Colts hire new analytics guy

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Its not analytics if it wasn't hard as analytics.    Al simply believed I speed above all else.

 

When DHB ran sub-4.3, Al was convinced.   It didn't matter that he had terrible hands.   It didn't matter that he didn't run great routes.   He just saw another Cliff Branch and took him.

 

That's not analytics.

 

Al was as far from analytics as possible.

 

He also drafted Todd Marinovich because he was big

 

   “Analytics” has been around for years in other names

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

He also drafted Todd Marinovich because he was big

 

   “Analytics” has been around for years in other names

 

Al made lots of strange picks.     They had nothing to do with analytics.    They had to do with Al's view of the football world.      He wasn't using analystics.    He was using his opinion.

 

Besides,  analytics are like the old saying about computers....    put garbage in,  you get garbage out.

 

If you're not understanding the information you have,  then everything else is wasted.    I had talks with Raider scouts because they wanted the team to draft some QB from Southern Mississippi named.....   Favre.

 

What ever happened to him?

 

[PrincetonTiger]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Al made lots of strange picks.     They had nothing to do with analytics.    They had to do with Al's view of the football world.      He wasn't using analystics.    He was using his opinion.

 

Besides,  analytics are like the old saying about computers....    put garbage in,  you get garbage out.

 

If you're not understanding the information you have,  then everything else is wasted.    I had talks with Raider scouts because they wanted the team to draft some QB from Southern Mississippi named.....   Favre.

 

What ever happened to him?

 

It depends on what you consider a priority data set

   Everyone but the Falcons passed on Favre

    Every scout has their favorite 

 

 

   You do realize that I agree with the hire and understand it since I have a scouting/analytics background 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think we all know that's not what anyone means when the word "analytics" is used. 'Player X ran a great 40, that means he's fast,' isn't really analytics, it's just data. Analytics is the study of data to determine which information has the greatest and most direct correlation to success.

 

It's how we get from 'great 40 means he's fast' to 'great 10 yard split means he's quick in a short area,' which is far more valuable information for a trench player than 40 time.

 

And then the hardest part is applying that analysis to whatever field or area it relates to.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ AND THANK YOU!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

My mind went a little sideways and I couldn't crytalize this in my head.     Thanks for doing this.

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

35 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

It depends on what you consider a priority data set

   Everyone but the Falcons passed on Favre

    Every scout has their favorite 

 

 

   You do realize that I agree with the hire and understand it since I have a scouting/analytics background 

 

As I stated in one of my posts in this thread,   I believe in scouting.    Completely and absolutely.     I'm not trying to attack or diminish what you do.    Not in any way.   That's in part why I loved hiring Ballard with his scouting background.    And I was happy he signed the two player personnel guys from the Seahawks and the Jets.     

 

But I also believe in analytics.  The happy marriage of the two forms of evaluating talent is the difference between the best teams and everyone else.

 

I'm not stating this as an absolute fact,  but I'm not aware of any team that ignores analytics and goes only by scouting and is doing well.     Not one.      Again,  there may be one,  or maybe even more.    But they are few,  and far, far between.    They are the exceptions to the rule.

 

[lollygagger8]

Analytics is another tool for teams to try and get a leg up on the competition. Might as well use it

[chad72]

 

8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

As I stated in one of my posts in this thread,   I believe in scouting.    Completely and absolutely.     I'm not trying to attack or diminish what you do.    Not in any way.   That's in part why I loved hiring Ballard with his scouting background.    And I was happy he signed the two player personnel guys from the Seahawks and the Jets.     

 

But I also believe in analytics.  The happy marriage of the two forms of evaluating talent is the difference between the best teams and everyone else.

 

I'm not stating this as an absolute fact,  but I'm not aware of any team that ignores analytics and goes only by scouting and is doing well.     Not one.      Again,  there may be one,  or maybe even more.    But they are few,  and far, far between.    They are the exceptions to the rule.

 

 

True. 

 

I don't think anyone is downplaying the importance of coaching or scouting. There are tendencies and match ups coaches spot, a QB spots if he reads Ds like elite QBs do, and then those that analytics spots. Each one augments the other. 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

For player evaulation, analytics is not... A CB that runs 4.56 is too slow for the NFL, analytics is a player than runs 4.56 but has this 10 yard split and this agility and this acceleration score and this tackle score and this leaping ability, and this intelligence score, etc.  can succeed in the NFL.  That is where scouting and player interviews come in, to determine if the player has non measurable traits to succeed.

 

For game planning, @chad72 posted a great article on using analytics effectively for game planning and game execution.

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

For player evaulation, analytics is not... A CB that runs 4.56 is too slow for the NFL, analytics is a player than runs 4.56 but has this 10 yard split and this agility and this acceleration score and this tackle score and this leaping ability, and this intelligence score, etc.  can succeed in the NFL.  That is where scouting and player interviews come in, to determine if the player has non measurable traits to succeed.

 

For game planning, @chad72 posted a great article on using analytics effectively for game planning and game execution.

 I see it in reverse

    Analytics has a role in player development and scouting has a big role in game day situations    

      When I say “scouting” I am referring to the game development 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

 I see it in reverse

    Analytics has a role in player development and scouting has a big role in game day situations    

      When I say “scouting” I am referring to the game development 

 

In todays NFL, scouting and analytics go hand-in-hand through the entire year-long process.

 

Both are used for everything from player selection to player development to opponent evaluation to gameplan development to employee reviews, etc.

 

At this point, scouting IS analytics and analytics IS scouting.  It all boils down to processing the available information to try and make the best decisions.

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

In todays NFL, scouting and analytics go hand-in-hand through the entire year-long process.

 

Both are used for everything from player selection to player development to opponent evaluation to gameplan development to employee reviews, etc.

 

At this point, scouting IS analytics and analytics IS scouting.  It all boils down to processing the available information to try and make the best decisions.

Agreed that is also the problem(semantics) since “analytics” has been around since NFL teams developed scouting departments 

[Coffeedrinker]

17 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

 I see it in reverse

    Analytics has a role in player development and scouting has a big role in game day situations    

      When I say “scouting” I am referring to the game development 

What do you mean in reverse? I mentioned how it was used in player eval and in game planning.  The reverse of that would be not being used for either.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

What do you mean in reverse? I mentioned how it was used in player eval and in game planning.  The reverse of that would be not being used for either.

I see analytics in the PD side and Scouting on the Gameday side 

[Coffeedrinker]

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I see analytics in the PD side and Scouting on the Gameday side 

So you don't think teams have scouts that go around the country and evaluate players?

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

So you don't think teams have scouts that go around the country and evaluate players?

 They do but as I said earlier because of my coaching background at the HS level I understand and refer to scouting as the study of future opponents and development of game plans

[chad72]

Analytics helps coaches confirm their eye tests too. Hey, whenever I see this formation on 3rd down, these are the tendencies I see. Is there merit to it? Then analytics can give you a percentage stating that they use that formation about 15% of the time on 3rd downs and out of those 15%, they run play A 35% of the time and play B 30% of the time. Seahawks had used that goal line formation in the SB for just 3 or 4 plays the entire year but Belichick still practiced for it and planned for it, and Malcom Butler got beat a few times in practice as the 3rd CB but came through on game day at the end of the SB.

 

Coaches still have to coach and players still have to execute. Even Belichick sometimes runs a few plays to throw analytics off guard, just so that coaches keep a play or two he will never use in mind. 

 

I can give more examples but I am swamped at work today, this is the best I can do.  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

16 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I heard someone say in baseball there won't be anymore manager types like Earl Weaver, Billy Martin, Tony Larussa etc...  Front offices are trending toward managers they can control and who will go with the analytics data.

 

It kind of applies in the NFL to an extent too. So many teams hire former players as their HC assuming his years of experience in the league will translate to him being a good coach, meanwhile, a HC in New England that never played a snap of football in his life has built one of most dominant sports dynasties of all time.

[Coffeedrinker]

38 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

 They do but as I said earlier because of my coaching background at the HS level I understand and refer to scouting as the study of future opponents and development of game plans

Ok, well thanks for letting us know you have a more narrow definition of scouting than the rest of the football world.

 

And really, if you don't think analytics has a place in scouting another team then I would say you don't understand analytics.  Us old school guys used to call them tendencies, analytics is just taking tendencies to a whole new level in what tendencies can be tracked, combined and analyzed.

[PrincetonTiger]

8 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Ok, well thanks for letting us know you have a more narrow definition of scouting than the rest of the football world.

 

And really, if you don't think analytics has a place in scouting another team then I would say you don't understand analytics.  Us old school guys used to call them tendencies, analytics is just taking tendencies to a whole new level in what tendencies can be tracked, combined and analyzed.

We called it advanced scouting   

  When I hear Analytics I think Moneyball and Theo Epstein types not what I did

[Valpo2004]

Isn't PFF a form of analytics?  Also some of the more advanced stats that they have out there.  

 

Seems to me that it's basically an attempt to take what you see on film and combine numbers and try to essentially make it into a math thing.  Usually one I think that tries to take into account as many variables as possible.  

[PrincetonTiger]

23 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

Isn't PFF a form of analytics?  Also some of the more advanced stats that they have out there.  

 

Seems to me that it's basically an attempt to take what you see on film and combine numbers and try to essentially make it into a math thing.  Usually one I think that tries to take into account as many variables as possible.  

Yes

[Finball]

3 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

It kind of applies in the NFL to an extent too. So many teams hire former players as their HC assuming his years of experience in the league will translate to him being a good coach, meanwhile, a HC in New England that never played a snap of football in his life has built one of most dominant sports dynasties of all time.

 

BB has played football, just not at pro level.

 

But yes, that's pretty common in pro sports, though MLB has gotten away from it and NBA a little bit.

[jskinnz]

2 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

We called it advanced scouting   

  When I hear Analytics I think Moneyball and Theo Epstein types not what I did

 

How about this as a definition.  Maybe not as a definition but as differences between the two?

 

Scouting = their right corner bites on double moves.  We can get them on a sluggo.

 

Analytics = In 12 personnel, the Colts ran the ball 100% of the time on first down with the lead in the 4th quarter

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

How about this as a definition.  Maybe not as a definition but as differences between the two?

 

Scouting = their right corner bites on double moves.  We can get them on a sluggo.

 

Analytics = In 12 personnel, the Colts ran the ball 100% of the time on first down with the lead in the 4th quarter

I did both 

   As I said I see baseball style analytics useful on the business side of sport 

 

  I see that as Scouting and Detailed scouting 

[jskinnz]

15 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I did both 

   As I said I see baseball style analytics useful on the business side of sport 

 

  I see that as Scouting and Detailed scouting 

 

You've dug your heels in.

 

No sense in continuing on.

[jskinnz]

21 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I did both 

   As I said I see baseball style analytics useful on the business side of sport 

 

  I see that as Scouting and Detailed scouting 

 

Assume the Princeton in your screen name refers to southern Indiana?

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

You've dug your heels in.

 

No sense in continuing on.

There is no right answer

 

   I see scouting as a part of analytics 

Just now, jskinnz said:

 

Assume the Princeton in your screen name refers to southern Indiana?

Yes

[jskinnz]

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

There is no right answer

 

   I see scouting as a part of analytics 

Yes

 

Been to football game down there.  Married a Jasper girl.

 

That game did not end well for Princeton.

 

[PrincetonTiger]

4 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Been to football game down there.  Married a Jasper girl.

 

That game did not end well for Princeton.

 

I know the Jasper program and HC well

   Coach Ahrens was the Jasper Track Coach at the same time my Dad was the Track HC at PCHS

      My cousins are Southridge alums but my Aunt taught at Jasper

 

 

            

[Superman]

1 hour ago, jskinnz said:

Analytics = In 12 personnel, the Colts ran the ball 100% of the time on first down with the lead in the 4th quarter

 

Don't remind me, please.

[jskinnz]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Don't remind me, please.

 

They were trying reverse psychology.  Pagano - "They know we run in this personnel grouping so they will be expecting pass so let's surprise 'em and run it anyway.  They'll never expect it."  

 

Keep choppin wood.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

Isn't PFF a form of analytics?  Also some of the more advanced stats that they have out there.  

 

Seems to me that it's basically an attempt to take what you see on film and combine numbers and try to essentially make it into a math thing.  Usually one I think that tries to take into account as many variables as possible.  

 

Charting is a form of analytics. They can break the raw data down into smaller groups of information, so you can look at the data and know that this QB completes twice as many deep throws down the right side as he does down the left side. Then you can look at which receivers he's been throwing to on each side, which ones have the most success, which corners he's been targeting, how much success he has on deep passes against blitzing coverage, etc. 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Charting is a form of analytics. They can break the raw data down into smaller groups of information, so you can look at the data and know that this QB completes twice as many deep throws down the right side as he does down the left side. Then you can look at which receivers he's been throwing to on each side, which ones have the most success, which corners he's been targeting, how much success he has on deep passes against blitzing coverage, etc. 

Yep

[Shive]

At the base of it, I see analytics as quantifying as much as the game as possible, then using that data to gain insight.

 

For scouting players, you're looking at advanced statistics, which statistics are most stable (yields consistent results over time), and which ones translate best for your scheme and general NFL success. Using only analytics is a terrible idea, just like only using the "eye test" is as well.

 

The eye test said Baker Mayfield was the 4th or 5th best QB in this draft, because he doesn't fit a criteria that doesn't necessarily translate to success. It's just assumed that a QB 6'3"+ with a strong arm has a better chance at being a top QB than a 6'1" QB with an decent arm, but just as many (if not more) of the taller, stronger QB's flop than the shorter ones.

 

Analytics says that Mayfield does the things well that successful NFL QB's need to be able to. He has the highest completion rate to open targets, which is one of the most stable stats for QB's. He was also the top prospect in a few other key statistical categories that are most likely to correlate to success at the NFL level. Analytics looks at Mayfield's game and says he's the best QB in this draft, while it looks at Josh Allen's game and says he probably shouldn't even be drafted in the first round.

 

My biggest gripe with the anti-analytics folks is that we look at guys that use traditional scouting methods that fail and say that person just isn't a good evaluator. We look at guys that use analytics that fail and blame analytics instead of the guy. Analytics is just a tool and to someone that doesn't use it properly or listen to the information given to them, it's not going to be effective.

[chad72]

1 hour ago, Shive said:

At the base of it, I see analytics as quantifying as much as the game as possible, then using that data to gain insight.

 

For scouting players, you're looking at advanced statistics, which statistics are most stable (yields consistent results over time), and which ones translate best for your scheme and general NFL success. Using only analytics is a terrible idea, just like only using the "eye test" is as well.

 

The eye test said Baker Mayfield was the 4th or 5th best QB in this draft, because he doesn't fit a criteria that doesn't necessarily translate to success. It's just assumed that a QB 6'3"+ with a strong arm has a better chance at being a top QB than a 6'1" QB with an decent arm, but just as many (if not more) of the taller, stronger QB's flop than the shorter ones.

 

Analytics says that Mayfield does the things well that successful NFL QB's need to be able to. He has the highest completion rate to open targets, which is one of the most stable stats for QB's. He was also the top prospect in a few other key statistical categories that are most likely to correlate to success at the NFL level. Analytics looks at Mayfield's game and says he's the best QB in this draft, while it looks at Josh Allen's game and says he probably shouldn't even be drafted in the first round.

 

My biggest gripe with the anti-analytics folks is that we look at guys that use traditional scouting methods that fail and say that person just isn't a good evaluator. We look at guys that use analytics that fail and blame analytics instead of the guy. Analytics is just a tool and to someone that doesn't use it properly or listen to the information given to them, it's not going to be effective.

 

Yep. It is like analytics saying Hairston never gave up a TD pass during the entire year and getting carried away with it. You then factor the competition level he faced and then hold your horses till the later rounds when you can get him, which is what Ballard did. Analytics probably brought him to the forefront with what he did catching the eye, it got him drafted because a scout vouched for him with the aid of the analytics. The fact that he did pretty well in year 1 gives a thumbs up to the scout and the analytics he used to help himself.  

 

Yep, no matter what analytics says about 1-on-1 match ups on the outside WRs, Brady on a key 3rd down in a playoff game looks the way of Gronk or his slot pass catchers (Edelman or Amendola or any pass catching RB in slot). Heck, he even threw it into traffic while Edelman made his circus catch in the Falcons SB with defenders expecting it. Sometimes, guys just make plays, analytics and film study be da***d.  

[Farns01]

I thought CB hired LtCol. Brian Decker (ret.). last year to do player analytics.  Now we have two of these guys.  He’s still listed on the staff.

[ColtStrong2013]

On 5/30/2018 at 6:42 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

The ship has sailed for the anti-analytics crowd.

 

Analytics is winning in every team sport, and it's winning big.   Mixing in some old school eye ball testing is always fine...   but if that is ALL you use, then you've put yourself at a competitive disadvantage.

 

Another great hire by Ballard.   Very forward looking.   Today is a good day for Colts Nation.

 

 

Analytics is winning in everything. Try running a business today without data and utilizing it properly. Data is king. And the teams that utilize it properly are going to end up light years ahead of everyone else in the near future. 

 

Take this draft and look at what caliber players Ballard brought in. Put the tape aside for a moment and look at the data. Speed. Speed. Speed. Now look at the tape and see how those athletes utilize their speed. This team will be fast. They will play fast. And it will result in a lot of wins down the road. 

[sreeb2deeni]

On 5/30/2018 at 10:35 PM, PrincetonTiger said:

I see it on the player acquisition side

   A lot of “Analytics Guys” have had more of a business background 

That's a very interesting question to me.

 

I come from the hockey world and the analytics guys seem most interested in providing lots of situational data that can help the coaches plan for a game. They will suggest ways to strengthen the statistically-proven team weaknesses of their own team or provide ways to exploit every single opponent with mismatches that the data analysis suggests will have the highest percentage for success.

 

As for the "nerds" winning out, I'm not sure about that. The coaches are ultimately the ones who decide what to do in each situation during a game or practice. Now I will say that the players nowadays are very aware of the "best" play, as determined by analytics, and often play a less risky style. Whether that is good, bad or indifferent the players are very much affected by what the analytics guys are prompting the coaches to stress to the players in every tiny facet of the game.

 

I believe analytic's effectiveness is limited to a head coaches' ability to use the analytical information to make in-game decisions very quickly and effectively, yet also to listen to his intuition that is rooted in experiences the "nerds" will never understand. "Paralysis by analysis" can happen, with both coaches and players. Finding the right balance is very difficult when tradition says something completely different than the guy who now has a higher status within the organization than you. Your job depends on game results, while his jobs depends on managing data that never stops growing and multiplying.

 

The player acquisition side of an analytic guys's job is less obvious to the outside eye because it happens far from the ice. It happens in war-rooms (just like the NFL) where the scouts and "nerds" hash it out until an accurate picture is formed. It goes without say that old school hockey scouts are often stubborn and set in their ways, however the solid statistical counter-points that come from the well informed "nerds" can sometimes sway the scouts decisions which often, in a small way, saves themselves from themselves.

 

One last thing to add from my point of view is, that in professional hockey, the analytic gurus are shooting up the charts in terms of being hired for top-end managerial jobs. I've always thought there was some truth to the saying, "The meek shall inherit the earth", but I never thought in a million years that "nerds" would have any place in hockey. Consider me converted. I've lived the sport for over 50 years and I still enjoy studying and learning more about the game. From whom that information comes, is less-important to me these days.

 

Bottom line is: Old School Ideas < New Aged Ideas. The sooner any coach can accept that fact, the better his or her job security will be.

 

Sorry for the ridiculously long post folks. This subject is near and dear to me, what can I say. I hope my blathering allows some of you to see analytics from the perspective of a sport that really doesn't get much attention around the Indianapolis area.

 

Go Colts!

[ColtStrong2013]

3 hours ago, sreeb2deeni said:

That's a very interesting question to me.

 

I come from the hockey world and the analytics guys seem most interested in providing lots of situational data that can help the coaches plan for a game. They will suggest ways to strengthen the statistically-proven team weaknesses of their own team or provide ways to exploit every single opponent with mismatches that the data analysis suggests will have the highest percentage for success.

 

As for the "nerds" winning out, I'm not sure about that. The coaches are ultimately the ones who decide what to do in each situation during a game or practice. Now I will say that the players nowadays are very aware of the "best" play, as determined by analytics, and often play a less risky style. Whether that is good, bad or indifferent the players are very much affected by what the analytics guys are prompting the coaches to stress to the players in every tiny facet of the game.

 

I believe analytic's effectiveness is limited to a head coaches' ability to use the analytical information to make in-game decisions very quickly and effectively, yet also to listen to his intuition that is rooted in experiences the "nerds" will never understand. "Paralysis by analysis" can happen, with both coaches and players. Finding the right balance is very difficult when tradition says something completely different than the guy who now has a higher status within the organization than you. Your job depends on game results, while his jobs depends on managing data that never stops growing and multiplying.

 

The player acquisition side of an analytic guys's job is less obvious to the outside eye because it happens far from the ice. It happens in war-rooms (just like the NFL) where the scouts and "nerds" hash it out until an accurate picture is formed. It goes without say that old school hockey scouts are often stubborn and set in their ways, however the solid statistical counter-points that come from the well informed "nerds" can sometimes sway the scouts decisions which often, in a small way, saves themselves from themselves.

 

One last thing to add from my point of view is, that in professional hockey, the analytic gurus are shooting up the charts in terms of being hired for top-end managerial jobs. I've always thought there was some truth to the saying, "The meek shall inherit the earth", but I never thought in a million years that "nerds" would have any place in hockey. Consider me converted. I've lived the sport for over 50 years and I still enjoy studying and learning more about the game. From whom that information comes, is less-important to me these days.

 

Bottom line is: Old School Ideas < New Aged Ideas. The sooner any coach can accept that fact, the better his or her job security will be.

 

Sorry for the ridiculously long post folks. This subject is near and dear to me, what can I say. I hope my blathering allows some of you to see analytics from the perspective of a sport that really doesn't get much attention around the Indianapolis area.

 

Go Colts!

The Colts have actually been one of the best cap management teams since Grigson started. That's due to a lot of data analysis. Mike Bluem is responsible for the capspace and is very good at structuring contracts. His job is 100% data related. He makes the numbers work and places a value on every player they are looking to sign. 

 

Data can get you the best athletes on the field. Data can find mismatches which this new era offense is all about. Data finds weaknesses and consistencies. Lord knows Pagano and company didn't use data to make adjustments. They were the most predictable team any of us have likely seen and the data proves it. Teams had an advantage against us, certainly last year, from utilizing data and understanding that when leading in the 4th quarter last season the Colts were 100% run in certain personnel groupings. On first down in that scenario, the Colts were 70% of the time in a 12 or 13 personnel (1 or 2 receivers) and in those personnel's were 100%, run. 70% of 1st downs with 4th quarter leads were 100% run. Want to know why we couldn't close games out?... Large part right there. There was a whole study done that was pretty embarrassing on the predictability of this team last year. Data has to be utilized to find these tendencies on your opponents, but more importantly, protect yourself against those weaknesses. I have no doubt we will be one of the strongest in this regard under Ballard/Reich. Reich could be exceptionally good with the data available. Philly was last season and it showed. 

[LockeDown]

Analytics is used as a predictor. However, sports thrive on outcomes that overcome data based predictions. A few off the top of my head.  .  Chips  are down,,,,against all,odds.....3rd down and long...intangibles....long shot...Webber calling time out when he didn't have one at a crucial point.....under pressure....comebacks.....joe Montana talking about john candy to Loosen up teammates for a game winning drive....just win baby.....he's got heart...