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

Is Ryan Tannehill the long term solution at QB?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Chuck Wilson, Nov 1, 2015.

Is Ryan Tannehill the long term answer at QB for us?

  1. Yes

    44 vote(s)
    40.7%
  2. No

    39 vote(s)
    36.1%
  3. Not quite sure, need to see more

    25 vote(s)
    23.1%
  1. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    solid points, I just go the old school way and watch him execute the responsibilities of the position, his footwork, his play speed setting up, how he improvises off pressure, look at his leadership qualities, break down his delivery, his accuracy and ball placement, and his touch, all things that can be evaluated in iso..

    Im personally at the point where some of those things do not pass the eye test for a hi level qb, but, I keep trying to find ways to understand just how bad this oline is relative to the qb play..
     
    Rock Sexton likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Depends on what you mean by "respected" naturally.

    But Warren Moon had 3 consecutive losing seasons to start his career (Tannehill btw doesn't have losing records his first three years.. just not winning records), and Dan Fouts didn't have a winning season until his 6th season (though he didn't start all 16 games in any of his first 5 seasons.. still he never won a majority of the games he started until the 6th season), so it's happened before even though it's rare.
     
  3. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    we really need to find a better way for folks who love stats to use the qb rating system...maybe this qbr rating is better...ive heard most people talk crap about it, but I also know that ryan throwing for 300 yards in complete garbage time last week will not be detected by the qb rating system..

    whatta you really think? does it factor in running yards by the qb?...what are some of the pro's and con's and why do you feel its a much more accurate system?
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    QBR is rightfully dissed because ESPN won't tell you the formula so you have no way of knowing what kinds of stuff they put in there. Note also that the more parameters (things you can vary) you have in a formula the better it can be made to predict any desired outcome. I have a sneaky suspicion that's the primary reason QBR has a higher correlation with winning than traditional passer rating.

    Passer rating is problematic because it includes points scored (one shouldn't include what you're trying to predict in a formula), and it includes arbitrary weights on the different components. There simply isn't a great way of analyzing QB's independently. Y/A is probably the best available measure that's relatively "clean".
     
  5. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I think you should start a thread on the differences, maybe a time for a new detailed investigation into both these systems..one looks to be much more detailed than the other, but yet we completely ignore it...especially when it has our qb ranked 31st..
     
  6. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating

    I respect your knowledge for the stats part of the game, so your saying your just going to dimiss these numbers because you think there up to somethin shady?

    is there really no article that depicts everything in their system?

    can we not come to a conclusion that one is better than the other based on the criteria?

    point blank question, being the numbers guy you are, are you telling me that being rated 31 st by this system doesn't disturb you or should I say intrigue you?

    the article im reading seems to be a better way of analyzing a qb thru numbers.?..am I wrong?
     
  7. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It's a proprietary measure so no as far as I know there is no source that discloses the full formula.

    Just to be clear, I don't mean "shady" as in something nefarious. I mean that it's easy from a mathematical standpoint to increase the predictive power of a model by adding more parameters. Not sure how best to explain this without going into math, but try this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_series#/media/File:Exp_series.gif

    You see that blue curve there that doesn't change? Suppose that represents the "true" model (reality). The red curve is let's say your attempt to predict the blue curve. With zero parameters in something called a Taylor series you get a bad fit (that horizontal red line at the beginning). As you increase parameters (the "n") you get better and better fits with the red curve. So from a mathematical point of view you only need to keep adding parameters to get as good a fit as you want.

    So the question is whether QBR incorporates any fundamental insights into what makes up great QB play or not. My suspicion is that it doesn't (otherwise they'd probably publish it) and that it achieves higher correlation with wins solely because they just add more and more parameters (could be anything, like performance on 1st down, 2nd down.. oh why not add time to throw, etc.. doesn't mean they know how those things all relate to each other.. it's simple mathematically speaking to produce better fits by having a computer find the "optimal" weights regardless of whether it has any relation to reality or not).

    Hope that's clearer, and yes I tend to err on the side of dismissing stuff where people don't show their methodology. Can't trust people dude..
     
  8. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    It is definitely complex and there is no perfect rating system. Stats are only reliable incorporating the context in which they were accumulated. What I like about QBR is it won't significantly skew a QBs stats positively by throwing a 1 yard TD pass to a wide-open TE when the team is down by 30 points with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter or negatively when a QB throws an interception that was on target when the team is down by 5 with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter. It will take into account runs, fumbles (regardless of which team recovers) and all the little things QB rating doesn't take into account. It also assigns responsibility to all players on the team participating in the play...QB, OL, WR, etc...which on the surface I would think the Tannehill fan base would like b/c the main argument I perceive to be is his poor play doesn't take into account the OL, WR, etc...Of course, the more context that is taken into account Tannehill's rank drops. The other factor it ways heavily is "clutch."

    I recommend this read to get familiar with QBR:

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating

    Also this one from Football Outsiders:

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

    What I like about it is QBR would factor in all the variables for these scenarios whereas QB rating would totally ignore the context:

    QB A:
    Team is being blown out 35-3 in the 4th quarter with 10 minutes left and the ball at their own 20 yard line.

    1st and 10...QB hits WR for a 5 yard completion.
    2nd and 5...QB holds the ball too long behind adequate protection, fumbles the ball as he is hit and O Lineman recovers football for a 8 yard loss.
    3rd and 13...QB dumps ball off 2 yards pass the line of scrimmage and WR is tackled 3 yards short of 1st down.
    4th and 3...team punts.


    QB B:
    Context...team is down by 5 points with 45 seconds left and the ball is at the opponents 15 yard line.

    1st and 10...QB avoids pass rush on all out blitz, scrambles outside and throws ball away when WRs are covered avoiding a sack the average QB would take.
    2nd and 10...QB is on target to WR in endzone and WR drops easy catch.
    3rd and 10...QB is on target for 13 yards resulting in a 1st down.
    1st and goal at the 2 yard line...QB runs the ball in for a TD and team WINS ballgame.


    According to the standard QB rating system the following ratings would be given for those series completely void of context:

    QB A = 97.9 QB rating
    QB B = 47.9 QB rating

    QBR would take all that into account and be assured that QB B would be closer to 100 (top of the scale) and QB A would be closer to 10 or so (bottom of scale).

    Of course, QBR doesn't have a simple calculator online to plug in att, comp, yards, td passes, interceptions and get that magical number. QBR requires ESPN workers watching video to assign responsibility and algorithms based on 10 years of detail analysis to what leads to winning games done to determine the rating when it was originally set up. ESPN has also made modifications to the algorithms along the way to improve it.
     
  9. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    13,501
    6,245
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Oh boy. Wtf? :hang:
     
    Chuck Wilson likes this.
  10. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I think a lot of it is based on experts evaluating the games, and I'm coming to that conclusion based on some of the items they evaluate, like Rodgers rolling out to buy time, because there is no mathematical equation to figure that out, iow, a computer gets the input that Rodgers had 7 seconds to throw, it can't compute whether that was due to Oline play or Rodgers ability to avoid the rush, that must be assessed by an individual watching the game, and there are several of those items in that whole QBR thing.

    Also just looking at the fairly high grade they gave Rodgers, that would obviously be impossible judging simply on math, he didn't have any number to speak of in that game, wasn't it like 77 yards passing?

    Math is obviously good to evaluate certain things, but a players performance can really only be ascertained by an individual who knows what he's looking at, but like you said, can't trust people, and I agree, the only thing you can do is find out who is right most of the time, over time, and go by their analysis.

    I have learned to trust myself over the experts because I've been more on point, BUT, they're also dealing with politics and so forth so you can't always know if they're telling it like they see it, hence the can't trust people theory.
     
  11. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Yeah, I think ESPN's QBR has to take into account human input. You guys have some good examples.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  12. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    I loved WPA, but advanced football got bought out.
     
  13. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Video watching definitely a part of it. I am sure they have access to angles we don't get to see live to get a better view of the OL, WRs, etc...Can never fully eliminate the human element even when it comes to quantitative. Also limitation like not being able to factor in defense when obviously that plays a part. Of course, a QB is going to score higher if he is given 10 seconds to throw to a wide open WR in the end zone 50 yards down the field than one getting sacked on an all out blitz without the time to get a chance to escape.

    I do really like it factors in context and "clutch." In my opinion clutch is really what separates Top Tier QBs (franchise, elite, whatever term someone likes) from lower tier is converting 3rd downs, playing lights out when the game is on the line at the end of the 4th quarter, etc...
     
    Finster likes this.
  14. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I couldn't agree more, I've said many times that if Tanne had shown those abilities I'd live with his other issues, look at Tebow, by all standards a horrible QB, but he has the "clutch gene", he would play his best when the chips were down, and I'm not advocating starting a Tebow, his mechanics are a real mess, but the "clutch gene" there is undeniable.

    Flacco is another example, a middling QB until the game is on the line, Eli as well has shown that, but Tanne has not, in fact he's shown more of a propensity to play poorly in those situations, and I know from reading your stuff, and that particular comment, that we agree that that ability is the key difference in championship play.
     
    AdamC13 likes this.
  15. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Yep. Eli and Flacco are both clearly better than Tannehill.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  16. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    Lol this thread has turned into a frickin' science class with all these formulas
     
  17. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    Eli is clearly better. I'd say Flacco is BARELY better and that's because of one magical playoff run. For me they are almost the same QB
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  18. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Hey man, that's enough for me. 11 TDs, 0 INTs in playoffs and Super Bowl MVP. He's always played well in playoff games, btw. Regular season doesn't mean anything compared to the playoffs in my book. That's why Brady is way ahead of Peyton.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Wait.. in the regular season Eli is certainly NOT clutch, at least no more than Tannehill is. And if that's the case one should first see how Tannehill performs in the playoffs before claiming Eli > Tannehill because of the "clutch" factor. So Flacco I agree.. Eli no until Tannehill has a good defense to work with in the playoffs.
     
    Chuck Wilson likes this.
  20. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Has Tannehill had the opportunity to get us into the wildcard yet? Yes, he has had the opportunity. He hasn't. So far, in big games, he's the opposite of clutch.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That's regular season. Like I said, Eli in the regular season is NOT clutch. So for proper comparison you need to put Tannehill in the playoffs with a good defense and see what happens.
     
  22. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
  23. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Completely in agreement.

    Tebow has a 9-7 career record as a starter, including two playoff games (1-1). Out of those 9 wins Tebow led his team to "SIX" 4th quarter comebacks (meaning his team was trailing in the 4th quarter at some point and his team came back and won) and "SEVEN" GWD (Game Winning Drives...led his team on a drive in the 4th quarter or OT that put his team ahead for good). The Broncos also won another game 38-24 against Oakland when they were tied 24-24 to start the 4th quarter but the go-ahead TD was a result of a punt return so despite leading them on another drive for a TD he doesn't get credit for a GWD on that one.

    Tannehill has a 26-29 career record and is credited with "eight" 4th quarter comebacks. However; 3 of those games the winning points were scored by either special teams or defense (Landry return TD against the Redskins this year and Fede blocking punt out of end zone against Vikings last year and Wake sacking Dalton in the end zone in OT against the Bengals...but somehow those games go under Tannehill's count total for 4th quarter comebacks...LOL) and "five" GWD.

    IMO that is the main reason why Tannehill is NOT the answer, franchise, elite, tier 2, whatever b/c he doesn't win games in the clutch. Pretty much the polar opposite of Tebow.

    Tebow, the QB that has no skills = 16 starts, 9 wins and 7 Game Winning Drives
    Tannehill, the QB that has skills = 55 starts, 26 wins and 5 Game Winning Drives

    Oh yeah, and during Tannehill's reign the opposing QB has led their team to a victory over Miami with a GWD in 12 games. So Tannehill is 5-12 in GWD against the opposition. If he were to have flipped that he would have a career record of 33-22, Miami would have made the playoffs and I would be singing his praises about what a great QB we have.

    Just like Tannehill led team late season collapses began his senior year in college so has the opposing teams QB pulling out 4th quarter comebacks and GWD...Tannehill had "zero" 4th quarter comebacks and "one" GWD (tied with Nebraska his junior year and A&M kicked two FGs in the 4th quarter and Nebraska kicked one for an end score of 9-6). The opposing team had "four" 4th quarter comebacks and "four" GWD by opposing QB.

    So if we include Tannehill's college and pro totals:

    Tannehill = 6 Game Winning Drives
    Opposing QB = 16 Game Winning Drives
     
    Rock Sexton, dolphin25 and Finster like this.
  24. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well the second link doesn't help because the only thing it says about the regular season is finishing with two wins. The first link says he had 25 career game-winning drives. But that's in 11 years, so it's not impressive at all.

    Here are some better stats:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannEl00/splits/

    Look at how he does with 2 minutes left or 4 minutes left. When tied, he's pretty bad. When trailing he's average. And he's no better in the 4th quarter than in other quarters. No he's not clutch in the regular season. Eli's "clutch" reputation is due entirely to those two playoff runs that ended in beating NE. Thing is, the defense was more important for the Giants' wins in both games than Eli or anyone else.
     
  25. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Fair enough. I still think he's much better than Tannehill.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  26. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    Tebow. So clutch he can't secure himself a job.
     
  27. Dolphins1Beatles

    Dolphins1Beatles Ziggy Stardust

    4,749
    1,940
    113
    Oct 9, 2009
    New York
    I don't know. But I am incredibly jealous of a team like the Panthers who are 7-0 with Ted Ginn Jr as a featured starting WR yet Cam Newton is still making big plays, any Miami hasn't been able to buy a winning record. I'm still hopeful, but I don't trust him in big games - aka December games with the playoffs on the line, Patriots road games, National games. Just feels like this is headed to familiar territory in the QB department...
     
  28. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    I thanked you for your post because I laughed so hard I almost fell out of my bed.

    What planet are you living on to say Eli Manning isn't better than Ryan Tannehill?
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  29. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Living on planet Earth.

    Other than what Eli did in those two playoff runs to the SB, what is so great about him as a QB? Yes, he won the SB twice, but personally I think that had more to do with the Giants' defense than him. I certainly don't consider Tannehill to be better than Eli (Eli has the aforementioned playoff records among other things), but given that Eli is really not that great in the regular season I just think for fair comparison you need to put Tannehill in a position similar to what Eli faced before judging based on "clutch".

    Good you didn't fall out of bed though :wink2:
     
  30. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    So you totally disregard Tannehill's piss poor performance against the Bills and Jets with a win and your in situation? Or how he vanished this past Thursday in the biggest game of the season?

    At this point there's not much to compare to be quite honest. Eli Manning plays his best in big games. Ryan Tannehill plays his worst in big games.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Not disregarding anything. Eli can't be relied on to play well in "big" regular season games either. His "clutch" reputation is entirely due to those 8 playoff games (but not in playoff games in seasons he didn't win the SB.. he played pretty bad in those). Clearly those matter, but I just don't consider Eli that great a QB. Really not worth getting into an argument over btw.. it's not a big deal if we think differently.
     
  32. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    imo thats never been in question..
     
  33. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    No it's not a big deal if we think differently, I'm just trying to understand your line of thinking.

    If my memory serves me correctly two seasons ago Eli Manning came up big in a week 17 win and your in game against the Cowboys.

    I'm not going to start researching every clutch situation Eli Manning had ever been in but I know when you look at his resume compared to Ryan Tannehill there really is no comparison. We can have this debate when Ryan comes close to putting up a game like Eli did this past Sunday, let alone his two clutch postseasons ending in Lombardi trophies and Super bowl MVPs.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  34. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Given his relatively mediocre stats when he should be clutch, like in the last 2-4 minutes of the game when tied or trailing, or in the 4th quarter, the "logical" response to someone saying he was clutch in some regular season game is that it has to be selective memory. Just due to random chance, every QB will have a great game here and there, and on occasion that will be in a game people will say is important. But trends over time don't look like those for Eli in the regular season unless the supposed "clutch" performances were more aberrations than skill.

    And check out his stats from the 3 playoff years where the Giants didn't win the SB. Terrible in two (in fact he was arguably one of the reasons they lost) and average in another. Clearly not clutch when it counted.

    Anyway, keep in mind I fully agree those 8 playoff wins and 2 SB's count. Just saying other than that you're not looking at that great a QB.
     
  35. Chuck Wilson

    Chuck Wilson New Member

    89
    54
    0
    Oct 20, 2015
    But that's like saying IF Michael Jordan didn't hit that game winning shot he wouldn't be clutch. That's what makes him great man.

    I'm not going to continue the argument but there's no comparison between a QB that can't sniff the post season and one as accomplished as Eli Manning and I'll just leave it at that.
     
  36. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    See, THIS is the stuff I have an issue with. You want to complain about Tannehill not being "clutch?" Go ahead. Although, be honest, and admit that "making a play" late in a game, still requires a receiver to run a good route and make a catch. However, what I bolded and enlarged above, you're complaining about opposing offenses making plays against our DEFENSE, and holding Tannehill responsible for that. It's exactly what a bunch of us were saying last season. Tannehill could have changed NOTHING, and had the defense made three or four stops, we win three or four more games, and we're in the playoffs, and, like you said, "I would be singing his praises about what a great QB we have." If you can't see what's wrong with that...

    I don't know why I bother reading stuff about Tannehill on here.
     
    brandon27, bakedmatt and Fin D like this.
  37. yoge

    yoge New Member

    195
    60
    0
    Dec 29, 2013
    Eli is in a higher tier than Tannehill. If you all
    are comparing THill to other qb's then he belongs in
    Kapernik, Fitzpatrick, Foles camp. Newton, Dalton, Carr
    , Flacco, Palmer is the tier Tannehill will be in if
    he improves.
     
  38. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Cbrad, I hope you see know what we were trying to explain to you before about how people are clearly making w/l record an overwhelming QB stat.
     
    resnor likes this.
  39. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    It's good for a laugh.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  40. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    LOL...I love this fantasy world you live in where the game is supposed to be over after the Dolphins take the lead. You actually expect the Dolphins defense to stop the opposing teams offense 3 or 4 times at the end of the game while our own offense doesn't score? UNBELIEVABLE! Scratch that, anything coming out of Tannehill's fan club to excuse his lack of being clutch is no longer surprising.

    And I assume the games you are talking about are Miami's defense should have stopped Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers? If so, what planet are you living on? Manning has 43 4th quarter comebacks and 54 GWD to go with only 90 losses.

    Maybe Ross can petition Goodell requesting a rule change stating no team shall score points in the 4th quarter against the Dolphins so we have a chance to win.

    Does it really not click that QBs who are clutch turn it up in the 4th quarter leading their team to points? Just look at games this week...Dalton, Bridgewater, Flacco, Brees, Ryan, Luck all led their team to double-digit points in the 4th quarter to win the game or at least to send it to OT...happens all the time. Brady, Palmer, Manning, Smith, Newton all led their teams to double-digits points in 4th+OT as well. Four more teams scored 7 points in the 4th quarter.

    In 14 games played this weekend (an average football weekend) there were 7 Game Winning Drives by QBs (Dalton, Bridgewater, Flacco, Brees, Wilson, Winston, Newton) in 28 starts. Again, Tannehill has 5 Game Winning Drives in 55 starts.

    You know, there is nothing in the rules that states when the other team scores Miami can turn around and score themselves to re-take the lead all the way up to the end of the game.
     
    dolphin25 and Rock Sexton like this.

Share This Page