Tuesday, November 25, 2008

The End Of The 50-Yard Field Goal

Stephen Gostkowski, the kicker for the New England Patriots, has one of the strongest legs in the NFL. Most of his kickoffs go into the opponent's end zone -- many of them for touchbacks.

But he doesn't have any 50-yard field goals this year. That's because Coach Belichick hasn't asked him to try any. Gostkowski has a 93% success rate on kicks less than 50 yards. But no attempts beyond that distance.

This stat is part of a larger trend in the NFL.

In 1994, the NFL changed the rules for missed field goals, so that the team taking possession got the ball at the point of the kick -- not at the previous line of scrimmage. This is only a 7-yard difference. But it's enough to shift the odds away from the decision to try long field goals.

This rule helped create a "no man's land" near the opponent's 35-yard line. On 4th down, it doesn't make sense to punt from within 40 yards of the end zone -- there's a good chance you'll kick too far and end up with a touchback, and a net gain of only 15-20 yards.

But a field goal attempt doesn't make much sense either. Let's assume the average kicker has a 50% success rate on 52-yard field goal attempt (this is a kick from the opponent's 35-yard line). Half the time, you get 3 points. The other half of the time, the other team gets the ball with good field position -- at their own 42-yard line. Getting the ball at your 42-yard line is worth, on average, about 1.8 points.

So, half the time you get 3 points; but the rest of the time you lose 1.8 points. This means that a field goal attempt from the opponent's 35-yard line is worth less than a point (0.6 to be more exact).

By contrast, having the ball at your opponent's 30-yard line is worth about 4 points. So even if you have less than a 50% chance of getting the 1st down, it frequently makes sense to go for it instead of trying to kick the field goal.

Although kickers continue to get stronger and more accurate, we'll see fewer and fewer long field goals as more coaches continue to realize that 50-yard field goal attempts are bad bets.

Saturday, July 26, 2008

Cliff Lee For MVP?

Photo by aturkus on flickr
Cliff Lee is now 14-2 for an Indians team that has won only 45 games. Lee has over 31% of his team's wins.

The last pitcher to finish the season with more than 30% of his team's wins was Fergie Jenkins, winning 25 games for the 1974 Texas Rangers. And Jenkins pitched in a 4-man rotation, allowing him to get 41 starts.

In other words, no pitcher has ever done what Cliff Lee is doing: winning 30% of his team's games while pitching in a 5-man rotation.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Over-Active Game Design


Photo by Bari D
It's not surprising that everybody wants to be a game designer. What's bad is that everyone thinks they can be a good game designer.

Probably the most telling aspect of bad game design is "over-active" game design: the desire to "improve" games by adding complexity.

The media response to tonight's All Star Game is a perfect example of over-active game design. Some suggestions I've heard on T.V. and radio:

  1. Anyone who pitched on Sunday should be banned from the All-Star Game.
  2. The All-Star rosters should be even bigger (as if 32 players per team weren't enough).
  3. Starting pitchers should be required to stay in for 4 innings.
  4. Pitchers should be allowed to go back in the game, even if they were already used.
  5. All pitchers on the Mets and Yankees (since they are probably already in New York) should have been available to pitch.
  6. In extra innings, award a run for every hit.
All of these ideas are dumb: examples of fans thinking they can "fix" a game system by adding more rules.

Of course, the worst ever example of bad game design at the All Star Game was when Bud Selig stood up and declared a "tie" in 2002. He actually changed the rules of the game -- in the middle of the game!

Can you imagine the NFL Commissioner changing the rules for overtime of the Super Bowl?
"I just decided that for this overtime, you only need 5 yards for a first down. I know it's weird, but I'd like the game to end sooner."
It's absurd. But it's not as bad as what Selig did in 2002. Not only did he change the rules in the middle of the game, but he called a premature stop to an exciting extra-inning game. It was horrible game design and horrible showmanship, rolled together into one burrito of suck.

By now, you probably want to know what I think we should do about the problem of extra-inning All Star Games.

The answer: nothing.

When you run out of pitchers, let the position players pitch. It happens several times each year, in games that actually count. Which of the following would be more interesting to watch as a fan?

1) David Wright takes the mound in the bottom of the 16th. He gets the first two batters out but then gives up a walk-off homer to J.D. Drew.

2) Bud Selig waddles onto the field and declares a tie.

It's a no-brainer. Keep it simple. And stop trying to add rules where they aren't needed.

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

Varitek Isn't The Weak Link



I don't live in Boston anymore. But I still live in Red Sox Nation. This means that the radio next to my desk gets WEEI. The hot topic this week is how Jason Varitek's offensive drought is hurting the team.

Tek is definitely worrisome. However, his OPS of .672 is only 118 points below his career average.

Manny Ramirez has an OPS of .884 this year: 113 points below his career average of .997.

So you could argue that Manny's "slump" is hurting team offense just about as much as Tek's.

It's an interesting way to look at things. Varitek is getting close to the Mendoza line, so he's the one that stands out. But Manny's "dip" has actually cost the Red Sox more runs (because he gets more at bats, and has played in 11 more games).

Of course, I put "dip" in quotes because the truth is that both Manny and Tek are 36 years old -- so it's likely that this is exactly what we are supposed to expect from these two. Neither of these players is "slumping". They are both just getting old. Unless you are Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens, this is when your stats begin to take a nosedive. It's actually refreshing to see their performance taper off, instead of seeing them "reborn" as 40-year-old superstars because of steroids and HGH.

Varitek stands out to Red Sox as the bigger problem, because you shouldn't pay a guy $10 million to hit .220. But the upside of Tek's problems is that he's more easily replaceable. Assuming for a moment that his "game calling" abilities are over-rated, it can't be that hard to find a catcher that can hit .220. On the other hand, Manny is a future Hall-Of-Famer. Replacing that kind of offense is going to be nearly impossible. So, in the big picture, Manny's drop-off is actually more damaging to the Red Sox playoff hopes than Varitek's.

The downside of Tek's problems is that he's locked up through 2009, but Manny is a free agent after this year. After a season-and-a-half of Manny with a sub-.900 OPS, Theo can be pretty sure this isn't a fluke, which means it's unlikely we'll see him in a Red Sox uniform in '09.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Steve Phillips Is A Moron


Steve Phillips, former Mets GM and current ESPN commentator, probably isn't a moron. But he did just say something really dumb on Baseball Tonight.

He just accused Paul Janish of the Reds of making a "bad baseball play" by trying to bunt with men on first and second and one out in the 6th inning of Sunday's game at Yankee Stadium.
His beef wasn't based on straight-up analysis of the situation. It was based solely on the fact that it was starting to rain.

Here's what he said:

"If the game ends with them not scoring, they don't end up ... umm ... extending that game."

That's crazy! Letting the rain dictate your strategy, even though rain-shortened games are now rarer than a pitcher throwing a 1-hitter (there were less than a half-dozen rain-shortened games in 2007). In this day and age, it was virtually impossible for the umpires to just call the game in the 6th inning and award the win to the Yankees.

The overwhelming majority of major league baseball games are played to their conclusion, regardless of weather, even if the fans have to endure long rain delays, or come back at a later date to play the remaining frames. The last rain-shortened game in the majors was almost 10 months ago.

More importantly, Mr. Phillips lives and works in Connecticut -- about 80 miles from Yankee Stadium. All he had to do was flip on the Weather Channel to see that we've been getting short afternoon thunderstorms all week in the Northeast.

The rain delay lasted less than an hour, and the Yankees won. But not because Janish made a "bad baseball play".

Sunday, February 10, 2008

How You Can Fix The Wild Card!

It's been almost ten years since we came up with the right way to fix the current wild card system.
The 2007 AL East race between the Yankees and Red Sox was the closest since 1978, but I stopped watching in early September, because the current wild card system makes the division title worthless. Once the Yankees put enough space between themselves and the Tigers, the rest of the season became meaningless.

Last year could have been the most exciting playoff chase in recent memory. A chance for the Red Sox to collapse as badly as they did in 1978. Instead, we got to see a bunch of games where Terry Francona sits his best players and experiments with how best to use Eric Gagne.

It seems like calls to fix the wild card have died down. It's because the ALDS and NLDS can produce some exciting playoff baseball. That's great. I don't want to get rid of the wild card. I just want to fix it so that the division races regain some importance. In case you missed it the first time, here's the proposal again:
1) Replace the current Wild Card system with two Wild Cards. Because these are the 4th and 5th teams in each league to earn a playoff spot, we will call these teams #4 and #5.
2) As with the current system, the division winner with the best record is the #1 seed, the division winner with the next-best record is the #2 seed.
3) On the first day after the end of regular season, team #5 plays a one-game playoff at team #4.
4) The winner of this game advances to meet team #1 in a best-of-five series.
In other words, this is identical to the current system, except that each league adds a 2nd wild card team which faces off against the 1st wild card team in a one-game showdown.

Some advantages of this new system:
a) Division races gain importance. Settling for the wild card means there's close to a 50% chance you'll get eliminated in one game. Even if you do win, you have to hop a plane and go face the best team in your division, the very next day.
b) "Home field" races (such as between the 2007 American League division winners) gain added importance. Wouldn't you rather face a team that just used their best available pitcher in a one-game playoff than a team that had the ability to set their rotation?
c) This addresses the frustation that the current wild card system is "unfair" because the wild card has as good a shot (or better) at making it to the World Series. No team wants to face a 1-game elimination playoff, no matter how good their best pitcher is. Moreover, it's unlikely that a wild card team's best pitcher will be rested for this playoff game. And even if he is, and the team manages to win the one-game playoff, they have to start the division series with their #2 starter.
d) This adds to post-season excitement, and TV ratings, without lengthening the playoffs. We don't have to worry about playing November games in Boston or Cleveland.
e) The one-game playoffs create instant excitement to kick off the post-season. It's like scheduling a couple of Game 7's right at the beginning of October. Baseball needs this, because a lot of fans are losing interest in the playoffs. It's ridiculous that the Braves would have thousands of empty seats in the playoffs because "it's only the first round".
At least from Bud Selig's point of view, this system seems to be an improvement on all grounds. It restores the importance of each division race while also increasing fan interest -- because even more teams now have a shot at the post-season. In fact, although we are adding 2 teams to the playoffs, we actually increase the chance that each division winner has of reaching the World Series (because we disrupt the starting rotations of the wild card teams -- putting them at a disadvantage in the ALDS and NLDS).

But instead of actually fixing the current system, Selig has been busy making bizarre tweaks to the post-season format, like giving home-field advantage in the World Series to the team from the league that wins the All-Star Game. This year, he created a new rule that most baseball fans don't even know about: the division winner with the best regular season record gets to decide whether the ALDS will span 7 days or 8 days (the best National League team gets no such benefit, but it appears that the leagues will "trade off" this lovely privilege in future years).

Anyway, it's about time to restore the division races to prominence, while also adding some post-season excitement. It shouldn't be too hard to get baseball to stand up and notice this idea. Just print out this letter and mail it to Bud. You can probably find his e-mail address online, but I've learned that snail-mail works better for these kinds of things:
Mr. Allan H. "Bud" Selig
Commissioner of Baseball
777 E. Wisconsin Avenue
Suite 3060
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Thanks for your support!

Clay