Post by Richie3Jack on Jan 5, 2016 14:43:22 GMT -5
deadspin.com/the-browns-just-put-baseball-guy-paul-depodesta-in-char-1751131167
DePodesta was played by Jonah Hill in Moneyball as they decided to not use DePodesta's real name in the movie and instead went with 'Peter Brand.'
This is a bit of an odd one for sure, although DePodesta did play WR at Harvard.
DePodesta's work in MLB has been successful overall, but much is left to be desired. LA Times writer, Bill Plashke said that Hill did a masterful job of mimicking DePodesta (other than DePodesta being very fit and healthy). However, Plashke has been a long time critic of DePodesta.
DePodesta had the obvious success at Oakland, but was not all that successful when he became the GM for the Dodgers. He was then hired to be the VP of Player Development with the Mets while long time GM Sandy Alderson was the GM with the Mets. So, the success was there with the Mets, but it wasn't as the GM. The same could be said for the A's.
With the Browns he is supposed to be the Chief Strategy Officer. One of the major issues with advanced sports analytics in football is that you're supposed to go for it on 4th down a great *majority* of the time in the NFL
In fact, as you get to say the high school level, you should probably never *not* go for it on 4th down. Powerhouse Pulaski Academy out of Arkansas has a coach that never punts:
The premise of Kevin Kelley's work is fairly brilliant and I think can pay off even BIGGER dividends in the NFL.
One of the things that Kelley does as well is he never does your standard kickoff, he only does onside kicks. While I'm not sure about the onside kicks in the NFL and you really can't go for it *every* time on 4th down in the NFL...mainly due to the quality of kickers in the league that can put up an easy 3-points....
But, one of the beauties of going for it on 4th down is that it can be actually beneficial for the defense.
History has shown that defensive players are more than twice as likely to get injured as offensive players. And history has shown that there is a correlation between staying healthy and winning games in this league. IIRC, the Bengals are the least injured team this season and have not won 12 games in a season since 1988. And they did it without Andy Dalton for the last 3 games.
So, if you're going for it on 4th down and say 2 from your own 25-yard line and you get it....you're keeping your defense off the field, so they can't get injured. However, if you don't pickup the first down, even if the opponent scores a TD when they get the ball, at least they are scoring quickly so the defense won't be on the field for very long and you're more likely to keep the team healthy.
This is where I think Chip Kelly's offensive design was poorly thought out. He was using a no huddle and getting killed in time of possession. However, if he had been aggressive in going for it on 4th down...he would have been able to sustain some drives and if the defense got scored on...at least they were scored quickly on. They may have won games with wild 60-48 type scores...but at least they would win.
But, the main principle in going for it on 4th down is simple....the yards per play needed is dramatically less if you're going for it on 4 downs than if you have a standard, 3 plays and a kick methodology.
If I have 3 plays to get a first down, then I have to gain 3.34 yards per play in order to get the first down. If I'm playing 4 down ball, then I need 2.5 yards per play. That's a difference of 25%.
Let's say we throw on first down and have an incomplete pass. So on 2nd and 10 we would need 5 yards per play in traditional 3-down strategy and we would need 3.34 yards per play in 4-down strategy. That's a difference of 33%.
And if we have a 3rd and 10, that means we need 10 yards on that play in 3-down strategy versus 5 yards per play in 4-down strategy, a difference of 50%.
Another big thing about this strategy is that if a coach really had the mindset for it like Kevin Kelley has, it completely changes the playcalling on both sides of the ball.
These days what we see is teams get into 3rd and 4 or more and they are almost automatically going to throw the ball. And the defense usually lines up some sort of blitz package and it becomes a situation where you need a good QB and offense to get the ball off on time into the hands of the receiver before the blitz comes. And it's a good way to get your QB hurt if they are sending the blitz each time.
With 4-down strategy, a team can run the ball on 3rd and 4, or even 3rd and 7. Let's say you pick up 5 on a run on 3rd and 7...now you have a makeable 4th and 2...but in the meantime you may make defenses more gun shy in terms of blitzing if they know that you may not throw it. Or if you have a 3rd and 10, there's no need to have to throw the ball past the first down marker when you can throw it short, gain 7 yards and go for it on 4th and 3.
Those are just some of the important possibilities with 4-down strategy. Unfortunately, nobody has even come close to trying this in the NFL even with teams hiring statistical consultants. If DePodesta is worth his salt as a Chief Strategy Officer, he would implore the Browns to try this. And at this point, the Browns cannot become any more of an embarrassment.
3JACK
DePodesta was played by Jonah Hill in Moneyball as they decided to not use DePodesta's real name in the movie and instead went with 'Peter Brand.'
This is a bit of an odd one for sure, although DePodesta did play WR at Harvard.
DePodesta's work in MLB has been successful overall, but much is left to be desired. LA Times writer, Bill Plashke said that Hill did a masterful job of mimicking DePodesta (other than DePodesta being very fit and healthy). However, Plashke has been a long time critic of DePodesta.
DePodesta had the obvious success at Oakland, but was not all that successful when he became the GM for the Dodgers. He was then hired to be the VP of Player Development with the Mets while long time GM Sandy Alderson was the GM with the Mets. So, the success was there with the Mets, but it wasn't as the GM. The same could be said for the A's.
With the Browns he is supposed to be the Chief Strategy Officer. One of the major issues with advanced sports analytics in football is that you're supposed to go for it on 4th down a great *majority* of the time in the NFL
In fact, as you get to say the high school level, you should probably never *not* go for it on 4th down. Powerhouse Pulaski Academy out of Arkansas has a coach that never punts:
The premise of Kevin Kelley's work is fairly brilliant and I think can pay off even BIGGER dividends in the NFL.
One of the things that Kelley does as well is he never does your standard kickoff, he only does onside kicks. While I'm not sure about the onside kicks in the NFL and you really can't go for it *every* time on 4th down in the NFL...mainly due to the quality of kickers in the league that can put up an easy 3-points....
But, one of the beauties of going for it on 4th down is that it can be actually beneficial for the defense.
History has shown that defensive players are more than twice as likely to get injured as offensive players. And history has shown that there is a correlation between staying healthy and winning games in this league. IIRC, the Bengals are the least injured team this season and have not won 12 games in a season since 1988. And they did it without Andy Dalton for the last 3 games.
So, if you're going for it on 4th down and say 2 from your own 25-yard line and you get it....you're keeping your defense off the field, so they can't get injured. However, if you don't pickup the first down, even if the opponent scores a TD when they get the ball, at least they are scoring quickly so the defense won't be on the field for very long and you're more likely to keep the team healthy.
This is where I think Chip Kelly's offensive design was poorly thought out. He was using a no huddle and getting killed in time of possession. However, if he had been aggressive in going for it on 4th down...he would have been able to sustain some drives and if the defense got scored on...at least they were scored quickly on. They may have won games with wild 60-48 type scores...but at least they would win.
But, the main principle in going for it on 4th down is simple....the yards per play needed is dramatically less if you're going for it on 4 downs than if you have a standard, 3 plays and a kick methodology.
If I have 3 plays to get a first down, then I have to gain 3.34 yards per play in order to get the first down. If I'm playing 4 down ball, then I need 2.5 yards per play. That's a difference of 25%.
Let's say we throw on first down and have an incomplete pass. So on 2nd and 10 we would need 5 yards per play in traditional 3-down strategy and we would need 3.34 yards per play in 4-down strategy. That's a difference of 33%.
And if we have a 3rd and 10, that means we need 10 yards on that play in 3-down strategy versus 5 yards per play in 4-down strategy, a difference of 50%.
Another big thing about this strategy is that if a coach really had the mindset for it like Kevin Kelley has, it completely changes the playcalling on both sides of the ball.
These days what we see is teams get into 3rd and 4 or more and they are almost automatically going to throw the ball. And the defense usually lines up some sort of blitz package and it becomes a situation where you need a good QB and offense to get the ball off on time into the hands of the receiver before the blitz comes. And it's a good way to get your QB hurt if they are sending the blitz each time.
With 4-down strategy, a team can run the ball on 3rd and 4, or even 3rd and 7. Let's say you pick up 5 on a run on 3rd and 7...now you have a makeable 4th and 2...but in the meantime you may make defenses more gun shy in terms of blitzing if they know that you may not throw it. Or if you have a 3rd and 10, there's no need to have to throw the ball past the first down marker when you can throw it short, gain 7 yards and go for it on 4th and 3.
Those are just some of the important possibilities with 4-down strategy. Unfortunately, nobody has even come close to trying this in the NFL even with teams hiring statistical consultants. If DePodesta is worth his salt as a Chief Strategy Officer, he would implore the Browns to try this. And at this point, the Browns cannot become any more of an embarrassment.
3JACK