Is Ryan Tannehill Going to Become a Franchise QB?

Lol.

Sent from my GT-P3110 using Tapatalk 2

 

Bwahahahaha

That's priceless.

 

Neither do stats nordo we have stats for developing QBs. We all knew Ryan tannehill was going to be a project and most likely sit a year to learn from a vet QB. Since tannehill just finished his rookie season and isn't a bonafide bust and will continue to be developed by our coaching staff why would we not try to improve the talent around him? You would have to be insane to think we should just throw him out the window after this season.

 

I agree but it can possibly help, but what the **** are some of those QBs on that chart tag with a yes for a franchise QB? Do you see how misleading they are for you categorize Dalton, Ponder, Palmer as franchise QBs? And in no way shape or form do people tag Stafford and bradford as the answer for QB or call them a franchise QB. It blows my mind you think freeman deserves a yes for franchise QBs so would some buc fans.

 

I think that tells you right there, that WPA is bull**** stat.

 

Wayne had 5 TDs, 73 1st downs and 1,355 yards.
Hartline had 1 TD, 48 1st downs and 1,083 yards.
Bess had 1 TD, 38 1st downs and 778 yards.

Please explain "clutch" play.

 

No kidding. The day Hartline, Bess, Hilton, and Avery truly have a better WPA than Reggie Wayne is the day I crap a lobster dinner, complete with butter sauce.

 

Regardless of whether its right or wrong, well done Shou.

 

I hate to tell you, but neither do your statistics. All you can do is use those to make guesses. A more productive exercise in my opinion would be to break down the strengths and weaknesses in Tannehill's game via game tape, then breaking down the strengths and weaknesses of his receivers and compare that to the strengths and weaknesses of other receiving corps around the NFL, or take a look at other young QBs and see if their play was elevated (again using game tape rather than statistics) by adding talent around a previously weakly talented group. Again though, that would still be far from giving us anything substantial as to whether Tannehill will be a franchise QB or not.

It may be less certain, but the difference in certainty is marginal. And as you previously stated, the Dolphins are going to move on with Tannehill for the foreseeable future anyway, so what does it matter?

 

Great point. This is what seems to be lost on the crowd that defends Tannehill's receivers. Hartline and Bess aren't bad players, but If the Dolphins cut all of their receivers tomorrow there is a good chance that the only two who would be signed would be Hartline and Bess. That is saying something.

 

You don't have to because no stat would every tell me ponder/palmer is a franchise QB or worth sticking with and no stat could possibly categorize the rest I mentioned to franchise QB status

 

That's just nasty.

 

It's quite good really. Bring your bib, I'll invite you over.

 

Does it smell like a trap too?

 

Also, i would say that the only QB that honestly would like to have a different group of players around him is Ryan Tannehill

 

Because they dont score touchdowns

 

Meh... again, to me, this is another example of trying to use stats to make a point, that common sense, and your eyes while watching the game should tell you otherwise. its another perfect case for stats dont tell the whole story....

However, nice work nonetheless...

 

Sorry I had to stop reading and reply right here. Shou I have yet to see the masses complain about either WR. As has been said countless time, they are good.....very good at what they do, but neither is a true play maker or #1. So please stop making it sound like everyone is saying our starters suck because no one is. We need upgrades at WR/TE positions and if we get those upgrades you will see better numbers from Tanny.

 

Are you really saying that because the results of a statistic don't match your perception, then the stat is flawed?????

 

Are you really defending a stat that you've no idea how its calculated? There's nothing specific explained. There's a vague notion given, but we have no idea how the stat is actually calculated. We have no idea how weights are determined and given. We have no idea with what consistency they are even applied.

So yeah, add that all up with results that don't pass the sniff test, then yes I will say the stat is flawed.

 

I have every idea how WPA is calculated. It is one of my favorite stats, along with EPA.

And to be clear, I didn't even go so far as to defend it.

 

Then explain it.

Explain how its objective.

You were defending it. You don't need to make a proclamation that you're defending it to defend it. The simple fact you claimed its your favorite stat is proof.

 

How could it not be objective? It is entirely based on previous results. There is nothing arbitrary about it. This is clearly explained:

There is absolutely nothing subjective about WPA.

 

How does that translate to a QB's individual effort? Or a WRs?

 

Ok I just went and picked out 11 true play makers whom I believe we all can agree are play makers. and compared to Bess and Hartline here are there TD per rec. ave. Now tell me again there is no evidence that those two are not play makers.

Name TD #Rec TD to Rec
Bess 12 321 26.75
Hartline 06 183 30.50

C. Johnson 54 488 9.04
Jennings 53 425 8.02
Finley 17 198 11.65
Wayne 78 968 12.41
Hilton 7 50 7.14
Wallace 32 235 7.34
Bowe 39 415 10.64
Jones 18 133 7.39
A. Johnson 56 818 14.61
Gronkowski 38 187 4.92 (INSANE!!!!)
Green 18 162 9.00

 

QBs WPA is based on all passing plays. WRs WPA is based on every time they are targeted.

 

Right, but give me an example.

 

Its all clearly stated in the link in the OP.