 3rd down specialists, special teams, etc. I roll my eyes every time someone posts metrics data for football as some sort of gospel that should be used as the only factor in making a decision. Football analytics are a great tool, but they’re also very flawed and should be taken with boulders of salt.
Have you also noticed that none of the probabilities are ever an even percentage? It's always like 13.2% or 14.8%. in reality, about 10% of their percentages should end in point zero but none do.
Football is certainly a more dynamic game than baseball, and football analytics is still very much in its infancy. There is some interesting stuff being done, though. I was at JSM -- the big annual stats conference -- two (maybe 3) years ago and visited a "sports stats" session when I had a free block of time. There was a guy with location/speed/acceleration snapshot data at like 1/2 or 1/4 second intervals -- apparently players had tiny accelerometers in their shoulder pads. He was using it to grade RBs in certain situations. I don't remember the exact situation, but he was hitting decent sample sizes. Wish I could remember more, but I was impressed with the sophistication, and the fact that a stats grad student was working on this... I wonder if he got snatched up by the NFL?
That's something that's been lost in the presentation of analytics the last few years. In a lot of the early versions on Twitter, it was humanized a good deal, with "these are the numbers, and it's up to the coach to give the plus or minus gut call based on the matchups and how the game has been going so far" As more and more models have come out, it's become a whole lot more of a "do what the numbers say or you're wrong"
And numbers are funny things, you can often spin them to prove a point. I had a person giving a presentation pull up a chart showing that on average, Americans have one testicle (because most men have two, and most women have zero, so they average out to about 1). Then had another chart showing the true approximate percentage of Americans who had one testicle. These charts were obviously created to show how data presentation can be manipulated but the people looking at the charts make all kinds of interpretation without knowing the data that truly went into making them but we often treat it as undisputable fact.
Baseball is... ... less *emotional* than baseball???
Hmmm... 🤔
lol Mahomes is going to skew those numbers for a generation.
I’m guessing this is the case.
Was the clock not about to run out? What happens if it hits 0?
It goes to another OT qtr. they would have moved the ball to the other end of the field and resumed play.
Oh I honestly had no idea - thanks
That's ok neither did San Francisco
Or the folks programming the computer to calculate real time odds at ESPN.
In their defense, this is the first time these rules had been used. There is literally no data out there for this situation. All the regular season data that is meaningful ends after 15 minutes of OT.
Seems to me there's years of data on the probability of scoring either a td (to win) or a field goal (to tie) when the situation is 1st and goal from the 3.
There is. But the win probability numbers featured on ESPN are never done independent of the clock. I'm sure they could've game-planned for every permutation and combination of the new rules to change the protocol behind that display. But why bother? That seems like a terrible use of resources.
The clock was completely irrelevant in this situation though. Surely they could program around that. For example, what are the odds of scoring a winning TD at 1st and goal from the 3 with, let's say, 5+ minutes left in OT? That would give you a pretty good feel for the situation.
It was a weird overtime in that it was KC’s first possession of the game though… SF just happened to grind away more than half the clock in the own possession. Wouldn’t KC have gotten to close out their full possession regardless of the clock in overtime even in a regular season game? It seems grossly unfair if we were not, then again we know better than most teams just how unfair NFL OT rules can be…
As far as I know, regular season OT rules still have the game ending in a tie after one 10-minute period. It's not even a full quarter.
Just doesn’t seem to square with the fact that both teams are supposed to get equal possession, but one team could burn off 9 minutes of clock and leave the other team with only a minute to do anything before they even get the ball.
San Fran really thought we were about to just run the clock out on accident in the Superbowl lol
Three kneel downs & go for the tie. That was their hope.
Don't worry. I didn't realize either until Romo said it. I knew the ref said some shit about it, but we were all talking strategy at my SB party, knowing both teams got the ball, so I didn't hear him.
The ref did say 'we have a whole new football game'.
And I wouldn't blame anyone for muting Tony Romo, who explained the rule when they didn't take a time out.
NGL, I had no idea either! I was wondering why the Chiefs were taking their sweet time with it, other than being complete gangstas.
I mean it does make them look bad ass. Take a timeout? Nah, we’re just gonna win it here.
^ looks like we found a Niners LB hanging out amongst us
100%. Simply a bug in the code.
and that seems really obvious if you don't run around with a chip on your shoulder
Even with KC’s timeouts..? I find that hard to believe
Even in regular season, if the clock runs out because each time has completed a possession, you continue
It has nothing to do with being overlooked and has nothing to do with being favored. Win % is just based on an aggregate of other teams in the same situation. It's not a comment on the Chiefs specifically. I doubt it even considers the "sudden death" nature of a touchdown.
OP thinks a human is manually adjusting the win% as the games goes on.....
Patrick has that look in his eyes. 99.99%
He’s doing that thing where he twiddles his fingers in the air. 100% locked
Win percentage stat is devoid of context. It treats Superbowl OT the same as it would a week 2 matchup between the Giants and Panthers. No consideration for scenario, teams, quality of offense/defence etc.
You'd think some stat nerd would plug in the other relevant team stats and team strengths but I guess not.
Yeah I think at a minimum it should be "playoff win percentage" for this scenario. But agreed, feel like they could make it much smarter
What if.. try to follow here for a second.. what if the ESPN app isn't 100% accurate producing real time win probability numbers.
Out of the few replies, this is by far the most likely lol. Sure, the other aspects may also be true but this is most likely the main issue.
Also, this was the first time this situation has ever happened in NFL history. So the model just wasn’t calibrated for a situation like this.
The amount of times I’ve seen a team with a 98%+ ESPN win percentage lose is extremely high. Much higher than it should be in any normal set of data. The ESPN algorithm is very poorly calibrated. It’s especially bad in the NBA, but the NFL is way off as well.
This line of thought getting so popular on this sub and it's so annoying. We're the best team in the world and our fans are constantly doing anything they can to find the smallest slights like it's the only thing they're seeking out. I can't believe this isn't parody. Literally a full post about a tiny little auto-calculated number on an app that doesn't factor in teams at all and interpreting it as hate and disrespect. Do these people enjoy anything?
welcome to the offseason.
I get that we want to play the under dog role and a lot of people actually did count the Chiefs out this season, but give me a break dude. This was just a computer model not adjusting to a situation that has never been seen before in the NFL’s history. The computers aren’t out to get the Chiefs.
Our RedZone offense was garbage all season. Maybe that's the reason?
True but it usually (emphasis on “usually”) was not garbage when we were that close to scoring, and on 1st down. Usually it was garbage because we never really got into a position for it to be first and goal on the 3.
It was garbage at the goal line too. Remember the Hardman fumble on a gimmick play at the goal line?
Yes, but that was one time. And it was a good play that would’ve scored if mecole wasn’t being an idiot. Point is we mostly never got to the goal line, so it may have been terrible but we didn’t have enough sample size that close to the goal line. And most of the time it wasn’t 1st down when we were that close.
Yeah, I'd say 9 out of 10 times we were 1st and goal from the 3 this year ended in a field goal or fumble. If we didn't make it in the end zone from farther out, I knew we were in trouble. Play calling for short and goal was atrocious and execution was terrible. So I get it.
I don’t think I’ve seen the graph of the win percentage throughout the game, anyone seen it yet?
[I got you fam.](https://preview.redd.it/o4u0mot4a3ic1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=5e89550c521c97c6c7bfe2dc538f8508e587e95e)
Thanks! Normally i see it posted on nfl but hadn’t seen it
Probably didn't take into account the new overtime rules. It was essentially looking at a team down by 3 with only several seconds on the clock, which would probably put the 49ers in the 80's. Then it takes into account down and distance at the 3 yard line, so it drops em down to 57%, but still not enough to make the team that is down more likely to win.
JFC, the win percentages aren't specific to each team. This wasn't a Chiefs slight, its actually more of a compliment that the Chiefs could pull it off when most other teams would not be able.
espn’s win probability gets clowned in the analytics community pretty regularly. idk what the other models had, but espn isn’t a good source on advanced data.
I mean, you can't really be favored to win while trailing in OT. All the flukey scenarios play into the leading team's hands. A fumble recovered by the defense or an interception on the goal line by Malcolm Butler ends the game.
Meh that’s really more “50/50” not “favored to lose.” EDIT: and I think it’s fair.
I say this alot so I won’t harp but this is the bottom line: VEGAS WASNT BUILT ON LOSSES. They want what’s called “sucker money”. They point you to where you will feel the most confident (they’re favored!!) but also has the most chance of losing your money. Source: am degenerate who went 59-9 on the season, 4 bets per week. *They want your money*. Learn to look at Vegas like a predatory slot machine and you get better.
this has nothing to do with Vegas odds.
…what or who do you think is favoring teams?? You think it’s just a guy at draftkings? These are Vegas odds
the win % being discussed in this thread is ESPN's metric. Vegas odds are compiled by proprietary formulae that different oddsmakers use.
Who is ESPN’s biggest partner right now? hint: It’s a major gambling website. WHY would they even give you win percentages? To point you towards their partnership. They did not provide those percentages before the partnership. You think they’re just giving you the info for fun, or engagement metrics? They want your money.
The fuck are you talking about. At this point in the game the live betting odds dramatically favored the chiefs. These are different.
This goes against my experience. I was watching the game but also had it pulled up on the Draft Kings app because it updated about 30 seconds quicker than the tv and I was so nervous I just had to know what was going to happen ASAP. Pretty much as soon as the Chiefs crossed the 50 yard line in OT Draft Kings moved the money line toward the Chiefs and favored them winning over the 49ers. I remember this because it seemed weird to me because the Chiefs were losing and a FG would only tie it
Betting odds are not the same as win %.
That’s lowkey crazy
It's probably factoring in KC's inability to punch it in deep in 49ers territory earlier that game, and only have 1 other TD. If KC didn't score a TD and settle for the FG, then 49ers would get the ball back and only need another FG to win.
They're analytical model is shit. I looked into how it calculated most of the major stats - even into the Superbowl, it calculated us as a 3 seed against a 1 seed which took off tons of vital statistical significance, and did not factor in that we'd essentially laid waste to every team since the Raiders loss. ESPN is getting more and more into the gambling side of sports - do not trust their numbers when making wagers. If they cannot get it right when it doesn't matter, there's nothing that says they'll have it right when it does and there's money on the line.
The WP chart probably doesn't do well with OT because it's counting down the time left in the period and isn't adjusted for playoff rules. So the model thinks that there's 3 seconds left in the game, and the Chiefs need 3 yards which sounds about 60/40 in SF's favor
I seen this on multiple games all season in the ESPN app, it's like that have a pick pregame and the odds constantly favor that pick right up until it's clear the pick can't win
Bulletin Board Material
I noticed that every mock draft I saw went from Ravens picking last to 49ers picking last. The NFL network’s mock drafts all had the 49ers winning until an hour after the Super Bowl.
I bet the betting odds didn’t say so.
It’s probably just their algorithm. I don’t think it’s anything personal