Michael Lewis wrote a really good piece (almost all of his pieces are good, IMHO) in last week’s Play magazine about N.F.L. kickers and whether the great “clutch” kickers like Adam Vinatieri are actually much better than the average kicker. Lewis’s verdict: not really. It’s just that a few random kicks turn out to be highly memorable (think Vinatieri in the snow against Oakland, or Scott Norwood missing for Buffalo in the Super Bowl).
Vinatieri himself was one of the main characters in Lewis’s piece. So it sure was nice of Vinatieri to go ahead and make Lewis look even smarter by missing a 29-yarder last night against San Diego that would have won the game.
Jinx? Nah. It’s called the law of averages. And, especially when it comes to sports, regression to the mean.
The best thing about Vinatieri’s miss is that his Colts and my Steelers are now tied at 7-2 for the second-best record in the A.F.C. Could it be another charmed season for my beloved black and gold?
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Zlguocius, if that is your real name
,
The law of averages is indeed a law: If I toss a coin 10 times, I might only get 30% heads, but if you want me to get arbitarily close to 50%, I can toss the coin enough times to get that percentage of heads. This is essentially the same as “regression to the mean” (i.e., the 30% in the first 10 flips was an aberration and not indicative of the true probability).
I think the point of the entry is that it’s a misconception that Vinateri (amongst others) is less likely to miss a 29 yard field goal with the game on the line than he would ordinarily. You’re right–it’s still small either way, but the point was that his missing the field goal might help dispel the view that he is clutch, and helped to illustrate the author’s finding that “clutchness” does not exist (whereas, if Vinateri had made the high percentage field goal, it would have been attributed by some to his clutchness, not to the underlying high probability event).
Zlguocius, if that is your real name
,
The law of averages is indeed a law: If I toss a coin 10 times, I might only get 30% heads, but if you want me to get arbitarily close to 50%, I can toss the coin enough times to get that percentage of heads. This is essentially the same as “regression to the mean” (i.e., the 30% in the first 10 flips was an aberration and not indicative of the true probability).
I think the point of the entry is that it’s a misconception that Vinateri (amongst others) is less likely to miss a 29 yard field goal with the game on the line than he would ordinarily. You’re right–it’s still small either way, but the point was that his missing the field goal might help dispel the view that he is clutch, and helped to illustrate the author’s finding that “clutchness” does not exist (whereas, if Vinateri had made the high percentage field goal, it would have been attributed by some to his clutchness, not to the underlying high probability event).
This isn’t the law of averages — it’s the law of aging. Vinatieri is over the hill. The Patriots let him go for a reason. He hasn’t made a kick from beyond 40 yards this season. As for Vinatieri in his prime, his resume is without parallel in NFL history — game-winning kicks in three Super Bowls — two of which broke tie games in the final seconds from beyond 40 yards. That’s enough of a statistical sample to convince me that he was clutch.
This isn’t the law of averages — it’s the law of aging. Vinatieri is over the hill. The Patriots let him go for a reason. He hasn’t made a kick from beyond 40 yards this season. As for Vinatieri in his prime, his resume is without parallel in NFL history — game-winning kicks in three Super Bowls — two of which broke tie games in the final seconds from beyond 40 yards. That’s enough of a statistical sample to convince me that he was clutch.
If you haven’t read Lewis’ Moneyball I HIGHLY recommend it. I’m planning on reading it again before the next baseball season begins. It’s full of Freakonomics.
If you haven’t read Lewis’ Moneyball I HIGHLY recommend it. I’m planning on reading it again before the next baseball season begins. It’s full of Freakonomics.
I respected you until I heard about your traitorous allegiances…GO BROWNS!
I respected you until I heard about your traitorous allegiances…GO BROWNS!