for 4th down nerds - kahneman's new book on how people think

[Millhouse]

http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2011/12/thinking-fast-and-slow.html

this is ottointhesnotto length - sorry

Kahneman Nobel prize winning economist/psych guy. I haven't read the book yet but the book's insight is that have two ways of thinking. 1. fast pattern recognition with crude probability buckets, simple decision rules. 2. conscious thought, much slower. we rely on both because you don't have the time or attention to analyze everything so in depth.

When thinking fast, we group things into buckets, possible, impossible, certain. Explains why people will buy expensive fire insurance (loss from fire goes from possible to impossible) while buying expensive lottery tickets relative to expected value (insane wealth goes from impossible to possible). You don't neccessarily know the expected probabilities, you just move from one bucket to another.

I think this is what goes on with most coaches. They don't know the expected values or can't think of them fast enough so when faced with a 4th down, they think "failing is possible but punting inside the 20 is certain." never mind that it's not certain, that's how they think spur of the moment. "not converting = possible, punt far away = certain... tick tock uh tick tock ok ok punt certain certain certain"

haven't thought this through entirely but assuming that coaches think in terms of crude probability buckets might explain a lot of their irrational decisions. the thing is that this data exists and can be right at your disposal, it doesn't require much conscious thought, just let go and rely on the chart or computer upstairs.

being able to think fast is very important for coaches. this isn't to say that slower thinking coaches are stupid - i don't know how fast a thinker einstein was, maybe he would've been bad at this stuff too with seconds ticking away. who wants to admit that they don't think fast? hiring someone to handle these probabilistic thinking duties would tell the world, "I'm not great at thinking fast on my feet!"

 

[qdawgg]

I think you bring up an interesting topic. One problem with message boards and judging certain decisions that are made during a game is that unlike the coach we have 3 advantages: Time, focus, and outcome.

- Sitting at home and thinking about a certain play the following day we have all the time in the world to 2nd guess and then back it up with stastical information from the last 30 years or the last 2 weeks of the season. Whatever statistics best suite our argument

- We also don't have all of the other issues to deal with at the same time that the coaching staff has. A coach not only has the specific play running through his head but at the same time he might be subconsciously distracted by 2 teammates arguing on the sidelines or a Michael Hay personal foul (that has or hasn't happened in yet but definitely will happen). When you add this and the time issue together it makes decision making even more difficult - obviously.

- We also know the outcome. That makes pretending we know what to do a lot easier when we already know what happened.

 

[Millhouse]

I think you bring up an interesting topic. One problem with message boards and judging certain decisions that are made during a game is that unlike the coach we have 3 advantages: Time, focus, and outcome.

- Sitting at home and thinking about a certain play the following day we have all the time in the world to 2nd guess and then back it up with stastical information from the last 30 years or the last 2 weeks of the season. Whatever statistics best suite our argument

- We also don't have all of the other issues to deal with at the same time that the coaching staff has. A coach not only has the specific play running through his head but at the same time he might be subconsciously distracted by 2 teammates arguing on the sidelines or a Michael Hay personal foul (that has or hasn't happened in yet but definitely will happen). When you add this and the time issue together it makes decision making even more difficult - obviously.

- We also know the outcome. That makes pretending we know what to do a lot easier when we already know what happened.

i can't speak for anyone else, but I promise that I flip out in those few seconds where someone punts on 4th and 1 from the 45. it's not hindsight for me. if coaches are distracted, they should give someone else that responsibility who isn't so distracted.

if coaches need simple crude rules, you can create new ones tilted more towards rationality. never punt inside the 40. never punt on 4th and short inside the 50. etc.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

this is ottointhesnotto length - sorry

You couldn't do better than that?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think you bring up an interesting topic. One problem with message boards and judging certain decisions that are made during a game is that unlike the coach we have 3 advantages: Time, focus, and outcome.

if coaches need simple crude rules, you can create new ones tilted more towards rationality. never punt inside the 40. never punt on 4th and short inside the 50. etc.

I completely agree with Millhouse. You can make new rules. Chip Kelly has new rules. In my head the buckets are different than what most coaches on the field have in their heads. Time, focus and outcome don't affect that. I'm using quick and dirty thought processes the same, I just have different ones that involve a mentality that says that controlling the ball and scoring points is what wins, and if you're going to get the ball from me either I made a mistake or I'm really desperate, because no way no how am I going to make the choice to kick it to you.

 

[Millhouse]

You couldn't do better than that?

typo

 

[kingottoiii]

i can't speak for anyone else, but I promise that I flip out in those few seconds where someone punts on 4th and 1 from the 45. it's not hindsight for me. if coaches are distracted, they should give someone else that responsibility who isn't so distracted.

if coaches need simple crude rules, you can create new ones tilted more towards rationality. never punt inside the 40. never punt on 4th and short inside the 50. etc.

HCs really need game managers. Someone to keep track of when to go for it on 4th, when to go for 2, when to challenge a call, and to keep track of time management. The HCs who accept this and hire dedicated guys to control this will be ahead of the curve.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

HCs really need game managers. Someone to keep track of when to go for it on 4th, when to go for 2, when to challenge a call, and to keep track of time management. The HCs who accept this and hire dedicated guys to control this will be ahead of the curve.

Bill Simmons has advocated a long time for this. He likes to point out Andy Reid as a guy that's a great coach all week except for the last 10 minutes of a game.

 

[Scooch]

HCs really need game managers. Someone to keep track of when to go for it on 4th, when to go for 2, when to challenge a call, and to keep track of time management. The HCs who accept this and hire dedicated guys to control this will be ahead of the curve.

Totally agree. Hell, they should just use grad assistants so it doesn't count against their allotment of coaches. Every college in America is teeming with geeks who can write formulas to determine when to go for it and when to punt. Have said geek in the booth with his Macbook.

The challenge is to find a coach who will commit. I think many might agree with this approach in theory, but as soon as the first 4th and 5 from the opponents 46 comes up in the first quarter, they're punting. Fear is a powerful motivator.

 

[Chip]

HCs really need game managers. Someone to keep track of when to go for it on 4th, when to go for 2, when to challenge a call, and to keep track of time management. The HCs who accept this and hire dedicated guys to control this will be ahead of the curve.

It's a great idea, but I think too many would either be too stubborn or too insecure to do it. Stubborn in that they think they can make that decision better than anyone. Insecure (for coaches who truly delegate to qualified OCs and DCs) in that they feel like if they're not making those decisions, someone will wonder what they are paid for?

 

[Scooch]

It's a great idea, but I think too many would either be too stubborn or too insecure to do it. Stubborn in that they think they can make that decision better than anyone. Insecure (for coaches who truly delegate to qualified OCs and DCs) in that they feel like if they're not making those decisions, someone will wonder what they are paid for?

It is kind of amazing that in most corporations the very best executives are the one's who hire great people, delegate accordingly, and stick to the big picture stuff. Yet in the head coaching profession most of them are insane micro-managers who work so many hours it gets to the point of diminishing returns.

Also funny to me that basketball coaches seem to have a MUCH better balance in terms of working hours and delegation.

 

[Millhouse]

It is kind of amazing that in most corporations the very best executives are the one's who hire great people, delegate accordingly, and stick to the big picture stuff. Yet in the head coaching profession most of them are insane micro-managers who work so many hours it gets to the point of diminishing returns.

Also funny to me that basketball coaches seem to have a MUCH better balance in terms of working hours and delegation.

another funny thing about it is even though our basketball coach is probably the best of them all in terms of working hours and delegation, he is so good with mental probabilities and thinking on his feet that he'd be able to handle those decisions even with a lot of distractions.

 

[kingottoiii]

It is kind of amazing that in most corporations the very best executives are the one's who hire great people, delegate accordingly, and stick to the big picture stuff. Yet in the head coaching profession most of them are insane micro-managers who work so many hours it gets to the point of diminishing returns.

Also funny to me that basketball coaches seem to have a MUCH better balance in terms of working hours and delegation.

It is funny most companies use outside consultants to make a lot of decisions. It gives them a different perspective and takes blame away from execs. The consulting industry is pretty big. For a HC it would be easy to blame a game management decision on the coach assigned to it. Win win.