The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible • Hacker News Board

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#11

Post by skwirl » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:28 AM UTC

robryan wrote: post #8

As someone who doesn't follow the NFL I am surprised that they allow the teams to supply their own balls. Seems it would be less complicated and achieve an even playing field if everyone had to use the same balls supplied by the league. Does this happen in baseball/ basketball as well? From an Australian perspective it seems unusual.

Quarterbacks like their footballs to be broken in a bit, and they all have their own preference for doing it. They lobbied the NFL years back to let them break in the game footballs and the NFL said OK. They have to use official NFL footballs and they are SUPPOSED to be properly inflated at game time. Each team uses their own footballs while on offense.

I doubt this happens in basketball because the same ball is being handled by numerous people on both teams, so it wouldn't be fair to let one player or team break the ball in to their own preferences. The same would be true of your AFL. In the NFL, teams are using their own broken in balls, and the quarterback is (usually) the only guy who has to actually throw it.

Baseballs only last a couple of pitches and offense/defense are completely different games, so I seriously doubt anyone is allowed to do anything to any ball before the game. When a pitcher gets a new ball it is already pre-rubbed in a special mud, and they can rub it in dirt a bit but they can't put anything that will stick to the ball on it as it gives the pitcher an advantage.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#12

Post by sehr » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:29 AM UTC

robryan wrote: post #8

As someone who doesn't follow the NFL I am surprised that they allow the teams to supply their own balls. Seems it would be less complicated and achieve an even playing field if everyone had to use the same balls supplied by the league. Does this happen in baseball/ basketball as well? From an Australian perspective it seems unusual.

They all use the exact same model of ball, they're just not carried around by league officials to every game.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#13

Post by gopher2 » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:31 AM UTC

skwirl wrote: post #9

jsyedidia wrote: post #4

If you watch Patriots games, you'll see that if Patriots running backs fumble, they get benched. If they do it again they get released. Belichick is maniacal about getting on his players about fumbling. That is a simple explanation. The team has been well-coached for a long time. If you think the Patriots' success is all from deflated balls, you need to explain how they out-scored the Colts 28-0 in the second half (a…

Fumbling players being treated harshly by their coaches is true of every team as far as I know. That said, I still think it's more likely that the Patriots have some unique practice/drilling regimen that results in less fumbles than they are regularly using deflated balls to their advantage. This is interesting in and of itself, so no matter what, I think this is an interesting analysis. But it's hard for me to belie…

Wouldn't be particularly surprising if the ball PSI gradually decreased over time. Brady likes ball as low PSI as is allowed within the rules, and they probably became more and more comfortable with pushing the boundaries over time.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#14

Post by abram » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:31 AM UTC

It would be interesting to get the stats on fumbles during kickoff/punt returns (when a neutral kicking ball is in use, not a team-supplied offensive ball), and on plays involving interceptions or fumble recoveries (where they would be using the other team's ball). If they rank highly in fumble prevention in those situations, it would suggest that this is a result of coaching, not using a particular ball.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#15

Post by roganp » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:33 AM UTC

fecak wrote: post #7

jsyedidia wrote: post #4

If you watch Patriots games, you'll see that if Patriots running backs fumble, they get benched. If they do it again they get released. Belichick is maniacal about getting on his players about fumbling. That is a simple explanation. The team has been well-coached for a long time. If you think the Patriots' success is all from deflated balls, you need to explain how they out-scored the Colts 28-0 in the second half (a…

Over the past two seasons there have been 9 total fumbles by Patriot running backs - only 1 all this year. All of those backs are still employed by the Patriots. Over those two seasons, the majority of fumbles came from Brady and Edelman. Of the backs that fumbled in 2012, only Woodhead is gone. He fumbled only once. Two backs fumbled in 2011, once each. Woodhead (who is gone) and Ridley, who is still a Patriot. Patr…

Couldn't this be tested by looking a the frequency of fumbles made by backs before and after they play for the patriots? I mean, if the explanation of the patriots low fumble rate is because they deflated the balls then it should cause a corresponding jump in fumbles for those running backs that move on to other teams (who presumably are not deflating the balls).

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#16

Post by Anechoic » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:37 AM UTC

jonjenk wrote: post #2

Analyzing outlying statistics across all the available variables would be an interesting technique to try to predict other potential rules violations. This could apply to many different types of sporting events. I wonder if anyone is working on this problem? Despite a few nit picky issues I have with this particular analysis of the Patriots fumble data it's probably the strongest evidence I've seen so far that there…

it's probably the strongest evidence I've seen so far that there has likely been a persistent rules violation.

That's only true if ball inflation tracks with fumbles. There have been lots of assertions that's the case, but I haven't seen any evidence.

Two counter examples:

- If you look at AFCC, that's Patriots had 1 fumble in the first half playing with an underinflated ball in dry weather conditions, and had zero fumbles in the second half playing with properly inflated balls, and in wet conditions.

- Aaron Rodgers is on record stating that he likes his footballs to be inflated as high as possible. But if you look at GB's fumble data in the link, they're #6 behind NE in total fumbles.

There are a whole bunch of confounding variables here, including coaching techniques (look at how Tiki Barber's corrected his fumble problems in one year after coaching changes).

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#17

Post by Anechoic » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:48 AM UTC

roganp wrote: post #15

fecak wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the past two seasons there have been 9 total fumbles by Patriot running backs - only 1 all this year. All of those backs are still employed by the Patriots. Over those two seasons, the majority of fumbles came from Brady and Edelman. Of the backs that fumbled in 2012, only Woodhead is gone. He fumbled only once. Two backs fumbled in 2011, once each. Woodhead (who is gone) and Ridley, who is still a Patriot. Patr…

Couldn't this be tested by looking a the frequency of fumbles made by backs before and after they play for the patriots? I mean, if the explanation of the patriots low fumble rate is because they deflated the balls then it should cause a corresponding jump in fumbles for those running backs that move on to other teams (who presumably are not deflating the balls).

Danny Woodhead: 0 fumbles with NY Jets in 2009-2010 (didn't play much), 1 fumble with NE Pats from 2010-2012, 1 fumble with SD Chargers 2013-2014 (did not play full year with SD in 2014 due to injury, but had many more attempts in 2013 with SD than with NE). http://www.nfl.com/player/dannywoodhead/4327/careerstats

LeGarrette Blount: 3 fumbles each year with TB Bucs, 2010-2011 & no fumbles in 2012, 3 fumbles with NE Pats, 2013, 1 fumble with Steelers in early 2014, 0 fumbles with NE Pats in late 2014 http://www.nfl.com/player/legarretteblount/497149/profile

Laurance Maroney: 1 fumble in 2006, 4 fumbles in 2009 with NE Pats, 0 fumbles with Den Broncos in 2010 http://www.nfl.com/player/laurencemaroney/2506884/profile

Sammy Morris: I'm not going to summarize his stats, but he has a whole bunch of fumbles with a bunch of teams including NE. http://www.nfl.com/player/sammymorris/2504126/profile

Those are all the running backs I can think of who played for the Patriots and other teams in recent years. I'm not going to bother with Corey Dillion since he was before 2007.

ftr I am a Patriots who hopes that there is no wrong doing but is trying to keep an open mind.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#18

Post by xofer » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:52 AM UTC

Is the author confusing "fumbles" and "fumbles lost" or am I?

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#19

Post by jsyedidia » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:56 AM UTC

fecak wrote: post #7

jsyedidia wrote: post #4

If you watch Patriots games, you'll see that if Patriots running backs fumble, they get benched. If they do it again they get released. Belichick is maniacal about getting on his players about fumbling. That is a simple explanation. The team has been well-coached for a long time. If you think the Patriots' success is all from deflated balls, you need to explain how they out-scored the Colts 28-0 in the second half (a…

Over the past two seasons there have been 9 total fumbles by Patriot running backs - only 1 all this year. All of those backs are still employed by the Patriots. Over those two seasons, the majority of fumbles came from Brady and Edelman. Of the backs that fumbled in 2012, only Woodhead is gone. He fumbled only once. Two backs fumbled in 2011, once each. Woodhead (who is gone) and Ridley, who is still a Patriot. Patr…

"Patriots backs simply don't fumble": Yes, because if they have a fumbling problem, they stop playing until they fix it (Ridley) or they cease being Patriots if they can't fix it (Maroney). Belichick is well-known for having a "doghouse" for running backs who fumble.

"Your explanation isn't supported by the data": I wasn't trying to give an explanation supported by the data. I was trying to give an explanation for the data that makes sense and is supported by observing the Patriots play.

It's like saying Magnus Carlsen must cheat at chess, because the chance of him making so few errors is effectively zero assuming he makes errors at the rate that other grandmasters do.

Re: The New England Patriots’ prevention of fumbles is nearly impossible

#20

Post by Reebles » Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 1:56 AM UTC

robryan wrote: post #8

As someone who doesn't follow the NFL I am surprised that they allow the teams to supply their own balls. Seems it would be less complicated and achieve an even playing field if everyone had to use the same balls supplied by the league. Does this happen in baseball/ basketball as well? From an Australian perspective it seems unusual.

Baseballs are heavily regulated in game due to the long legacy of doctoring the ball to achieve otherwise impossible movement on pitched balls. Each ball in play goes through the home plate umpire before making it to the pitcher/catcher.

Of course in baseball you'll still occasionally see the pitcher with a hidden "foreign substance" used to doctor the ball once they get ahold of it. Back 20ish years ago it was not too rare for a pitcher to be discovered with a nail file or scratching the ball on their belt buckle. Generally this is seen as "part of the game", and well, there are admitted spitballers/nail-filers in the hall of fame and nobody really cares. Nowadays, if a pitcher gets caught with a "foreign substance" (usually pine tar), they are usually suspended for a few games, the media goes into a frenzy, and retired baseball players say they all did it too.