***Week 3 GameDay Thread - Bengals @ Bills***

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(09-22-2019, 07:32 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: But more to my point, i was trying to get him to realize that "2 hands on the ball=should catch, full stop" is not right because, in that...(keep in mind, i'm trying to explain this in layman's terms and i'm probably going to butcher it) three dimensional vector space, vector A (the flight of the ball), when it reaches it's coordinates (a1+a2+a3 (?) gives a statistical probability of a successful completion between 0-100. Taking the human element out of it--knowing that a receiver can drop a perfect throw--the coordinates of vector A (this is where i start to get fuzzy--because i'm imagining a bullseye being in the place of the receiver but i don't know if there's a technical term for it), when they get further away from the "center", cause the statistical probability of a successful catch to drop. When you add velocity to vector A, that causes the statistical probability to drop further (when we put the human element back in--with the ability to grasp the ball). 

So....*exhales*, physically speaking, using (added) velocity + trajectory (away from center), the likelihood of a successful catch drops dramatically when the tail and the head of vector A are a shorter distance AND the coordinates are further away from center (and that's not even taking into account that the receiver is moving laterally to the vector of the ball). 

That's kind of what NextGen stats do. They calculate the statistical probability of a catch based on the conditions. 

FTR, i'm 82% tempted to not hit "post reply" because i don't know if what i typed makes a damn bit of sense, physically and as a mathematical equation.

I get it. You’re adding vectors in three space. The resultant of the addition of two vectors is another vector. The magnitude of the new vector will be the difference between the trajectory and the intended aiming point.