1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Talent Surrounding Ryan Tannehill: Part II

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by shouright, Dec 24, 2012.

  1. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    4.783 in Miami.

    Also worth noting that he had the highest YAC of his career (6.8) by a longshot, with Matt Cassel throwing to him.

    Matt Cassel > Tom Brady, right Shou?
     
  2. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    So basically what the OP is arguing is that the wr who catches and runs with the pass has no significant effect of pass rankings? So when the wr makes a great catch on an ok throw, he should get no credit ? To say that qb rating is a solely individual stat is the very definition of ridiculous.
     
    Hurricane likes this.
  3. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    Yes. You and I = Bess and Hartline.

    With that in mind, I think it's time for us to quit our jobs!

    Also, it's not the sole individual stat. Quarterback Correlation is. It's his invented stat, where you divide offensive points by quarterback rating.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 27, 2012
  4. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    ToddPhin likes this.
  5. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I would suggest everyone stay on topic in this thread. If you don't have anything to contribute to the topic, there is no need to post. Derailing a thread is a violation of the TOS.
     
    shouright likes this.
  6. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    In all fairness, have you read content of the thread? There is nothing to contribute.

    It's a giant circular argument. Shou is literally asking the same questions, and we are all giving him the same answers.
     
  7. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Do you understand how correlations work?

    The height and weight of the human being are very strongly correlated. Are there 6'4" men who weigh less than 5'8" men? Sure. The correlation between height and weight is still very strong, however, despite those exceptions to the rule. What you're illustrating above are exceptions to the rule when it comes to QB rating. Those exceptions in themselves don't invalidate the statistic as a general measure of QBs' individual ability.

    Now, add to the mix the fact that 23 of the 27 rookie QBs who have gotten significant playing time since 2004 haven't achieved a significantly higher QB rating than about 72, which is well below average, and QB rating then becomes a valid measure of the consensus belief that "rookie QBs tend to struggle in the NFL," and therefore a valid measure of Ryan Tannehill's individual performance this year.
     
  8. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    It is worth noting that the correlation between YAC per-attempt and Net YPA is 0.45, which is essentially meaningless.
     
    shouright and unluckyluciano like this.
  9. Laces Out

    Laces Out Well-Known Member

    3,428
    937
    113
    Aug 4, 2011
    Omaha, Ne
    Quit being lazy and break down each QB year to year. That's your objective measure.
     
  10. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    If this is the case, then I am left to believe your posts are intended to derail the thread.
     
    shouright likes this.
  11. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I am impressed by your table.

    Plus I am surprised that more quarterbacks with better receiving talent have worse YAC total than Tannehill.
     
  12. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    :lol:
     
  13. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Why someone posts something is irrelevant. The thread is very well within what the forum is intended. If you disagree with what he says, you're free to debate. What is not acceptable is people posting things that are unrelated to the topic at hand.
     
    shouright likes this.
  14. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    Probably for the same reason that patssuck, Aqua, Finacious, and everyone else against Shou is. To introduce him to reality. To get a Phin fan to quit acting like a Jet fan.

    I also inherently don't like someone saying that the quarterback of my team is bad, because Zebra divided by Lemon equals Omicron.



    So if I go make a thread explaining how Philip Rivers is a better quarterback than Marino ever was, because of passer rating, that thread won't be moved, deleted, or closed?

    I have a perfectly valid stat to prove it.

    It concerns our team.
     
  15. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Maybe the talent on those teams isn't what you believed it to be? I think after looking at the data, there is a strong case to be made that YAC has absolutely no correlation to the QB. The correlation between YAC/att and completion % or INT-rate is non-existent.
     
    shouright likes this.
  16. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    If you're trying to gauge YAC, why would you factor it per attempt? That doesn't make sense.
     
  17. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    This isn't the forum for that.
     
    shouright likes this.
  18. finfaninilinois

    finfaninilinois Active Member

    543
    82
    28
    Nov 29, 2009
    for 1 you cant compare yac totals because they all dont have the same amount of catches. The only way you can really compare is yac's per reception which are as follows

    welker - 5.6
    gronk 5.7
    woodhead 7.4

    jones 5.5
    rodgers 8.4
    white 3.1

    bess 4.3
    bush 7.4
    hartline 3.4
     
  19. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Its no different than total yards. Yards per att. is a lot more accurate than total yards.
     
    shouright likes this.
  20. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio
    I am not talking about shou, I am taking issue with his point. HE asked people to prove him wrong, I said he should prove me wrong. which he cant anymore than I can he. BUT HE ASKED THE question.

    I am merely asking him to show how all these fancy stats would PROVE its all Tannehill and not any of teh supporting cast. Thats it, I cant prove him wrong, but he cant prove himself right
     
    shula_guy likes this.
  21. finfaninilinois

    finfaninilinois Active Member

    543
    82
    28
    Nov 29, 2009
    he's trying to make it worse than what it is
     
  22. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    In theory that is within the TOS.
     
  23. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    But the discussion was about YAC. By doing it per attempt, you're diluting that data by factoring in incompletions. It's more accurate to calculate it per reception.
     
  24. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    What exactly am I trying to make worse?
     
  25. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio
    By the way if you really believe stats alone can tell the whole story then I am done debating, cause it is ridiculous. It isnt baseball. When someone else directly effects your stats as much as you do, you cannot base on stats alone
     
  26. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    Again, how can you use a statistic (qb rating) that requires others to contribute extensively to show exclusive individual ability?
     
  27. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    You can't even do it with one stat in baseball, either. That was my point in posting Hank Aaron's all-time rank in batting average. Even a great stat like OPS is combination of stats (On-base + slugging).

    In NO SPORT can one stat tell you the whole story. QB rating, even though it's a combination of stats calculated to measure success, shouldn't be used by itself to determine anything. If it did, we could determine that Tony Romo is a better QB than Peyton Manning, and no one, anywhere, believes that objectively.
     
  28. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio
    ok how do you prove that QBR is the whole tell tale tape of a qbs ability? oh those drops just magically become qbs fault, he should have caught the ball for him. Of the int caused by the receiver batting the ball in the air. Act superior all you want, but the little tricks arent as sly as you think Shou.
     
  29. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio
    neither do you
     
  30. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    It doesn't make sense, since a receiver has significant input into how successful a pass is. I am sorry that you don't watch the games.
     
  31. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio
    I agree. tho in baseball there are soem stats that the individual heavily influences and can be a reasonable judge of a players ability. Batting avg w runners in scoring position is one I like.
     
  32. DevilFin13

    DevilFin13 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,713
    6,282
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Along the YAC lines some people are bringing up, I think air yards (yards minus YAC) are an indicator of how much a QB is doing compared to others. Here's the link. Tanny ranks 16th in air yards per attempt. But he is 35th in % of his passing yards as his YAC. So he isn't getting a lot of help from his receivers. Unlike say Tom Brady who gets 47.7 % of his yards from YAC, as opposed to Tanny's 40.7. Someone like Aaron Rodgers, who comes from a similar offensive system, gets 47.9% of his yards from YAC.

    I'll give some credit to guys like Rodgers and Brady. They put the ball where it needs to be and when it needs to be there for their WRs to gain YAC. But I don't think Tanny is significantly worse than them on the accuracy front. I think it's plausible his timing is worse and could be affecting our WRs' YAC. But I think it's even more plausible that our WRs aren't skilled at getting YAC. I'm pretty high on Bess and Hartline. I think they are valuable players. But this is one of their glaring weaknesses.
     
  33. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    You're nit-picking. 23 of the 27 rookie QBs since 2004 haven't had a QB rating significantly higher than 72. Ryan Tannehill's isn't significantly higher either.

    Do you realize that the fact that Romo's QB rating is higher than Manning's probably diminishes (theoretically) the correlation between QB rating and individual QB ability by about 0.02? That difference is meaningless. The correlation is very strong nonetheless. It's like saying the correlation between height and weight is invalid because there exists in the world a 6'6" guy who weighs 220, and a 6'2" guy who weighs 230.

    These exceptions to the rule are are very weak rebuttal, and they reflect the lack of an understanding of the way correlations work.
     
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Its worse than that. Here are the things used to determine qb rating:

    Attempts
    Completions
    Yards
    TDs
    Ints.

    (BTW a nice calculator for anyone interested Link)

    Now, knowing that TDs, Completions, Yards Gained and sometimes INTs all require another person other than the QB, to register as a stat, Shou believes that one stat shows how important the QB's level of play is, and how the surrounding receivers' talent level isn't important to offensive points in a game. That's how bad this is.

    One stat that requires player X & player Y, tells us that player X is important and player Y is not. Why? Because no one has made a chart that shows QBs who throw passes to no one complete less passes than a QB who throws to someone.
     
  35. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Right. I don't think anyone believes they are YAC guys. The question is how much does YAC contribute to an efficient offense or winning?
     
  36. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    How do you put someone on the ignore list?
     
  37. JMHPhin

    JMHPhin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,684
    3,323
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ohio

    you have in a very sly way avoided the point of his argument and made it seem like you dismissed him when in fact all you have done is admitted he was right
     
    shula_guy likes this.
  38. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    You're getting lost in your own argument. You've continually nit-picked your stats, then when something doesn't jive, you claim others are nit-picking.
     
    ToddPhin and Fin D like this.
  39. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not a chance.
     
  40. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Wrong.
     

Share This Page