If the expected chance to win in overtime exceeds the chance to convert the 2pointer than going for the 2 point conversion was definitely the wrong play.
I'm a poker player so I think of all my life decisions in terms of expected value. Which option among my available choices maximizes my value basically.
I'm not sure how they calculated the chance to convert or chance to win in overtime. However, Huntley versus Rodgers really makes me want to shorten the game. The key I think is how good of a two point conversion play do you have? If your coaches identified something they really think will work that matters. Otherwise, I think shortening the game is a generally good idea for the lessor team.
Usually in most games the smaller the sample size the higher the variance of the outcomes. Here the sample size would be plays.
I find analytics very interesting and agree they are a tool. However, no one without analytics ever discusses a decision making framework for their decisions--most of what I hear is momentum, feel, etc. How many investments do you think Buffet and Monger make on feel?
Like most everything in life the application of analytics is complicated. But I liked the decision for the Ravens to go for two. The play they choose was predictable and simplistic.
Thanks for the convo. Always fun.
