271 replies to this topic

[Slidemaster]

They'll be stupid to give Lamar a mega deal.

I wouldn't be opposed to drafting his replacement this year, to be honest. Rather roll the dice on that than give him $40 million per.

At this point, I agree. His MVP season feels like it was a million years ago.

[makoman]

I think you need to go for two at some point so if you do it early then you can better plan in the future if you know you need two possessions.

https://twitter.com/...144681174605825

 

Harbaugh said the same thing as why he did it. Said not even a decision.

[russsnyder]

If Bateman was the primary read, 4 yards shy of the sticks, I agree. But there was a free runner and Huntley had to get rid of it.

I agree.

Huntley had the rusher in his face and he had to throw it to whomever.

[Ravens2006]

If Bateman was the primary read, 4 yards shy of the sticks, I agree. But there was a free runner and Huntley had to get rid of it.

That's sorta the ongoing issue obviously. Free runner, and lack of preparation and options to combat the free runner. They HAD to expect CLE would bring heat there. Know it's coming. But the best way to combat that... gain some yards and first and second down, even if it's just two or three. Had time, had timeouts. Make sure you're in third and short at worst.

Throwing the go route on first was a high reward but momentum dulling risk. Then Phillips does what he's built to do in obvious passing situations, and gets beaten badly, resulting in sack and 3rd-and-20...

At 3rd and 20, the Ravens need another big break / miracle. You only get so many. Manage the drive from the first play to move the ball forward and get Tucker closer to kicking range with every play.

[CantonJester]

https://twitter.com/...144681174605825

 

Harbaugh said the same thing as why he did it. Said not even a decision.

 

Yeah, it’s still a stupid decision, and him blathering about how it was a non-decision? He was basically relying on a fortuitous onside kick to keep his decision alive. 

 

The only avenue of logic that makes *any* sense is if he had said, “we were going for the win, period.”

[makoman]

Yeah, it’s still a stupid decision, and him blathering about how it was a non-decision? He was basically relying on a fortuitous onside kick to keep his decision alive. 

 

The only avenue of logic that makes *any* sense is if he had said, “we were going for the win, period.”

I mean, it makes perfect sense IMO. I don't understand how you can say it makes *no* sense. I don't understand your side at all, sorry.

 

They knew they needed to get two at some point. If you know you've failed at 9 minutes left you still have time to remedy that. If you know you've failed at 12 seconds left like last week, you have no chance. Because they failed early they knew they had to play for an extra possession, which they got. Yeah, it took an unlikely onside, but they would have needed that anyway if they had failed the 2pt later. What is the big problem with going for it early?

 

ETA: disagreeing is one thing, I can see putting off the decision although I don't think that's optimal. I just don't agree with saying that this is clearly stupid and doesn't make any sense.

[Mike in STL]

Definitely disagree that it's stupid. I can see it going either way, but it is a fine choice.

eta:
similar situation, they said it was smart
https://www.espn.com...-knowing-future

538 indicates two is the right choice in their graphs
https://fivethirtyei...for-2-for-real/

Did I read that chat right? With 9 pt margin there is +0.4% change in win probability if you make the 2 vs the 1?

That’s not even close to a swing in probability that makes it more worth it. Rather go for it when you need it.

[Ravens2006]

Yeah, that's my take. Sometimes I think if you know you're 8 points away, that "last" drive might not be run as urgently and you wind up with less time in the event you don't get it. Again, you have to get a 2 somewhere along the way... get it now or get it later. Does it REALLY matter? If you fail early then you know what you have to make up late. If you fail late, it might wind up being "later" in the clock, and you have less time to try to make it up.

[CantonJester]

I mean, it makes perfect sense IMO. I don't understand how you can say it makes *no* sense. I don't understand your side at all, sorry.

 

They knew they needed to get two at some point. If you know you've failed at 9 minutes left you still have time to remedy that. If you know you've failed at 12 seconds left like last week, you have no chance. Because they failed early they knew they had to play for an extra possession, which they got. Yeah, it took an unlikely onside, but they would have needed that anyway if they had failed the 2pt later. What is the big problem with going for it early?

 

ETA: disagreeing is one thing, I can see putting off the decision although I don't think that's optimal. I just don't agree with saying that this is clearly stupid and doesn't make any sense.

 

It tells me they don’t appreciate the margin of error involved as they gamed those scenarios. They arrived at a decision that you always go for 2 there. That tells me they don’t consider the fact those numbers are arrived at in a vacuum. It takes acumen out of the equation entirely. 

[russsnyder]

I mean, it makes perfect sense IMO. I don't understand how you can say it makes *no* sense. I don't understand your side at all, sorry.

They knew they needed to get two at some point. If you know you've failed at 9 minutes left you still have time to remedy that. If you know you've failed at 12 seconds left like last week, you have no chance. Because they failed early they knew they had to play for an extra possession, which they got. Yeah, it took an unlikely onside, but they would have needed that anyway if they had failed the 2pt later. What is the big problem with going for it early?

ETA: disagreeing is one thing, I can see putting off the decision although I don't think that's optimal. I just don't agree with saying that this is clearly stupid and doesn't make any sense.

Right.

Despite the decision, the Ravens were in a position to go ahead with a Tucker field goal with their final possession.

The Ravens fell short and were beaten. We can second guess Harbaugh all we want,but I think the Huntley fumble in the red zone hurt more than the missed two point conversion.

[CantonJester]

Yeah, that's my take. Sometimes I think if you know you're 8 points away, that "last" drive might not be run as urgently and you wind up with less time in the event you don't get it. Again, you have to get a 2 somewhere along the way... get it now or get it later. Does it REALLY matter? If you fail early then you know what you have to make up late. If you fail late, it might wind up being "later" in the clock, and you have less time to try to make it up.

 

Except if you kick the PAT, you only need a defensive stand. If you go for two and fail, you now require a stand and some kind of turnover to occur. 

 

Sorry, but that was pure hubris. 

[makoman]

Except if you kick the PAT, you only need a defensive stand. If you go for two and fail, you now require a stand and some kind of turnover to occur. 

 

Sorry, but that was pure hubris. 

But if you're saying that "you only need a defensive stand" you're assuming they make the 2 point conversion after that defensive stand. If they had made it after the first TD then everything would have been fine.

 

If instead you fail, the result is the same. It doesn't matter if you tried and failed early or late. But failing earlier gives you more information that you can use during the rest of the game, that you wouldn't have if you failed with 12 seconds left.

 

I fail to see how this is hubris at all. 

 

But I don't need to argue about this anymore, I'm done.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Feel of the game is a thing, even if it doesn’t get a spot on the analytics spreadsheet thing. Tired of this same discussion, many of the analytical 2 point decisions over the years have not worked out for the Ravens. That is not debatable.

[makoman]

Feel of the game is a thing, even if it doesn’t get a spot on the analytics spreadsheet thing. Tired of this same discussion, many of the analytical 2 point decisions over the years have not worked out for the Ravens. That is not debatable.

So, was the feel of the game different at 9 minutes left than it would have been at 2 minutes left? After a nice drive and strong momentum?

 

I agree with you that feel matters, but since they needed two no matter what today I don't think it mattered that much. This isn't like going for two 5 times or whatever against KC in 2019, here they needed it at some point so forget feel, you just try to get it when you can get it. Just like the Colts game.

 

The real problem is it seems like they really suck at going for two, which is probably another Roman complaint. I can't seem to find current stats right now, but my recollection is that Lamar was pretty terrible overall at going for two. It should be close to 50% but I think he was much less than that...I could definitely be wrong since I can't find it. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

You make the xp, it's 1 possession game.  
You miss the 2 point, it's a 2 possession game. 

That's the decision for me. 

 

Either way, obviously not a big deal big picture wise. 

Credit to the roster / coaches for not quitting and finding a way to get back into the game. 

They might have a win (even 2) left in them, but losing out looks more likely.  Damn broke, and too much to overcome. 

Prepare for '22...   would be shocking to me if the 1st round pick isn't a Tackle.

[JStruds]

Can anybody explain the logic and intent of a rule that allows a player on the receiving team to step OB, play a ball in bounds and incur a penalty against the kicking team? I mean rules should have a reason, right?

[russsnyder]

You make the xp, it's 1 possession game.
You miss the 2 point, it's a 2 possession game.

That's the decision for me.

Either way, obviously not a big deal big picture wise.

Credit to the roster / coaches for not quitting and finding a way to get back into the game.

They might have a win (even 2) left in them, but losing out looks more likely. Damn broke, and too much to overcome.

Prepare for '22... would be shocking to me if the 1st round pick isn't a Tackle.

Huntley, Bateman and Freeman all stepped up today. The defense played well the second half. The outlook doesn't look good for the rest of the season, but that's why you play. I could see the Ravens taking a tackle in the first round. They need to address the Oline.

[JStruds]

You make the xp, it's 1 possession game.
You miss the 2 point, it's a 2 possession game.

That's the decision for me.

Either way, obviously not a big deal big picture wise.

Credit to the roster / coaches for not quitting and finding a way to get back into the game.

They might have a win (even 2) left in them, but losing out looks more likely. Damn broke, and too much to overcome.

Prepare for '22... would be shocking to me if the 1st round pick isn't a Tackle.

Damned near an heroic effort all things considered.

Assuming Stanley truly is healthy, draft a RT and immediately cut Phillips and maybe Villanueva too.

[You Play to Win the Game]

So, was the feel of the game different at 9 minutes left than it would have been at 2 minutes left? After a nice drive and strong momentum?

 

I agree with you that feel matters, but since they needed two no matter what today I don't think it mattered that much. This isn't like going for two 5 times or whatever against KC in 2019, here they needed it at some point so forget feel, you just try to get it when you can get it. Just like the Colts game.

 

The real problem is it seems like they really suck at going for two, which is probably another Roman complaint. I can't seem to find current stats right now, but my recollection is that Lamar was pretty terrible overall at going for two. It should be close to 50% but I think he was much less than that...I could definitely be wrong since I can't find it. 

The real problem, is people here go out of their way to defend everything Harbaugh does. This isn't rocket science.

 

They do suck at 2 point tries. I want to see the part of the calculus that includes that into the equation. 

[cprenegade]

I fall on the side of kicking the xp and saving the try for two until later.  I understand the argument that you need a 2-pt conversion so why not try it immediately and if you fail now you have time to make it up.  But that assumes that just because you miss it earlier you would miss it later.  I prefer to keep it a one score game because now you dictate to the opposition that they just can't play to take time off of the clock.  Maybe they pass more than they would in a one score game and if they fail, it leaves more time on the clock.  As the opposition, if it's a one score game I know that I still need to be a little aggressive.  If it's a two score game, my eye is going to be on the clock.  I'm taking it down to near 0 on every play.  I see both sides, but I like keeping it a one score game as long as possible and worrying about the lower pct. 2-pt play only when I have to.  

 

But it's not just Harbuagh.  I saw Mike Tomlin do the same thing in Pittsburgh's attempted comeback Thursday night.  Down 29-14, Pittsburgh scores and goes for two.  So instead of being down 29-21, a one score game, now they are down 29-20 and need two scores.  I questioned it then as well.