At this point he knows he can never be Joe Montana or Tom Brady so why give a shit about W and Ls. At least it appears thats his thought process [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Until the game is in doubt until we get the #1 seed. Yes.
Honestly, if there was a Game Theory Optimal strategy it would probably advise to sit Mahomes in games where we are massive favorites, because more than likely we will win anyway.
so you wanna sit Mahomes and play Henne in games we are favored to win? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
It does but not to the point that you should ever sacrifice a down to run the ball. The benefit is negligible. Even if the other team KNEW you HAD to pass it on 1st or 2nd and 10 you would STILL average more yards per play than running the ball. By alot. Teams KNOW you are passing on 3rd and 6+ and they still can't really stop you effectively.
I like throwing it on 1st down to setup much shorter yardage on 2nd down. If you can get 7-8 yards on 1st down with a pass play, you don't need that great of a running game to pick up the next 1st down on your 2nd down & 3rd down (or even 4th down) rushing attempts from short yardage. [Reply]
Originally Posted by poolboy:
so you wanna sit Mahomes and play Henne in games we are favored to win?
I'm just speculating on what a supercomputer with all of the variables would do. It wouldn't be many games but if we were playing at home vs the fucking Jets or something. Yeah probably. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
I'm just speculating on what a supercomputer with all of the variables would do. It wouldn't be many games but if we were playing at home vs the ****ing Jets or something. Yeah probably.
What if we need to win against the Jets to secure home field in the playoffs? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Until the game is in doubt until we get the #1 seed. Yes.
Honestly, if there was a Game Theory Optimal strategy it would probably advise to sit Mahomes in games where we are massive favorites, because more than likely we will win anyway.
No. This is false.
We would need a much, much better backup QB to ever employ this strategy because to lose one game in attempting it would cost infinitely more than anything gained.
And in the process of employing that better backup QB to give this a try, we would be diverting resources from the rest of the team that would reduce our effectiveness in aggregate.
There’s absolutely no way this is optimal game theory strategy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by poolboy:
What if we need to win against the Jets to secure home field in the playoffs?
I would imagine a supercomputer running a solver with all variables would play him in that scenario. But if the team got a 7-0 or 10-1 start it I THINK there could be an argument against playing him in games like that as the risk reward is very low. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
No. This is false.
We would need a much, much better backup QB to ever employ this strategy because to lose one game in attempting it would cost infinitely more than anything gained.
And in the process of employing that better backup QB to give this a try, we would be diverting resources from the rest of the team that would reduce our effectiveness in aggregate.
There’s absolutely no way this is optimal game theory strategy.
Again I'm just speculating. I do not think there have been any sims to discover the most effective strategy of when to sit players. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
I would imagine a supercomputer running a solver with all variables would play him in that scenario. But if the team got a 7-0 or 10-1 start it I THINK there could be an argument against playing him in games like that as the risk reward is very low.
Hey super computers are great but what about the eye test?
10 and 1 is prob not gonna happen [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
I would imagine a supercomputer running a solver with all variables would play him in that scenario. But if the team got a 7-0 or 10-1 start it I THINK there could be an argument against playing him in games like that as the risk reward is very low.
....ok...first we'd need to actually see the odds of mahomes getting injured in a given game...he's been injured and had to miss time what...twice in his career. Don't see how sitting him and possibly losing a game you need to win, is a statistically sound strategy. But I haven't talked it over with my super computer so who knows... [Reply]
Originally Posted by irafreak:
....ok...first we'd need to actually see the odds of mahomes getting injured in a given game...he's been injured and had to miss time what...twice in his career. Don't see how sitting him and possibly losing a game you need to win, is a statistically sound strategy. But I haven't talked it over with my super computer so who knows...
Exactly. But if you are a 14 point favorite perhaps your win percentage is 90% and not playing Mahomes brings it down to 80%. Probably not many scenarios to do it in the NFL as margins are slimmer. But in NCAA Football where you have 30+ point favorites it would be prudent to consider especially if there is a big chasm from your starter to second string. [Reply]
