Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Truth. How does this defend your position though? Sorry if I can't connect the dots myself. The way I see it, the free throws at the end don't matter because of the game situation. In the first scenario, they matter tremendously. Therefore, not all 4 for 20 performances at the stripe are created equal. You say it is the two at the end of the game that are important ... I say it is ANY two that he missed. You don't get any more credit for the two at the end. If he goes 2-20 and they lose you can't point to the last 2 he missed at the end of the game and exclaim it was those 2 that caused them to lose. If he goes 4-20 and they win it matters not where the extra 2 points occurred ... at the beginning of the game or at the end of the game. So the last 2 misses are no more relevant than the other 16 misses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 no. If he would have made the 1st 10 or so it wouldn't have come down to the end If he would have made the first 10, the game might have played out entirely differently so it's not possible to really say how important any of those free throws were. You can't assume all plays would have been the exact same in that game if the individual outcomes of those free throws is different. Maybe a make instead of a miss stops the clock allowing the other team to setup a play at the end of the first half whereas a miss means the clock just expires with no realistic attempt at a basket. So you can't assume making the first ten free throws has zero impact on all other possessions. For what it's worth, the value of an individual play in football seems more significant simply because there are so fewer opportunities to score points in football compared to basketball (so many fewer possessions). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 You say it is the two at the end of the game that are important ... I say it is ANY two that he missed. You don't get any more credit for the two at the end. If he goes 2-20 and they lose you can't point to the last 2 he missed at the end of the game and exclaim it was those 2 that caused them to lose. If he goes 4-20 and they win it matters not where the extra 2 points occurred ... at the beginning of the game or at the end of the game. So the last 2 misses are no more relevant than the other 16 misses. And as expected, we agree to disagree. I still didn't hear your response to my fictional SB winning FG attempt for Dallas. Is your reaction the same to a miss there as it is to a miss on the first possession? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) If he would have made the first 10, the game might have played out entirely differently so it's not possible to really say how important any of those free throws were. You can't assume all plays would have been the exact same in that game if the individual outcomes of those free throws is different. Maybe a make instead of a miss stops the clock allowing the other team to setup a play at the end of the first half whereas a miss means the clock just expires with no realistic attempt at a basket. So you can't assume making the first ten free throws has zero impact on all other possessions. For what it's worth, the value of an individual play in football seems more significant simply because there are so fewer opportunities to score points in football compared to basketball (so many fewer possessions). So now you are claiming that we can't isolate plays because what happens at the beginning of the game impacts what happens at the end of the game? And now you are saying you analogy is flawed? Edited January 11, 2015 by Grits and Shins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 And as expected, we agree to disagree. I still didn't hear your response to my fictional SB winning FG attempt for Dallas. Is your reaction the same to a miss there as it is to a miss on the first possession? It is irrelevant where the missed FG occurs in the game, it is the same 3 points. There are countless other missed opportunities in the game that could have resulted in a win, the missed FG is just one missed opportunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Really? So forget everything I said - the point is this: I believe that the outcome of plays happening closer to the end of a game generally carry more importance due to their context if the game is close. In a situation where a team wins handily (like if Shaq makes the first ten free throws, say giving his team a 9 point win for example), then the clock doesn't dictate this importance. But there's usually a point where someone hits a "dagger" where a made shot gives a team a large enough lead relative to the clock that the outcome of the game is essentially decided. And I'd argue that the dagger is more important that any other basket made because of the context of when the basket was made. Does that clarify? Sorry if I got detailed by your scenario - maybe just didn't think it through enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It is irrelevant where the missed FG occurs in the game, it is the same 3 points. There are countless other missed opportunities in the game that could have resulted in a win, the missed FG is just one missed opportunity. So you have exactly the same reaction then? Even if maybe a minute or two later you get over the emotional reaction and think through the game as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 So now you are claiming that we can't isolate plays because what happens at the beginning of the game impacts what happens at the end of the game? And now you are saying you analogy is flawed? I didn't say beginning if the game - I gave a specific instance at the end of the half. But regardless, just ignore that post... I clearly didn't communicate well in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) So you have exactly the same reaction then? Even if maybe a minute or two later you get over the emotional reaction and think through the game as a whole. Am I disappointed that he failed to execute, absolutely. But I never, ever point to a single play and say that is why we lost. I fully believe that you have to play 60 full minutes to win the ball game. In that 60 minutes of play there are plenty of missed opportunities (dropped passes, turn overs, failures to convert 3rd downs, poorly executed plays, giving up sacks, giving up 3rd down conversions to your opponent, allowing your opponents to drive and score, etc, etc, etc) that I never believe a SINGLE missed opportunity can be blamed for the game. Even if that missed opportunity is a blown call by the refs. The reverse is true ... you don't win on a single play either. You win because you capitalized on enough opportunities in the game win. Edited January 11, 2015 by Grits and Shins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Am I disappointed that he failed to execute, absolutely. But I never, ever point to a single play and say that is why we lost. I fully believe that you have to play 60 full minutes to win the ball game. In that 60 minutes of play there are plenty of missed opportunities (dropped passes, turn overs, failures to convert 3rd downs, poorly executed plays, giving up sacks, giving up 3rd down conversions to your opponent, allowing your opponents to drive and score, etc, etc, etc) that I never believe a SINGLE missed opportunity can be blamed for the game. Even if that missed opportunity is a blown call by the refs. The reverse is true ... you don't win on a single play either. You win because you capitalized on enough opportunities in the game win. Trollboy excluded, who here has been arguing that the non-call singlehandedly cost Detroit the win? The consensus among non-Dallas fans seemed to be that the play was a turning point, but not the sole reason for defeat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) Trollboy excluded, who here has been arguing that the non-call singlehandedly cost Detroit the win? The consensus among non-Dallas fans seemed to be that the play was a turning point, but not the sole reason for defeat. The discussion we are having is on the tendency some have of placing a higher importance on plays late in the game. I am arguing that single plays (or calls) cannot be isolated as the reason a team wins or loses. Rather when a team capitalizes on enough opportunities throughout the entire course of the game they win the game, they don't win the game because they capitalized on a single opportunity or executed on a single play or had a call go their way. Same is true for losing a game. You don't lose a game because you failed to capitalize on a single opportunity or failed to execute on a single play or had a call go against you ... you lose a game because you failed to capitalize on enough opportunities throughout the entire game to win. Edited January 11, 2015 by Grits and Shins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 In the context of the PI flag pick up, the fact that it happened in the middle of the 4th quarter to me assigns that play a certain level of importance. More important than if it had happened in the first quarter, but less important than if it had happened on the game's final possession for Detroit. My argument is that you have to take the value of each play as it happens, with respect to the game clock and situation. Grits argues that situation is irrelevant - a play is a play. I get the idea of what he says - one team scored more than another, and all of the plays contributed to that outcome. Where I differ is that the outcome of very specific plays, because of where they take place in the game, makes those plays more important because at the time they took place, successful execution of the play either wins the game or loses the game (or perhaps causes a significant sway in the probability of a win or loss from that point forward). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 If I take away 1 play in the Dallas/Detroit game ... the 76 yard TD score at the end of the first half. The PI is irrelevant. So why is the PI play MORE relevant than the 76 yard TD play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 If I take away 1 play in the Dallas/Detroit game ... the 76 yard TD score at the end of the first half. The PI is irrelevant. So why is the PI play MORE relevant than the 76 yard TD play? Apples to apples... I said any one specific play is more important if it happens later in the game, assuming that play's result one way or another has a significant impact on the team's probability of winning from that point forward. You're asking me to compare a long scoring TD that shifted game momentum AND put points on the board going into the half to an officiating blunder that shifted game momentum and removed an opportunity for Detroit to potentially put points on the board with only 8 or so minutes left. After the 76 yard TD, how much was Dallas' game win probability affected? I have no real idea - I'd have to look to find out the likelihood of coming back from a 10 point deficit at halftime vs. a 17 point deficit. Maybe it's a significant number. Now what about Detroit's win probability if they get 1st and 10 in FG range with 8:00 left instead of punting the ball away on 4th and 1? Again, not sure on the exact numbers. But clearly if you flip flop these plays - have the PI happen near the end of the first half - Detroit sustaining a drive and potentially adding 3 points at that point has less impact on their probability to win at that point than Dallas scoring 7 points on a long TD midway through the 4th would have on their probability to win. Maybe I'm looney (someone's emoticon usage here suggests I am), but that's how I process sports. A walk off home run, a buzzer beater, whatever example you think of - when those plays finish, they have the most dramatic impact on the result of the overall game because they happen at a point in time when their resolution tells us who wins the whole game. Looking back on a game afterward, you can certainly point to a number of plays that impact a game's outcome, but in a game that comes down to the final play, only one play holds the distinction of being THE play. It has more pressure, more stress, more drama, etc. - Hell, I might get up to take a leak when a team lines up for a 30 yard FG 5 minutes into the game - maybe I pause the DVR, maybe I don't and rewind it if I come back and something goofy happened (like I notice the other team now has 7 points so I rewind to see a blocked FG returned for a TD). But my ass is glued to the seat if that 30 yarder is to tie or take the lead with little or no time left. Would you at least agree that these end of game plays are more dramatic, stressful, pressure-packed if not more important? I just don't see how the adjective "important" wouldn't also apply... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 100% agree with MTSuper7. A team can react to an event early in the game and overcome it. There is no answer to a game winning field goal as the clock expires. Haven't you ever noticed how many game have hardly any scoring through 3 quarters and then explode in the 4th? To suggest that teams don't alter their approach to a game based on situation is just wrong. To suggest that a varying approach doesn't impact the result of play is also wrong. I can agree that the result of a game most likely cannot be attributed to a single play, however, I think that it is pretty clear that plays increase in value as the game goes on because the opportunity to answer them diminishes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Apples to apples... I said any one specific play is more important if it happens later in the game, assuming that play's result one way or another has a significant impact on the team's probability of winning from that point forward. You're asking me to compare a long scoring TD that shifted game momentum AND put points on the board going into the half to an officiating blunder that shifted game momentum and removed an opportunity for Detroit to potentially put points on the board with only 8 or so minutes left. After the 76 yard TD, how much was Dallas' game win probability affected? I have no real idea - I'd have to look to find out the likelihood of coming back from a 10 point deficit at halftime vs. a 17 point deficit. Maybe it's a significant number. Now what about Detroit's win probability if they get 1st and 10 in FG range with 8:00 left instead of punting the ball away on 4th and 1? Again, not sure on the exact numbers. But clearly if you flip flop these plays - have the PI happen near the end of the first half - Detroit sustaining a drive and potentially adding 3 points at that point has less impact on their probability to win at that point than Dallas scoring 7 points on a long TD midway through the 4th would have on their probability to win. Maybe I'm looney (someone's emoticon usage here suggests I am), but that's how I process sports. A walk off home run, a buzzer beater, whatever example you think of - when those plays finish, they have the most dramatic impact on the result of the overall game because they happen at a point in time when their resolution tells us who wins the whole game. Looking back on a game afterward, you can certainly point to a number of plays that impact a game's outcome, but in a game that comes down to the final play, only one play holds the distinction of being THE play. It has more pressure, more stress, more drama, etc. - Hell, I might get up to take a leak when a team lines up for a 30 yard FG 5 minutes into the game - maybe I pause the DVR, maybe I don't and rewind it if I come back and something goofy happened (like I notice the other team now has 7 points so I rewind to see a blocked FG returned for a TD). But my ass is glued to the seat if that 30 yarder is to tie or take the lead with little or no time left. Would you at least agree that these end of game plays are more dramatic, stressful, pressure-packed if not more important? I just don't see how the adjective "important" wouldn't also apply... the was directed to the fact that up thread (al wk actually) a few people blamed the Lions loss on the non call. That has now evolved into missin free throws in the 1st quarter of a basketball game. I've coached a youth sport the last 8 yrs. My kids are taught that if we lose its because we didn't score enough runs. Period. Doesn't matter if our sidestrikes out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the last. And I believe that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 The current state of the discussion is philosophical/theoretical. The non call was a big play, but the Lions got another possession. I have been consistent in saying that play did not cause the Lions to lose on its own. It certainly had an impact, but the Lions held their own fate at the end of the game and didn't get it done. They could have overcome a bad call but failed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Apples to apples... I said any one specific play is more important if it happens later in the game, assuming that play's result one way or another has a significant impact on the team's probability of winning from that point forward. You're asking me to compare a long scoring TD that shifted game momentum AND put points on the board going into the half to an officiating blunder that shifted game momentum and removed an opportunity for Detroit to potentially put points on the board with only 8 or so minutes left. After the 76 yard TD, how much was Dallas' game win probability affected? I have no real idea - I'd have to look to find out the likelihood of coming back from a 10 point deficit at halftime vs. a 17 point deficit. Maybe it's a significant number. Now what about Detroit's win probability if they get 1st and 10 in FG range with 8:00 left instead of punting the ball away on 4th and 1? Again, not sure on the exact numbers. But clearly if you flip flop these plays - have the PI happen near the end of the first half - Detroit sustaining a drive and potentially adding 3 points at that point has less impact on their probability to win at that point than Dallas scoring 7 points on a long TD midway through the 4th would have on their probability to win. Maybe I'm looney (someone's emoticon usage here suggests I am), but that's how I process sports. A walk off home run, a buzzer beater, whatever example you think of - when those plays finish, they have the most dramatic impact on the result of the overall game because they happen at a point in time when their resolution tells us who wins the whole game. Looking back on a game afterward, you can certainly point to a number of plays that impact a game's outcome, but in a game that comes down to the final play, only one play holds the distinction of being THE play. It has more pressure, more stress, more drama, etc. - Hell, I might get up to take a leak when a team lines up for a 30 yard FG 5 minutes into the game - maybe I pause the DVR, maybe I don't and rewind it if I come back and something goofy happened (like I notice the other team now has 7 points so I rewind to see a blocked FG returned for a TD). But my ass is glued to the seat if that 30 yarder is to tie or take the lead with little or no time left. Would you at least agree that these end of game plays are more dramatic, stressful, pressure-packed if not more important? I just don't see how the adjective "important" wouldn't also apply... Nope you are missing the point. I didn't say compare the plays ... I said the pick up of the PI flag is irrelevant without the first play. It is irrelevant without a whole host of other opportunities that the Cowboys capitalized on in the game. Certainly the play later in the game is more dramatic because of the game situation, but it is the result of a sequence of plays. If a QB throws 5 interceptions in a game the last one didn't lose them the game even if it the team loses by 1 point and the last INT occurred with 5 seconds left in the game in the redzone. Or are you going to tell me the previous 4 INTs were not relevant, just the last one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Come on, Grits... Some plays are bigger than others. Yes. Everyone knows this (well almost everyone). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Nope you are missing the point. I didn't say compare the plays ... I said the pick up of the PI flag is irrelevant without the first play... Or are you going to tell me the previous 4 INTs were not relevant, just the last one? Each play in a game happens within a certain context. All 5 INTs would be relevant, but the final one more so because it happened in a situation in which the team would have no more opportunities to win after it happened. Therefore, it is more important in the game context. These plays don't happen in a vacuum. Every play builds on the last, so the result of each play shapes the context for each next play to varying degrees. This is why you can't just say "remove the 76 yard TD" because that TD had an impact on how the rest of the game played out. Whether it's momentum, play calling, confidence, etc., the game experience is ever evolving. I'll give an example not related to the a game winning FG attempt or free throws or whatever. Say Aaron Rodgers is sacked in the first quarter of a game and gets carted off with an injury and never returns. That single play is likely the most important play of the game, depending on how the context of the game goes, as the Packers' chances of winning the game are severely affected by that one play. Take that one play (and injury) away, and the entire game is different. That's one example of how you can't look at plays without context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Come on, Grits... Some plays are bigger than others. That includes penalties, non-calls, decisions to punt vs. go for it on 4th down, etc. I said it before, what about the Fail Mary debacle in Seattle with the replacement refs? Every game will always have a handful of critical plays one way or another where you can point to those specific plays as having a significant impact on the game's outcome. To say no one play is more important than another is just plain incorrect. You say the game is merely a culmination of 125 plays with no single play standing on its own. Apply that logic to basketball - say a guy misses two free throws with his team down one point and 0.1 on the clock, meaning his team lost as a direct result of his inability to make his free throws. Are you trying to tell me that those missed free throws are no different than any other missed free throws in the game? Please tell me that's not your argument... Scott Norwood's missed FG at the end of SB XXV? That play is just a play? I understand that many things happened to get to the point where Norwood had a FG attempt to potentially win the game, but that single FG attempt was more important than all other plays prior to it because it single-handedly decided the game' winner. If Buffalo executes the play correctly, they win. If Buffalo doesn't, they lose. Not one of those previous 124 plays offers that level of importance. Thank you for taking the time to argue with Grits for me, I have lost the desire to do so. He keeps trying to put words in my mouth and make me sound like I'm saying something different. So I simply resorted to sarcastic and short responses, because reasoning with him wasn't going to work. Still catching up on the discussions for the weekend, I bet he and other Cowboy fans think that one call in the GB game was pretty important, and not equal to every other play and call/non-call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the outlaw Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Thank you for taking the time to argue with Grits for me, I have lost the desire to do so. He keeps trying to put words in my mouth and make me sound like I'm saying something different. So I simply resorted to sarcastic and short responses, because reasoning with him wasn't going to work. Still catching up on the discussions for the weekend, I bet he and other Cowboy fans think that one call in the GB game was pretty important, and not equal to every other play and call/non-call. unfortunately, i don't think you would ever see them publicly admit one play can be more important in the outcome of a game, than another, even if they did think so...crow isn't a very tasty dish! LOL Edited January 12, 2015 by the outlaw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Don't be silly. The reversal of the Dez Bryant catch was not why the Cowboys lost the game. There are a number of reasons they lost that game ... including, but not limited to, the Murray fumble and the fact that the Dallas defense put ZERO pressure on an immobile Rodgers in the 2nd half. Green Bay's offense had their way in the 2nd half. I have always been consistent in my position that one play does not decide a game, no matter the individual teams involved. I thought Dallas should have run the ball more than they did. While I admired the go for it gusto on the Dez Bryant play I might have run the ball there for the first down. I think it is a shame that all people want to talk about is the officiating in the game when we could be talking about what was a really good game and a fun game to watch. That game is what playoff football is all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.