Converts: 1 point or 2?

The Place for BC Lion Discussion. A forum for Lions fans to talk and chat about our team.
Discussion, News, Information and Speculation regarding the BC Lions and the CFL.
Prowl, Growl and Roar!

Moderator: Team Captains

Qman
Champion
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 12:59 pm
Location: Section 240

more math on the 2pt convert.. Calgary is doing it right ... tedford wake up


https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 12087.html
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Qman wrote:more math on the 2pt convert.. Calgary is doing it right ... tedford wake up


https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 12087.html
It's interesting that Edmonton, with one of the worst kickers in the league and a coach who loves to gamble, has attempted only one 2-point convert (and failed). The Esks play Calgary three times in the second half of the season. They'll have to change their thinking or risk falling behind on every touchdown.
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

Qman wrote:more math on the 2pt convert.. Calgary is doing it right ... tedford wake up


https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 12087.html
Still, when you have a struggling FG kicker and the Stamps O line and Jon Cornish...oops, out with injuries.

I think there is a big situational factor on the decision so if you go for 2 and miss it then you are likely to go for 2 after your next TD as a sort of catch up play.

Regardless of what is the best option or whether ball position for 1 or 2 needs tweaking, the new rules/options are a great improvement over the automatic 1 point kick. :good:
Qman
Champion
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 12:59 pm
Location: Section 240

DanoT wrote:
Qman wrote:more math on the 2pt convert.. Calgary is doing it right ... tedford wake up


https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 12087.html
Still, when you have a struggling FG kicker and the Stamps O line and Jon Cornish...oops, out with injuries.

I think there is a big situational factor on the decision so if you go for 2 and miss it then you are likely to go for 2 after your next TD as a sort of catch up play.

Regardless of what is the best option or whether ball position for 1 or 2 needs tweaking, the new rules/options are a great improvement over the automatic 1 point kick. :good:
no calgary is going for 2 every time last game.

They think of of it as going for 1.4 every time they line up at the 3 (your not going to get every one) instead of 1 from the 32. Your going to be better off over time.
User avatar
Toppy Vann
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9789
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm

Qman wrote:
DanoT wrote:
Qman wrote:more math on the 2pt convert.. Calgary is doing it right ... tedford wake up


https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 12087.html
Still, when you have a struggling FG kicker and the Stamps O line and Jon Cornish...oops, out with injuries.

I think there is a big situational factor on the decision so if you go for 2 and miss it then you are likely to go for 2 after your next TD as a sort of catch up play.

Regardless of what is the best option or whether ball position for 1 or 2 needs tweaking, the new rules/options are a great improvement over the automatic 1 point kick. :good:
no calgary is going for 2 every time last game.

They think of of it as going for 1.4 every time they line up at the 3 (your not going to get every one) instead of 1 from the 32. Your going to be better off over time.

Statistics are fine but a coach can't be making an in-game decisions solely on stats.

Lions went up 21 to 0 over Argos and all were the 1 pt variety. Given the way the Lions dominated the start of the game, it might be a fair call to go for 2 but let's say the Lions get stuffed. Then repeat on the next TD - eventually they are risking momentum off those plays shifting to their opponent. I was happy just to the 21 pt lead.

But I get where folks are going with this. With the odds looking good and your offense going - why not go for 2 more often. Maybe as when both teams do it is is not like you're going to lose 18 to 21 if you do as the Lions did - score 3 quick ones and then they score 3 but the facts are you could have had that scenario if the your team fails all 3 and the opponent just kicks singles.

stats all look back.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
User avatar
sj-roc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7539
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: Kerrisdale

B.C.FAN wrote:Through Week 5, teams are still attempting 1-point converts more than two-thirds of the time. Here are the updated success rates:

1-point attempts: 58 of 72 (80.6%). Points per attempt: 0.806
2-point attempts: 21 of 29 (72.4%). Points per attempt: 1.448

Of the 2-point attempts:
Run attempts: 6 of 8 (75.0%) - see note
Pass attempts: 15 of 21 (71.4%) - see note

With 1-point and 2-point converts having similar success rates, teams that don't attempt 2-point converts are leaving points on the field.

Note: There is at least one error in the official CFL stats package relating to the number of running and passing converts and success rates in Game 12, and the overall success of running and passing attempts, so these numbers do not coincide with the official league stats. I haven't doubled checked other games.
Interestingly these success rates differ a fair bit from what we saw in the preseason. I posted in the "rule changes for 2015" thread this article by Kirk Penton who recapped the numbers from that period.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/06/20/cf ... pre-season

Excerpt:
CONVERTS

One point convert kicks have moved from the 12 to the 32 yard line this season, which means it’s no longer automatic.

Teams attempted 33 convert kicks during the pre-season, and the placekickers made good on 30 of them, which works out to a 91% success rate. Last year the success rate on field goals between 31 and 33 yards was only 81%.

Two point converts have been moved up to the three yard line from the five in an attempt to lure teams to try more of them, and CFL squads were 4-for-8 in the pre-season.

The thinking was the one and two point converts would be similar in their odds of success, but it looks like the convert will continue to win.

So it’s simple: Move the convert back to the 50! (Kidding).
1PC attempts were much more successful in preseason than what we're seeing now, while 2PC bids fared significantly worse at 50% than where they are now at over 70%.

Back to the reg season numbers: also of note is that while 1PCs have only been clicking around 80%, a stat someone posted recently had it that FGAs from similar distances, 30-33yds (not sure how many of these) have ALL been made without fail. Is the greater point value of the FG a motivator here?

Or are we simply seeing — perhaps also for the reg/pre season splits — the limitations of statistics based on insufficient amounts of data?

Here's another odd thing about the 1PC/FG-from-same-distance dichotomy. On FGAs the spot of the ball — and I'm talking laterally here on wherever the LOS happens to fall — is wherever the play was blown dead previously (or the nearest hash mark if blown dead outside these). So the kicker doesn't always get his preferred angle to the goal posts, whereas on convert attempts teams do have this option to spot the ball wherever they like between the hash marks — anywhere at all.

Yet it's with this freedom that kickers are having less accuracy from approx 30-33yds out. If anything, one would think a difference in 1PC/FG success rates from similar distances ought to favour the 1PCs, all else being equal. But this clearly isn't the case so far. It could again be statistical limitations.

I would imagine the NFL is quietly watching the impact of our new convert rules. They considered several options in changing their convert rules and went with the one most resembling ours, which also comes into effect this year.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/5/19/8 ... n-approved
NFL approves rule changes to extra point

By Katie Sharp, Tue May 19, 2015

The NFL approved rule changes to the way extra points and two-point conversions are handled at owners meetings on Tuesday.

The NFL owners approved rule changes to the extra point Tuesday at the spring meetings in San Francisco. The proposal that was eventually set forth by the competition committee -- the one which moves the extra point try without moving the yard line for a two-point conversion attempt -- is the one that passed.

Currently the line of scrimmage for both the extra point and two-point conversion is at the 2-yard line. Kicking the extra point there -- the equivalent of a 20-yard field goal -- essentially makes a touchdown worth seven points because of the near-purrfect accuracy of kickers from that distance. Kickers have made at least 99 percent of extra points in each of the last five seasons, and there hasn't even been a season under 97 percent since 1988.

The adoption of the two-point conversion in 1994 added a strategic wrinkle to game-calling. Teams had the choice to either take the safe extra point or go for two points by trying to get into the end zone from the 2-yard line. Last year, teams converted 47.5 percent (27 of 56) of their two-point attempts. Since the rule was adopted, there have been only four seasons with a success rate of better than 50 percent.

The reason this is significant is that other proposals that were voted on included a change that would move the two-point conversion attempt up to the 1-yard line, which would convince teams to go for it more often. Last season, teams had a 57.5 percent success rate both rushing and throwing for touchdowns from the 1-yard line.

Now the ball will be placed at the 15-yard line for the extra point, making the kick a more difficult 33-yard attempt. Over the last five seasons, teams have made roughly 93 percent of field goals from that distance, meaning that the decision to kick the extra point is no longer a mere formality after scoring a touchdown.

Another interesting twist is that the ball will be live after the extra point or two-point conversion attempt. This means that the defense has a chance to score two points if they force a turnover. It makes the post-touchdown play a much more interesting one from a defensive perspective and will force teams to really consider the personnel they use on extra points and two-point conversion attempts.

It's worth noting that teams which line up at the 15-yard line can still score two points if they get into the end zone, whether because they faked it or had to abort the kick attempt. Teams are also allowed to change their mind if penalties occur. If it's an offensive penalty, they can choose to kick the ball from the 20-yard line (in the case of a false start) or the 25-yard line (in the case of holding) for one point. If it's a defensive penalty, they can try a two-point attempt from the 1-yard line.

Safeties also come into the equation. Philadelphia's proposal would have made any safety worth two points, but under the accepted competition committee proposal, they will be worth one point, regardless which direction they go. If the defense possesses the ball, leaves the end zone and then re-enters the end zone, the offense can get a safety if they make a tackle. If the offense possesses the ball and somehow manages to be taken for a 90-plus yard safety, the defense would get one point.

The Oakland Raiders and Washington both voted against the extra point rule change, according to Mike Garafolo of FOX Sports.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Scott Mitchell of the Calgary Sun has written a good feature on how the Stampeders are using the convert rules to their advantage, and on the success rates of all teams.
Calgary Stampeders making good use of two-point convert this season

Some excerpts:

OC Dave Dickenson:
We've been great," Dickenson said. "It's like the best part of our team right now. We practised it a lot more than in the past, and just like anything else, the more practice, the more time you spend on it, you should be better at it."
-------
"If you looked at it, if you went for two every time, you'd probably score more points at the end of the game," Dickenson said.
QB Bo Levi Mitchell:
"It makes it more enticing to not play it so safe sometimes," Mitchell said. "Typically, you kind of wait until the end of the game to go for that two-point conversion, but the way it is now, you can kind of go for it a little more, especially when you're already up. Once you're already up, I think, that's the biggest thing, our philosophy is to kind of go for two and try and get up as much as you can and always make it tough on the other team."
LEAGUE-WIDE TWO-POINT CONVERT SUCCESS RATE

TEAM-BY-TEAM
Stampeders 6-for-6 100%
Tiger-Cats 2-for-2 100%
Blue Bombers 2-for-2 100%
Lions 1-for-1 100%
Roughriders 4-of-6 67%
RedBlacks 3-of-5 60%
Argonauts 3-of-5 60%
Alouettes 0-of-1 0%
Eskimos 0-of-1 0%
The Stamps have good offensive coaches, good players and a lot of confidence in themselves. That helps. But they also know the odds are stacked in their favour, especially when they're 100% on 2-point converts and only 60% on 1-pointers. It makes the decision pretty easy.
User avatar
DanoT
Hall of Famer
Posts: 4309
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Victoria, B.C. in summer, Sun Peaks Resort in winter

The Lions need to focus on getting points. There is no need to worry about points after if there are few TDs.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Interestingly, there was only one 2-point convert attempted in Week 6 (by the Argos) and it failed, while teams went a purrfect 16 for 16 on 1-point attempts.

Through Week 6, here are the updated success rates:

1-point attempts: 74 of 88 (84.1%). Points per attempt: 0.841
2-point attempts: 21 of 30 (70.0%). Points per attempt: 1.400

Two teams (Hamilton and Saskatchewan) remain purrfect on 1-point attempts: a combined 22 of 22.
Four teams (Hamilton, Calgary, Winnipeg and B.C.) remain purrfect on 2-point attempts: a combined 11 of 11.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

A third of the way through the season, teams are becoming more proficient at kicking 1-point converts and more strategic at attempting 2-point converts. Teams were a purrfect 19 for 19 in 1-point converts in Week 7 and 2 for 2 in 2-point converts.

Both 2-point attempts this week were strategic. B.C. took a 3-point lead with a late 2-point pass to Shawn Gore in the Lions' 26-23 victory over Edmonton. Toronto pulled into a 16-16 tie with Saskatchewan with a 2-point pass to eligible O-lineman Wayne Smith in the third quarter of their eventual 30-26 victory.

Through Week 7, here are the updated success rates:

1-point attempts: 93 of 107 (86.9%). Points per attempt: 0.869
2-point attempts: 23 of 32 (71.9%). Points per attempt: 1.438
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

The New York Times has published a feature on the new CFL convert rules, interviewing Montreal kicker Boris Bede, head coach Tom Higgins and CFL statistician Steve Daniel, a the NFL prepares to make similar changes this season.
Bede, who is 9 for 12 on extra points, said he spent considerably more time practicing extra points than in years past. At 6 feet 4, 225 pounds, he is an example of the strong-legged kickers who are now more desirable in the C.F.L. The Alouettes released Sean Whyte, one of the most reliable kickers in the league, in favor of Bede because of Bede’s strong leg.

Under the new rules in both leagues, if an extra point is deflected and caught within the end zone, it can be returned by the defense to the opposite end zone for 2 points. Therefore, teams need the kicker to launch the ball out of the end zone, particularly in the C.F.L., where goal posts are on the goal line and end zones are 20 yards deep.

“Everybody’s going to stronger-legged kickers,” said Higgins, the Alouettes’ coach.
As N.F.L. Prepares for Longer Extra Points, C.F.L. Offers a Preview
User avatar
sj-roc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7539
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: Kerrisdale

Latest efficiency stats on convert attempts, through Week 8:

1PC: 106/126 = 84.1%
2PC: 24/33 = 72.7%

There was only one 2PC attempted in Week 8 (a successful one by Cgy against Ott in the week's final game) but after two purrfect weeks (19/19 in Week 7, 16/16 in Week 6) there were six failed 1PC attempts: one by Mtl (vs Edm) in the week's first game, another by Cgy, and one by each team in the week's other two games. It was the most 1PC fails in one week so far this year, with five fails in Week 3 previously being the most.

This chart shows how the 1PC (in black) and 2PC (and orange) efficiencies have evolved with each attempt.

Image

There was a streak of 41 1PCs made in row starting after Tor's Ronnie Pfeffer missed one here in Week 5 (July 24). After that the next miss was the aforementioned one by Mtl last week. At no other point this year has there been a streak of more than 11 in a row.

Here's a comparison of how league-wide 1PC and FG efficiencies are evolving with each attempt. The average FGA so far this year is from 34yds which is not too far from the new standard 32yd distance for 1PCs this year so maybe it's not too surprising that the two curves seem to be converging to similar percentages as the data accumulates.

Image

The first half of the orange curve shows that there was at one point a league-wide streak of 34 successful FGAs. Interestingly the fails that bookend this streak were both from 36yds, the latter of which was the miss from Paul McCallum after he had earlier in that game glared at the Lions' bench having just made one from 50yds, which was the last FG of that streak of 34. The streak included 10 attempts of at least 40yds and four from at least 50yds (which includes Leone's 56yder vs Ssk, the longest of the year so far), yet there were five failed 1PC attempts during this FG streak. The next longest FG streak this year is 16.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
Qman
Champion
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 12:59 pm
Location: Section 240

Still don't get why we don't got for 2 pointers every time, you are going for 1.4 every time given 70% hit rate.

As well, the lions have bar none the best 2nd & 3 conversion rate in the league at 83% ... league average is 71% this season at that distance.
User avatar
B.C.FAN
Team Captain
Posts: 12580
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:28 pm

Qman wrote:Still don't get why we don't got for 2 pointers every time, you are going for 1.4 every time given 70% hit rate.
I've been saying that all year. With all teams having played eight games, the odds have stabilized.

1-point attempts: 123 of 147 (83.7%). Points per attempt: 0.837
2-point attempts: 28 of 38 (73.7%). Points per attempt: 1.474

The Lions are close to the league averages:
On 1-point attempts, Leone went 1 for 1 last week and is 12 of 14 overall (85.7%), which ranks third in the league.
On 2-point attempts, the Lions missed their first attempt of the season last week when Lulay was sacked and are 2 of 3 overall (.667%).

Calgary went 1 for 2 on 2-point attempts last weekend but still leads the league in 2-pointers made, with 8 on 9 attempts.
User avatar
sj-roc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7539
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: Kerrisdale

Qman wrote:Still don't get why we don't got for 2 pointers every time, you are going for 1.4 every time given 70% hit rate.

As well, the lions have bar none the best 2nd & 3 conversion rate in the league at 83% ... league average is 71% this season at that distance.
It's like a mutual fund: past performance may not be repeated. I'm not sure that latter 83% stat is the best indicator of potential 2PCA success anyway.

For one thing, if I'm looking at the same 83% stat as you, I think you might be misinterpreting that stat as it measures success on 3yds to go OR LESS, meaning some of the plays gained less than 3yds yet still moved the chains. It's not telling you how often a team gains at least 3yds on 2nd down. So you'd have to throw those <3yd gains for conversion out of the mix; no telling where everyone's %ages end up after this.

Also I'd be interested to know how often we're gaining at least 3yds on ALL of our offensive plays, not just 2nd down (possibly less the plays that are 3rd & less than 3 where the goal is mainly just to move the chains rather than the yardage gained). This might provide a better indicator.

EDIT: Further to my 2nd point, I had a look at our 1st game this year. I counted 56 plays that we ran on offence, of which 53 had at least 3 yards to go for 1st down (including 3+ YTG on goal-to-go plays). Of these 53, we moved the ball at least 3 yards on 31 occasions, or 31/53 = 58.5% of the time, less than that 83% stat indicates. I also went through the entire season to date: 461 total plays run on offence, 431 with at least 3YTG, and 253 where the gain was at least 3yds, so 253/461 = 58.7%.

So taking all of our plays on offence so far this year where we have 3+YTG on any down, including our 2PC attempts, we've moved the ball at least 3yds only 58.7% of the time.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.
Post Reply