Comments on Advanced NFL Stats: Game Theory and Run/Pass Balance

hmm how does this account for the Shovel pass that...

2010-12-07T09:33:49.947-05:00

hmm how does this account for the Shovel pass that is run as a Power Run play??? hehe

Interesting article. I see that is optimal to run ...

2010-04-30T11:50:40.717-04:00

Interesting article. I see that is optimal to run 63% and pass 37% in your graph. These numbers would be true if the right assumptions are met, and I am wondering how you could adjust theses numbers to the difference in score. For instance you are not going to run the ball 63% of the time when you are down by three touchdowns.

(same guy as above) Maybe I just don't unders...

2010-01-22T16:28:39.878-05:00

(same guy as above)

Maybe I just don't understand how to view the graph from the defense's perspective.

That is interesting - but I must be missing someth...

2010-01-22T16:26:28.916-05:00

That is interesting - but I must be missing something if it is obvious that the defense should simply play the symmetric opposite.

If the parameters were changed (i.e. the slopes of those lines were changed) and the offense's optimal was 55% pass and 45% run would you still flip the numbers of for the defense? That doesn't sound right - you need to play the pass more if the offense becomes pass happy since like you said the potential to get burned playing run when the offense passes is so great.

Fixed. Thank you. In this particular example, the...

2010-01-20T17:29:44.605-05:00

Fixed. Thank you.

In this particular example, the defense would need to do the symmetrical opposite, guarding against the pass more often. Since the blitz is 'dominated,' the biggest vulnerability for the defense is playing run defense against a pass play. They should play pass D 63% and run D 37%.

In reality defenses don't have to play discrete choices, but can bias their scheme on a continuum based on how likely each play type is expected.

So what's the answer for the defense here? How...

2010-01-20T16:39:17.180-05:00

So what's the answer for the defense here? How often should they be in run defense versus pass defense given offense's mix?

(yes, as noted above there is an error in the equations.)

The equation for run D utility should be -3+12x, n...

2010-01-06T14:43:00.755-05:00

The equation for run D utility should be -3+12x, not -3+9x.

You might like "The Art of Strategy" boo...

2010-01-05T16:39:05.589-05:00

You might like "The Art of Strategy" book.

You have to also think about run/pass from the per...

2009-09-10T15:48:21.143-04:00

You have to also think about run/pass from the perspective of a player.

Suppose you're a linebacker in, say, a 4-3 defense. The ball is snapped, and the other team has just handed the ball off to a running back.

Stopping this running play will require, basically, every defensive player on the field to haul butt in either direct pursuit of the runner (for the defenders near him), or to make sure a cutback gap is defended (for defenders the runner may be running from).

You can't just stand there, even if the run is a sweep to the opposite side of the field. It'll take a team effort to make sure the ball carrier is contained.

This effort, in turn, will require hustle and intense physical contact on the part of most defenders. Defending the run, in short, is a pain in the butt.

Now let's say it's the next play. this time, it's a pass. You're playing a zone defense, and that's what you'll be doing most of the time. You drop into your zone, and maybe you run near a receiver who enters it, providing coverage. The ball is thrown downfield. It's caught - and you pursue, but you probably aren't going to be bumping into many people unless the ball carrier's right near by.

Or it's not caught. Or there's a sack. Either way, your work on the play is done.

If you play a pass-happy team, and you're a full-time starting linebacker who rarely leaves the game, you may drop back into your zone 40 times, but have to defend a pass or tackle a pass catcher only 5 or so times (depending on lots of factors, of course). That would be a striking difference if you were playing a run-happy team where you have to stick your nose into piles of blockers to contain a runner.

Why am I drawing all this obvious stuff out? Just to point out that a football play is more than just probabilities working themselves out. The difference in the physical experience between defending the run or the pass is another explanation for why teams bother to run at all.

"The best approach is to unpredictably someti...

2009-04-09T20:48:00.000-04:00

"The best approach is to unpredictably sometimes run and sometimes pass, which game theory calls a mixed strategy."

Theory runs into reality sometimes and gets messy. Like Urban Meyer once said if you play a 2 high safety defense when I have 4 WR's and the LB's are split out to the apex between EMLOS & slot WR he won't call a pass play. Similarly if you leave a WR uncovered they'll bubble screen you to death...it is no secret. It is smart execution based upon what the defense relatively gives up.

In order to be useful to coaches this has to get eventually to specific runs (lead iso vs. over front) versus specific fronts and specific passes versus coverages(smash vs. cover 2). That takes a lot of film watching and statistical analysis but not the sort you are engaging in.

Please don't stop but someday try and do it from the coaches standpoint as well for fun. 2nd and 7 from your 35 yard line...what formation, what motion, what type or run or pass, and what counter will you run of this later? I think it will influence the future direction of your work. Good luck and please continue.

ON DECEPTION IN FOOTBALL
"I think :) it's rare ...

2009-03-30T16:23:00.000-04:00

ON DECEPTION IN FOOTBALL
"I think :) it's rare to see defenses or offenses "fooled" outright, in the way the OP describes (calling a run defense and failing to adjust to stop a pass, or vice versa)..."

Deception (or more precisely, misdirection) isn't a one play proposition. The idea is to mislead enough to stay on the field (or to get the other team off the field). It's a matter of degrees, a matter of cumulative yards rather than big plays.

As anonymous mentioned above, what you want to do is catch the other team leaning, not completely bamboozled. The Pittsburgh DC is very good at messing up the chalk board -- players are not where they are supposed to be. But something as simple as a play action still needs to be set up. You need to "invest" in some poor yardage plays to show a tendency. When the defense starts to anticipate, you show the same play (run) but now it's based on what you've made the defense anticipate. You pass.

Misdirection versus brute strength. Those are the two factors in football you might measure.

There lots of potential deceptions that go beyond ...

2009-02-13T10:52:00.000-05:00

There lots of potential deceptions that go beyond play selection: the trap, counter, reverse, HB pass, bubble screen, bootleg, etc. etc. etc.

But isn't it true that most defenses know not only of the possibility of deception but also virtually all the forms it can take/has taken? Don't DCs design schemes to minimize the possibility that any of these will work, or quickly adapt (over the course of the season) to the flavor of the month?

I think :) it's rare to see defenses or offenses "fooled" outright, in the way the OP describes (calling a run defense and failing to adjust to stop a pass, or vice versa). Most standard schemes (like the Phillips 3-4 or the 46) prescribe multiple roles to players out of base calls to account for precisely this problem; Belichick's scheme seems to work differently, but, let's face it, it's because the guy is the best in the business at knowing exactly what his D has to do to stop the other guys.

Just as economists are fooled by the Nash Equilibr...

2009-01-21T10:27:00.000-05:00

Just as economists are fooled by the Nash Equilibrium, so can football tacticians also be.

Deception -- in football, misdirection -- changes everything. Act like you are convinced a running strategy will win (controlling the clock) and your opponent may take the bait. That is the time to pass. Act like you are going to pass, and then run (draw play). Or act like a run, then pass (play action).

Convince the defense that you have a plan and you know what they will do next. Script plays to catch them leaning, and when they lean, go the other way.

The soft underbelly of the market place is fraud. The same applies to football strategy. The most effective football play -- if both teams are relatively equal, which they generally are in the nfl -- is "nothing up my sleeve..."

This seems like an analysis of the original Tecmo ...

2008-08-03T00:43:00.000-04:00

This seems like an analysis of the original Tecmo Bowl. You got 4 plays to pick (2 run, 2 pass. Some teams have 3-31 ratios). On defense you better have good predictive skills or else you are toast.

ch-All very true.

Can I ask where you got ...

2008-06-30T00:20:00.000-04:00

ch-All very true.

Can I ask where you got your data?

"Further, if passing is far preferable to running,...

2008-06-18T13:42:00.000-04:00

"Further, if passing is far preferable to running, why should a team run at all? Hopefully that's obvious. An opposing defense could exclusively focus on defending the pass, dramatically limiting any expected gain."

This may be my favorite statistical topic, why do teams run the ball? In some cases running is empirically better: 4th and 1, 3rd and 1, 3rd and 2. In all other cases clubs consistently gain more yards and gain first downs at a higher rate when they pass instead of run. Since even Mike Martz runs the ball occassionally, commentators are left trying to justify the run because that's what clubs actually do.

I'm not sure a justification is needed. A common reason is the one I've quoted: teams run to "set up the pass", "keep the defense off-balance", "keep the defense honest", prevent the defense from "exclusively focusing on defending the pass", etc. Essentially this boils down to running the ball's suboptimal, but hopefully it will increase the expected gain from the passing game.

Teams often telegraph when they are going to pass. If Kurt Warner is flanked by 4 wide receivers and nobody is behind him, should the defense be surprised when they pass? I sure hope not. Defenses will switch to a nickel or dime package, and the offense will still throw the ball.

In 2007 teams passed nearly 89.7% of the time when faced with 4 or more yards to go on third down (regular season). Even if there wasn't a Warner/empty backfield combination telegraphing the play type any defensive coordinator should guess pass with that large a bias.

With such an obvious selection bias towards the pass game theory predicts that the 'surprise' run should net big yardage. It doesn't. Teams STILL gain more yards passing the ball and get first downs more often. Avg gain rushing, 3rd and 6 to 10 yards to go: 3.8 yards (5.9 yards for passing in same situation), First down %, 3rd and 6 to 10 yards to go, rushing: 18% (37% passing).

If teams selected plays on first and second down like they do on third down would passing still be better? I think so, but we may have to wait for Mike Leach to get an NFL job to find out.