SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks
STUDY: Does icing the kicker work?
Icing the kicker works (kind of)
September, 30, 2010 Sep 30
11:11
Today's winners in Statistics & Analytics:
Rob Bironas, Austin Collie, Twitter users everywhere
Today's losers:
Larry Fitzgerald, Sean Payton, Jeff Wilkins
First things first: This blog has finally made it to Twitter! Do you and me both a favor and start following all the action: @PKStatsBlog
Now, on to today's news: Icing the kicker works ... kind of. I think.
I know that's no way to make a statement. Usually we clarify things a lot more definitively around here. So before we get to why I'm hedging my conclusions a bit, let's take a moment to appreciate how contradictory the evidence is about whether or not it's effective to call a timeout just before a kicker tries a field goal.
Every season, there's evidence from the field to support both sides of the icing argument. Two weeks ago, on Washington's first possession in overtime against Houston, Texans coach Gary Kubiak called a timeout just before Graham Gano nailed a 52-yard field goal attempt. Gano missed on his second try, and Houston went on to win. Genius! But last Sunday, with 2:09 left in OT, Saints S Chris Reis blocked a Matt Bryant attempt only to have the play nullified because Sean Payton had called a timeout. Even though Atlanta was then backed up five yards because of a false start, Bryant drilled a 46-yarder to beat New Orleans. Dunce!
Sports psychologists are no help. In the current issue of ESPN the Mag, devoted to all things Ice, Eddie Matz quotes one shrink, John Murray, saying, "Icing the kicker creates a distraction," while another, Richard Lustberg, claims, "Most kickers are so relaxed, they don't give a crap."
Analysts have been arguing for years about this subject. In 2004, Scott Berry and Craig Wood, writing in Chance, found that an average NFL kicker had a 75.9 percent chance of making a 40-yard kick in sunny weather, but that those odds dropped to 65.9 percent after getting iced. (Hat-tip: Football Outsiders) But shortly afterward, Sports Illustrated's Paul Zimmerman and Stats Inc. found no icing effect on pressure kicks.
And now Matz writes, "In a study of clutch kicks taken from the 2000 to 2009 seasons, ESPN.com's Mike Sando found kickers were just as likely to convert whether they had been iced or not." But looking at the very same research, ESPN.com blogger Tim Graham says: "Research suggests that icing the kicker in clutch situations works."
Brain freeze!
Theoretically, icing a kicker should make no difference in his performance; I think it's safe to say most sabermetric types would not expect a few extra seconds of waiting time to affect how a professional carries out his central skill. And overall, that's what Sando's work shows. Sando and ESPN Stats & Information defined a clutch kick as an attempt from 35 or more yards in the last two minutes of a game with the score tied or the kicking team losing by fewer than three points. Under those circumstances, field goal percentages were "nearly identical for iced and non-iced kicks" -- 67.2 percent versus 66.8 percent.
Michael David Smith of the Wall Street Journal, using a somewhat looser definition of clutch, came to the same conclusion: 79.7 percent success when iced, 77.3 percent without a timeout, and no icing effect apparent at any distance of kicks.
But there's a catch. In overtime, kickers who weren't iced made 72.7 percent of their kicks, while kickers who had timeouts called before their attempts were successful just 58.1 percent of the time. And that wasn't because of a difference in distance: Iced kickers were about 2 yards closer to the uprights than kickers who were left alone. (Props to Sando for posting the spreadsheet with this and all his other data here.)
This finding could fit into the newest theory about icing: that it works because, but only when, it adds to an already extended, hyperstressful period of preparation for a kicker.
Nadav Goldschmied, a psychology professor at the University of San Diego, has looked at data on clutch kicks from 2002 to 2008 and found that kickers who were iced fared worse than those who weren't -- but also that when a kicker's own team called a timeout, his success rate was just as high as if he hadn't been iced. (Goldschmied's study accounted for factors such as the location and score of games, but it's not clear whether it controlled for the distance of kicks; I'll link to it as soon as it's published.) "Added time per se did not yield a deterioration in performance," Goldschmied says. "Preparing for the kick is taxing by itself. Other studies show that, in general, extending the preparation period results in worse performance." And preparing for overtime kicks, which are by definition sudden death, may be a kicker's most taxing moments of all.
But we're talking about small sample sizes here. Iced kickers have had just 31 overtime attempts since 2001, so while their dropoff looks steep, it doesn't reach the level of improbability we need to call it statistically significant. And when you get to the level of individual kickers or coaches, the samples are so small that we can't be sure they're more than noise. The difference between Rob Bironas, whose accuracy has increased 75 percentage points when he's iced, and Jeff Wilkins, whose success rate has fallen 80 points, is actually just a couple of boots over a decade. There definitely are kickers who do better or worse after getting iced, but for the moment we can't tell who they are until after they kick.
So we've got overtime as a particularly successful case, a theory to fit the facts (preparation is hard work) and a need for a lot more data. That may not be the sexiest conclusion we've ever drawn, but it will keep you ahead of your brother in-law through another Sunday.
TAKING NFL STATS TO THE NEXT LEVEL: Through three weeks, Giants QB Eli Manning has been the NFL's best passer when throwing outside the numbers (QB rating of 144.9) but the worst when throwing inside the numbers (38.5), according to ESPN Stats & Information. Looks like the Giants are falling so far behind so early that Manning is chucking bombs. ... Believe it or not, Jets QB Mark Sanchez has been tops against the blitz (130.0 rating against five or more rushers). ... If the Chiefs are going to keep handing the rock to Thomas Jones, then maybe they should toss it more to RB Jamaal Charles, who leads the league in yards after catch per reception (14.8); teammate Dexter McCluster ranks second (13.8). ... Bears RB Matt Forte isn't just rushing for only 2.8 yards per carry, he has no TDs -- nada -- in nine goal-to-go attempts. Shades of last year's Fantasy disaster. ... Cardinals WR Larry Fitzgerald has the third-most targets in the NFL (35) but ranks just 51st in catches (12). ... Raiders QB Bruce Gradkowski leads the league in yards actually thrown through the air per passing attempt, with 10.6, while WR Louis Murphy is one of 13 receivers with at least 20 targets who don't have any drops; that's quickly shaping up to be a dangerous combo. ... Austin Collie leads that list with 27 catches -- with 359 yards and no drops in 32 targets, he's been as valuable as any player in the league. ... Roy Williams (12 targets, no drops) is on that list, too -- it must be early in the season!
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jquest
