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

Tannehill extended through 2020

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Coloradotrv, May 18, 2015.

  1. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Already said what I'd do. It's not a pity party. It's frustration dealing with so many people bashing me. Take a look at how many times I was insulted.
     
  2. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    you are unestimating flacco and wilson bigtime..the seahawks dont expect much out of wilson?/

    wth hell man, can you name me 1 thru 7 in terms of his receiver group including tight end?

    the man displayed everything you need to see in an elite qb in the biggest game of the year..superbowl..
     
    texanphinatic and Sceeto like this.
  3. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    nahhh
     
  4. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    All time. And it's Rodgers then Romo.
     
  5. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
  6. jaymoney

    jaymoney it's magic baby

    161
    57
    0
    Mar 15, 2013
    I don't agree with that.
    They are underrated because of comparison with super star QB. Guys like Rodgers, P.Manning, Brady and Brees..those guys are HOF class player(not sure about Bress though). Just because Flacco Wilson and Eli isn't HOF class player doesnt mean their mediocre...they're decent players.
    If you wanted to bring up those kinda guys..i would say Brad Johnson with Bucs and Trent Dilfer with Ravens.
    They had absolute damn great defense not just great and not to mention good running game too..you'll need at least 2 HOF guys, 6 or 7 probowlers and bunch of solid starters on you're team to win the superbowl with guys like Chad Henne or A.J. Feely. Remember when the jest went to the afc champ games? Imagine if they had Tanny on their back instead of Mr.Buttfumble Sanchez.
     
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I want to make sure we're all on the same page...we are all arguing about the QB who did this last season, right?

    27tds, 12int, 4045 yards, 92.8 rating

    In his third season. With a bad oline.

    Carry on.
     
    JDelenne likes this.
  8. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    I think a lot of Dolfans have forgotten what a decent qb looks like.
     
  9. finyank13

    finyank13 Reality Check

    30,718
    5,415
    113
    Jan 6, 2010
    I was reading something on Twitter yesterday where it said when you figure in the years and money that Miami HAS to pay RT in order to not incur any dead space it comes out to a 3 year 40M dollar deal....

    Insanely good deal from the team....and lets be honest here for him too...the guys is making 40M dollar in 3 years.....

    Set. For. Life.
     
    resnor likes this.
  10. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    Russell Wilson does not qualify for the all-time list because he has yet to attempt 1,500 passes.
     
  11. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    There are a number of things wrong with that article, one of those things being he ignores that passer rating differential is one of the most highly correlated statistics to winning in the NFL. He creates the arbitrary scenario of the three passes to show the different ratings but not only is that an unlikely scenario to be an issue as nobody will use three passes to determine the worth of a QB when there's practice and the median attempts last season for qualified QB's was 448, there's the simple fact that you can reasonable expect a ****ty sample size of three passes to yield weird results like that. That's a deeply flawed argument in a deeply flawed article.

    Yes, younger QB's are overtaking older QB's in part due to new passing rules but in reality, these guys are much better passers too. Sure you could adjust these ratings for era to make them more comparable but the simple fact is a lot of these guys are just flat out better. Due to advances in sports knowledge, nutrition, science, and roster building, these guys are just better QB's on average. That article is just an advertisement for their own personal passer judgments. PFF's grades, however, are notoriously subject to inaccuracy and inexperienced graders. Statistically speaking, passer rating is an amazing measure because it correlates well with overall team success. Unless you have a real alternative or a good argument against it, you're just latching on to someone else's argument to support an opinion you had before the evidence.
     
  12. Ducken

    Ducken Luxury Box Luxury Box

    10,018
    5,152
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Lower Delaware
    But you really did not go into spacifics. It is easy to say stuff with a broad brush, what I was getting at is go into detail. You said you would have traded out of the 8 spot, with who? Who was looking to trade up at the time. What would you have accepted intrade? Their 1st and??? Who would you have targeted with those picks? And why those picks would have been better then Thill . And who would be our QB?

    You post like that and nobody bashes your posts. You give them food for thought and something to debate. Your posts were painted with a broad brush.
     
  13. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That article was bad yes, but saying passer rating is a good stat because it correlates with winning % is a bad argument. Passer rating includes TD/ATT in its formula. In other words, saying passer rating correlates with winning is like saying scoring points correlates with winning (why not just go all the way and say the final score correlates perfectly with winning %?).

    The other problem with passer rating is the made up relative weights on the different components (e.g. why multiply TD/ATT by 25 and not another number?). If someone chose to, they could get a computer to go through the space of possible weights on the different components and find the set that correlates most with winning %. So in principle you can increase that correlation relatively easily (not sure by how much though).

    Anyway, because of these problems, some people choose to go with Passing Yards/Attempts as their preferred stat because that also correlates well with winning %, though not as much as passer rating (for obvious reasons).
     
  14. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    It's obvious that nobody here knows who would've wanted to trade up. I'm not a GM. I'm saying what I would've tried to do. I guess I can't say that I would want to trade down because I'm not privy to the inner workings of the draft.

    Edit: I've also stated that at that pick I would've rather gone with Kuechly. So there's your scenario if I couldn't trade down.
     
  15. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    playoffs?!
     
  16. Griese's Glasses

    Griese's Glasses Well-Known Member

    1,388
    438
    83
    Oct 16, 2013
    Ottawa, ON
    Okay well for better or worse (likely better) Tanny is our guy. Kind of a relief to have an actual franchise guy instead of a revolving door of inadequacy.
     
  17. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Oh wow. There are still people trying to say that Russell Wilson is an average quarterback. That's cute.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  18. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Just replace Passer Rating with Net Yards Per Attempt. Almost as corollary, but not overfitting.
     
  19. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Gotta agree with you there. Idk what's up with him. During the regular season he's average but during the postseason he's a machine.
     
  20. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Didn't mean he's average. I mean not much responsibility is placed on him. He doesn't need to throw for a lot of yards the way other QBs like Luck or Manning or Brady have to. Wilson is excellent in his role.
     
  21. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Guys, my point is people overhype the QB position like you need a stud at that spot putting up insane stats. It's great if you do but it's definitely not required to win a Super Bowl.
     
  22. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    So then what is your issue with Tannehill??? He doesn't cost a lot, and he's a good, improving quarterback. I just don't understand.
     
  23. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I believe the concept to which you're referring is a fallacy. You're saying that fewer pass attempts means he has less pressure on him. I see it as the opposite.

    Think about it. If you're going to have a hundred at-bats then you don't feel pressure to hit a homerun every time. You can go out and be yourself, be the player you are, and know that if you strike out you'll have 99 more chances.

    But what if you're only going to get 50 at-bats? That ups the pressure. Those opportunities are dwindling much faster now, and you're starting to feel the pressure to get the barrel on the ball or else you'll have blown it.

    It works the same way with quarterbacks. If you're a guy that is going to throw 50 passes in a game, then here's where the rubber meets the road on that one. Your number is called on 1st down. You miss and it goes incomplete. No big deal. Why? Because you know your number is probably going to get called again on 2nd down a large percentage of the time, and you get to make up for the missed pass if you complete one on 2nd down. Then when you get to 3rd down, if it's 3rd & short you may run the ball but you'll probably also get a 3rd down pass to try and convert. But now let's say you're a guy that throws 30 passes a game. What happens when your number is called on 1st down and you miss? Well, you KNOW your number won't be called on 2nd down. The defense knows it too so they gear for the run and maybe your RB gets 4 yards. Maybe less. Suddenly you're staring at 3rd & 6 or 3rd & 7 and if you don't convert it then the drive ends, period. But another situation that will also happen is they run the football on 1st AND 2nd down, and then you're left with a 3rd down pass that you CAN'T miss, otherwise the drive is over.

    Simultaneous to this increase in pressure to make every pass count, there's a problem with respect to depth and efficiency. If you're in an offense that runs the football a LOT then a large percentage of the offense's plays are by definition low YPA plays. Run plays gain 4 to 5 yards per run, usually more toward 4 than 5. To be an efficient offense you need to be gaining 5.5+ yards per play in total. So what does that mean? It means you have to be gaining MORE yards on a per play basis passing the football than other teams that pass more. Other teams are alright gaining 6.5 net yards per pass play. But you need to be gaining 7+ net yards per pass play because of your run/pass mix.

    So at the same time that you're almost exclusively asked to throw in situations where you're feeling like you can't miss a pass or else the drive will end (e.g. third down), you're also asked to be completing big passes more often than guys on other teams because you need to be averaging higher yardage than them.

    This is why it really is counter-intuitive to me when people keep trying to say that a QB that is asked to pass the football less than other QBs has all these advantages, less pressure, etc.
     
    Mile High Fin and Stringer Bell like this.
  24. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    I'll ask you like I ask everyone who says something like this; if it's as easy as you make it seem, why do so many QB's bust out of the league?

    First and foremost, Russell Wilson is efficient. He doesn't need 35 att/game to score enough points. He is ridiculously efficient. But, that still doesn't mean he's not asked to do much.

    Russell Wilson had 452 attempts last season while Peyton Manning had 597. Russell Wilson also had 118 rushing attempts and was sacked 42 times. Manning had 24 rushing attempts and 17 sacks. Wilson's total 'QB' snaps were 612 and Manning's were 638. So in total, the ball was placed in Manning's hands to make a play at a rate of 1.625 times per game more than Russell Wilson. Wilson is asked to do as much as other QB's, very much so. With limited weapons or just surveying the field, it's often that running is the best option, not to mention he has a horrible offensive line so scrambling and rushing is often necessary for Wilson.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  25. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    CK, I think it compares to shooting free throws with the game on the line vs shooting free throws when you're up by 25. Wilson isn't asked to carry the offense. This doesn't make him not good, I'm just saying, I think he can play free, especially when his defense is holding opponents to 16ppg on average.
     
  26. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Again, a fallacy.

    If Russell Wilson were not as efficient as he is, that offense goes NOWHERE.

    This entire idea that he's got less pressure because he isn't asked to carry the offense is a complete sham.
     
  27. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I agree you can't say because RW is asked to pass less that RW is given less responsibility, but I think your logic is also flawed.

    Pitchers in the NL go up to bat far fewer times than a field player, and the pressure is certainly far lower on them to hit the ball well. There are tons more examples like this of course (including in the NFL).

    The key thing is not # of times you do something, but rather the assigned/expected responsibilities of that player. And in RW's case, he's expected to be efficient even if the number of attempts is less. That's the angle I'd take, not # of attempts.
     
  28. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    You're also mixing up your comparisons. By comparing it to a free throw shooter who is up by 25 points you're implying that Russell Wilson is more efficient because he's constantly playing from ahead on the scoreboard.

    Another fallacy.

    When Russell Wilson was TRAILING in the game, he had a 95.0 passer rating in 2014. He also ran 34 times for 348 yards (an incredible 10.2 yard average) and 3 touchdowns while trailing. His passer rating while ahead in the scoreboard was 98.6 so he's basically the same passer ahead in the score as he is behind in the score, and a much more dangerous scrambler when down in the score.

    The problem is people are going to keep their perceptions of Russell Wilson no matter how much evidence flies directly into their teeth. That's what I have found over time about him.
     
  29. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I completely disagree.

    The fewer opportunities you have, the more you personally feel the pressure to perform during each one of those opportunities. You're introducing a completely different element with respect to pitchers getting at-bats, the concept of what is expected of a player and what his role is.

    It's a simple fact if you're a player and you don't have very many opportunities to go out and show what you can do then you feel increased pressure with each one of those opportunities. This is not arguable, IMO.
     
    Mile High Fin likes this.
  30. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    You make good points. I understand that Wilson has more pressure to complete the few pass attempts he gets but because of the threat of the running game and read option, the opposing defense is left guessing and over pursuing. In other words, Wilson's pass attempts are easier than Brady's. There's also a ton of pressure if a team expects you to throw for 30+ TDs. I really doubt Wilson could complete 30+ TDs with the type of supporting cast other teams have (Patriots, Broncos, Chargers, Saints, whoever).
     
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You didn't condition your argument based on what the expected role of a player is, so my example is a great counter-example to what you said. But let's say you do keep the responsibilities the same. What you said still isn't true in general. Do you think a surgeon that performs a specific surgery twice as often as the another one (they're the same type of surgeon) feels less pressure each time he does it? If anything it's probably the opposite because they're rushed with time and have to be extra careful with what they do. So no your argument doesn't hold in general.

    Also, in the NFL, I seriously doubt most backup QB's that get few opportunities feel the same pressure as some starting QB, like Brady or Manning or Marino. You can tell how much those guys care about getting it right.
     
  32. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    First off, the read-option only makes his pass attempts easier to the extent that it threatens the defense, and the extent to which it threatens the defense is tied to HIS skill at executing it. So you're basically accusing a basketball player only being able to hit spot-up threes because he's always open, when the reason he's always open is because he's so good at attacking the paint.

    Second, yes a commitment to running the football more often can make passes easier to complete when called. However, that advantage is mitigated by the fact that his passes MUST be more efficient and must be completed for big plays more often, because of the changed role of the passing game in the total offensive mix. To not account for this would be foolish.

    Finally, you say there's a ton more pressure if your role in an offense is to throw 30+ TDs (and to achieve that by throwing many more passes). In what way? Demonstrate.
     
    Mile High Fin and djphinfan like this.
  33. Limbo

    Limbo Mad Stillz

    2,476
    1,128
    113
    Mar 21, 2013
    All those teams have better targets than the Seahawks had last season. Behind a sh-tty line he was throwing to a bunch of 2s and 3s, at best. This is the first time he'll have a hi-level talent to go to in Graham.

    And I suppose we should check out how they do in obvious passing situations. Wilson's passer rating on 3rd and 9+ is 80. Brady's is 86. (Tannehill's is 50.) When he's behind by 2 possessions, Wilson's passer rating is 131.
     
  34. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Terrible example. Once again you're bleeding the concept of role into the argument. It's a surgeon's role to NEVER make a mistake, because the cost is tremendous. Often life and death.

    You argue this as if you've never spoken to or had any exposure to any athletes. Ask a basketball player if he prefers to have his number called a lot or a little. He'll tell you a lot, because that takes the pressure off to be perfect every time it happens.

    Have you talked to these backup quarterbacks? In general I would not be surprised if on a per snap basis they felt tremendously MORE pressure. They gave by definition very few opportunities to show that they need an increased role. So every single opportunity is precious to them. Starters do not feel the same way, and the ones that do, well that kind of urgency probably has something to do with their being the starter in the first place.

    What you're describing is what YOU feel, as the viewer, when a backup quarterback is in the game. You feel less pressure on their behalf because you have low expectations of that backup. But that's irrelevant. What's relevant is what they feel.
     
    Mile High Fin likes this.
  35. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    My examples were good. You talked about at-bats, not making any distinction in the role of the player, so I pointed out (correctly) you needed to do that. In your response to that post you made a general claim about fewer opportunities => greater pressure, assuming one conditions on expected role. I pointed out you were wrong there.

    The problem is not my examples, it's what you write.

    As far as the last stuff about describing what I think athletes feel, let me tell you that a lot of athletes do interviews, and they tell you sometimes how driven (internal pressure) they are to succeed to the point that it's baseless for you to go out and claim they don't feel as much pressure as a backup QB. You're definitely no expert on the pressure Brady, Manning or Marino feel when they enter a game relative to a backup QB.
     
  36. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    OK.
     
    Mile High Fin likes this.
  37. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I disagree. However, good job at ignoring the bit about his defense taking alot of pressure off of him. Or the run game, for that matter. This also isn't me knocking Wilson. It's not his fault he's not asked to throw 30 plus times a game.
     
  38. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    I wish he costed less and ran more. That's it. Now that I know we can opt out soon I already said I don't mind the contract.
     
  39. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Actually it is.
     
  40. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I'll wait while you re-read the part about his efficiency when he's playing from behind. Shouldn't take you long to find it.
     

Share This Page