Statleague.com

Bill Simmons has had a good run.  He is obviously knowledgeable about the NBA and knows how to throw random pop culture references into an article to liven it up.  Like Teen Wolf would have.  But everything outside of The Association is written from the perspective of Joe Sixpack Fan and needs to be consumed for entertainment purposes only.  Like Twinkies.

But this new article where he tries to delve into the Patriots 4th down and 2 statistics is just embarrassing for everyone involved. His grasp on the basic tenets of logic is funny bad.  The level of undeserved hubris on display is something I would only expect to read in Sarah Palin’s new book “Going Rogue”.  The thought of a million readers all nodding their head in agreement with the babbling thoughts in this article just because they happen to be on ESPN really irks me.

In baseball, statistics permeate every aspect of the game. And they should. It’s an individual sport. You are on your own.

Great, a seemingly nonsensical assertion that stats are only important in an individual sport.  Off to a good start.  At least I know he’s going to spend the next paragraph explaining why the importance of stats is somehow linearly related to the amount of individuality on display.  Oh wait, he didn’t?  He just kind of moves on?  Darn, was looking forward to that.

Now, it’s not even arguable that baseball is a stat driven sport.  Of course it is.  But I think this is probably a factor of A) the limited amount of definitive situations the game can be in and B) 162 games per year over 100 years and intense stats compilations starting back in the ’30s.  Not some weird level of individual-ness.

But you still need to watch games to have an educated opinion. After my beloved Patriots threw away Sunday’s Colts game with one unnecessarily dangerous decision, my educated opinion was this: “That’s the second dumbest thing I have ever seen any Boston team do.”

Super, an appeal to authority fallacy.  Bill Simmons knows more about football than me, you, or the facts when put together in numerical form.  It’s comforting to know that he is so much better at watching sports than we are.

To be clear, let me say that I don’t think Belichick made some awesome genius call.  All the facts available say it was likely at best a good call and at worst a push.  Neither do I think Cutoff Hoodie McDouche knew all the math was supporting him when making that call.  He probably just knew that it was a good option, which it most definitely was, and made the controversial decision just like he’s known to do.  I call it “Going Rogue” then look up some of those fake photoshopped pics of Sarah Palin again.

But to call it the “second dumbest thing I have ever seen any Boston team do”?  Really?  Let me guess, it’s right behind being the last team to let a black player into baseball with Pumpsie Green 12 years after Jackie Robinson?  Or was it getting caught spying on an opponent you were going to destroy anyway?

Kevin Faulk hauled in a pass on the 30.3-yard line. It was spotted at the 29.

Was this a slight dig insinuating that they actually converted the fourth down attempt?  So you’re saying that the second dumbest play in the history of Boston sports was not only statistically correct, but it was also successful if not for a bad spot?  Odd criteria for this award.

Scenario A (if the Pats converted): “The Patriots’ average win probability [was] 92 percent.”

I really, really want to know if he just pulled this number straight out of his ass.  92% seems way too low in that situation and I haven’t seen another site that is anywhere near that far away from 100%.

(Important note: If you were sitting next to a bookie after the Pats blew fourth-and-2, and that bookie said to you, “The odds of the Colts winning here are 34 percent; I will give you 3-to-1 odds that they score,” would you have taken that wager in a millisecond or a kajillasecond? I think we can throw that number out. Whatever.)

Important note:  Yes.  If any bookie was dumb enough to offer 3-1 when any gambling novice can figure out that the odds warrant a 2-1 payment, then most people would jump at it.  With all the talk about gambling by the sports guy, he sure doesn’t know much about odds making.

By this logic, Belichick also should have held a loaded pistol to his head on the sideline, spun the chamber and tried to shoot himself like Chris Walken in “The Deer Hunter.” If those 1-in-6 odds came through and he succeeded, we could have said, “Hey, he played the percentages: 83.6666 percent of the time, you don’t die in that situation! You can’t blame him for what happened!”

Almost too dumb for words.  But if I must, I guess I will say that since he did have to make a call in this Russian Roulette situation, that playing the odds is like picking the gun with 1 bullet loaded over the one with 2.  Yes, any Russian Roulette players reading this, please go with the stats and play the odds in this situation.

I don’t want to get into my thoughts about plus-minus data and all the inherent problems with it. Some other time. We’ll ignore the Durant lunacy for now. But to argue, insinuate or even blink that Tim Thomas is underrated — by any metric — cannot be allowed.

This tangent continues for a 4+ paragraphs.  What the hell does some idiot trying to invent a nonsensical basketball stat have to do with any of this?  The only good thing about it is that for a bit in this long ass article he is finally talking NBA which is something he knows, and busting on Tim Thomas who always deserves it.  I might have to chalk this whole article up to concentrating too much on the NBA book tour while doing peyote in the southwest.

The “Belichick made the right move” argument was nearly as dense. In the biggest game of the regular season, when a football coach tries something that — and this is coming from someone who watches 12 hours of football every Sunday dating back to elementary school — I cannot remember another team doing on the road in the last three minutes of a close game, that’s not “gutsy.”

So the game was too big, the spot light was too hot, the consequences too dire, so you should just forget about weighing your options and making what you believe to be the right call because Bill Simmons has never seen anybody else do it.  Wow.  THAT’S EXACTLY WHEN YOU SHOULD BE TRYING YOUR HARDEST TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION!  At what point can I just assume that he is an 8 year old putting his fingers in the ears and saying “na, na, na, na” because he doesn’t want to hear the truth?

I find it really, really, REALLY hard to believe they would have completed that play 56 times out of 100 times with how they lined up. They spread the field with five receivers, eliminating any chance of a run.

You think this is somehow a unique situation in the history of 4th and 2?  What about the times that they line up to obviously run?  That’s the power of the law of large numbers, over time the statistics will normalize themselves to most situations.

Given these realities, if you’re feeding me “Here’s what happened in this situation historically” numbers, shouldn’t we be looking at the data for two-point conversions?

Wait, what?  Stats don’t matter for football, unless I change the situation to something I hypothesize to be similar and the numbers then support my predetermined conclusion?  This tangent is too dumb for words.  I’m going to skip it for now and cheer him on for some more face / desk bashing.

One other note: The “disrespecting the defense” card doesn’t show up in stats.

As it shouldn’t.  It’s something you just made up.

And it’s dumb.

I asked Peter Newmann to research the number of times a team started and completed three touchdown drives in the fourth quarter to erase a double-digit deficit and win an NFL game since 2005.

I hope Peter Newmann rolled his eyes and made fun of you at lunch with the other slide ruler junkies.  Here’s a hint:  the fact that you have hit a blackjack in each of the two previous shoes HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on whether you’ll hit a blackjack in this shoe.  Are you so desperate for stats to back you up that you’ll ignore the fact that the two other TDs that quarter have NOTHING to do with the final Colts drive?

You’re damned right I just went all caps.

Shit, so did I.  Sorry about that.  Complete ignorance of statistics sometimes does that to me.

Hold on, I have to repeatedly bang my head against my desk again.

I’ll hold.  If you want to do it a couple more times I’m also cool with waiting longer.

For instance, I had to drive from Seattle to Portland on Wednesday morning. The following factors were in play:

I really wonder sometimes if there is a word limit that the Sports Guy has to hit and if this story is just filler.  That’s the only rational reason I can come up with why in god’s name you’d spend that many words on a boring speeding ticket story.

The reward (of converting it) did not match the risk (the fallout from a demoralizing loss and a week’s worth of “What the hell happened?” questions, not to mention its impact on the team’s psyche).

So now I think we are getting much closer to the heart of Bill’s actual problem with the play:  the gambit didn’t work.  He is a fan of the Patriots and as such his thinking is trending much more results oriented than it should be.  Happens all the time in poker when you push all in pre-flop with pocket aces and lose to some junk 2-7 offsuit.  The conclusion should be that sometimes you make the best decision and variance bites you in the ass.  The conclusion should not be to fold pocket aces pre-flop.  (Interesting side note that heads up chances of AA winning are about 4 to 1 which is almost the same as Belichick’s odds of winning regardless of his decision here.)

It’s really telling that saying the reward of converting it (winning the game) isn’t worth the risk of answering questions from the media.  Uh, then I guess your concern really isn’t about doing everything to win this game, it’s more about protecting the fragile ego of the players when the big bad media sticks the mic in their face.  And that’s a terrible position to be arguing the validity of a single play from.  If you think this is that important of a point then I guess you will always want the Patriots to play it safe just on the off chance that a “risky” play doesn’t work out and later that week the pressure folds that player like origami.

Just… no.

Mr. Simmons, what you have just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.