his is a follow on from this thread last off season. https://thephins.com/threads/why-tannehill- should-be-a-better-qb-now-lazor-is-gone.88754/ I looked at couple of things, especially with regard to Tannehill's performance under pressure with Lazor as OC and whether it was a Tannehill problem or a Lazor problem. Overall passer rating Sherman 79.1 Lazor: 90.7 Gase: 93.5 Passer Rating when tied/ahead Sherman: 79.2 (+ 0.1) Lazor: 101.2 (+10.5) Gase: 95.2 (+1.7) Passer rating when behind Sherman: 79.1 (-) Lazor: 85.4 (-5.1) Gase: 92.5 (-1.0) 4th quarter passer rating Sherman: 77.2 (-1.9) Lazor: 90.7 (-) Gase 92.3 (-1.2) Against the Blitz Sherman: 82.5 (+3.4) Lazor: 78.7 (-12.0) Gase: 114.8 (+21.3) So think this goes a long way to establishing that Tannehill does not have problems with dealing with pressure or lacked the leadership/clutch to help his team come from behind. The problem in 2014/2015 was Lazor's play calling whenever he was behind. Although I should say that I am not happy with Tannehill's overall performance in 2016. I did expect a higher level of performance. The total team meltdowns against Tennessee and Baltimore count heavier as a proportion of his total season because of injury, but we have no way of knowing what Tannehill would actually have done in the last 3 games if the injury did not occur.
I Would have been happy ifhe had been able to get his pssser rating up to 100. I am getting tired of "maybe next year". I am a Tannehill believer, and think that a lot of the criticism he has recieved is unfair,.
This -15.1 should be -5.3 since all your other values are relative to overall passer rating (makes Lazor look a lot less bad). Anyway, the bigger problem with the "passer rating when behind" stat for "clutch" arguments is that "passer rating when behind" isn't restricted to 4th quarter, or <4 minutes or so left. That's a stat for playing from behind at ANY time during the game. Tannehill was abysmal passer rating wise when he played from behind with <4 minutes left in the game his first 4 years except during 2014 (one of the Lazor years). That for me is much more of a clutch stat. Also.. Tannehill's pocket presence problems were pretty clear to see. It doesn't show up that well looking at passer rating under blitz conditions because a lot of the time he didn't attempt a pass when he showed bad pocket presence. And if you don't attempt a pass that won't affect passer rating! Regardless, the guy has improved under Gase with both the "clutch" and "pocket presence" issues. He's not yet great at either, but he's definitely improving.
Thanks for catching that cbrad. I have edited the OP now. I will do another dive into clutch/pressure situations specifically but for this thread I wanted to look more at the difference between Lazor and Gase. Anywat his rating for trailing with <4 minutes to go was 86.7 (13 attempts) and his rating for +/- 7 in the 4th quarter was 87.9 (50 attempts). I think the sample sizes are a bit too small to draw any specific conclusions on yet but are generally hopeful
Actually I think it shows Lazor was an excellent playcaller when he didn't have any pressure on him. If you extrapolate what Tannehill was capable of doing in that offense you get him to a passer rating of close to 100 assuming a small 1 or 2 point drop off (Tannehill's drop off when trailing under other OCs). I'll do some work later to get more detail as to how athat would have affected our record. generally speaking team with a team passer rating of 100 is good for 12-4, but I also need to factor in the defense as well. But I'd pencil Lazor's playcalling as being good for at least an additional 6 losses over the 2 years he was OC.
Definitely hopeful and yes 13 attempts in 2016 is too small to conclude anything. But just to point out what that 86.7 in 2016 is being compared to, Tannehill's passer rating while trailing with <4 min left from 2012-2015 was 63.3. That's with 144 attempts and passer rating standard deviations are more or less stable once you get to ~150 attempts or so. That standard deviation is around 12 at 144 attempts so the 86.7 is around 2 standard deviations above 63.3.. VERY good sign for the Gase + Tannehill combo.
It would have been but his first few games in a new offense plus the injury shortened season is what messed with your numbers. From the Pit game on, he was a Top 10 QB in rating.
The last 2 games he played, when we were in a playoff hunt, he had 4 INTs and 4 fumbles and turned the ball over 5 times, his performances in crucial games has been bad.
You're going to cherry pick that because it fits your agenda. In his last game he had a 125 passer rating. Did you forget to mention that? And the game before that against the Ravens the entire team was chewed up spit out. And at that point the Dolphins had just won like 6-7 straight games He had 9 fumbles, 3 lost on the entire year. That's less than Palmer, Winston, Prescott, Rivers, Bradford, Dalton, Rodgers, and Luck.
I'm not cheery picking, I'm talking about crucial games, he's played poorly overall in those games, and once we're in a position to make the playoffs, he turned into a turnover machine. In his first 11 games he had 8 INTs and 5 fumbles, in the last 2 he had 4 INTs and 4 fumbles, and that is fact.
In one game he had 3 INT's. lol...His last game he had a 125 passer rating. Only in your world is that playing poorly
He fumbled 3 times in that game and turned the ball over twice, who cares what the rating is, TO's out trump that every time.
That's not cherry picking. That's all the data we have where he was playing for a playoff spot at the end of a season. That's the closest he's ever gotten to a playoff game. What you're doing is cherry picking. You're not even in the realm of what Finster is referring to. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From the Steelers game and on, he had a 100 rating. He had a streak like that before, under Lazor. During this stretch, he was a slightly more productive Alex Smith. Meaning, same amount of yardage, ypa, attempts. Just more productive on the TD from but also more mitskes on the INT front.
For "the season on the line" I'd say the test should be after week 8 when we got to 4-4. From that point we were playing lose one game and you're out of the playoffs football up until the Baltimore game, and then we also had a free game against New England in week 17. We only got those buffers because other teams lost. When we were at 4-4 many people we had to go 7-1 over the rest of the season to make the playoffs. When we played Baltimore was when the pressure came off a little bit because of the tie-breaker situation it looked like we could afford to drop 1 game and still make the playoffs. I won't dispute the games before we got to 4-4 because you can say that making the playoffs from 1-4 isn't a realistic hope, but from 4-4 your season will be on the line every game.
To work out the effect Lazor's playcalling had on Miami's W-L record I will look at how passer rating achieved affects W-L records. I have correlated offensive and defensive passer ratings to W-L percentage for the period 2006 to 2016. In 2006 the NFL average PR was 78.5 and in 2016 it was 87.6. So I have adjusted each year's PR to a 2016 base figure so that a more accurate comparison can be made. Average NFL PR 2006 to 2016 (adjusted to 2016 base): 89.13 Offensive passer rating Correlation to win %: 0.67 Std Dev: 11.98 Line of best fit: 68 = 0 wins; 108 = 16 wins; +2.5 = +1 win Miami's actual 2014 and 2015, converted to 2016 base: 2014 Offence: 93.0 10.0 expected wins Actual record 8-8 2015 Offence: 88.4 8.2 expected wins Actual record 6-10 If Lazor's playcalling had resulted in a 5 point drop off in Tannehill's passer rating when behind (NFL average drop off) then Tannehill would have had expected passer ratings of 102.5 in 2014 (behind 56%) and 92.5 in 2015 (behind 71%) with a difference of -9.5 points in 2014 and -4.1 points in 2015. So Lazor's playcalling deficiencies cost us 3.8 expected wins in 2014 and 1.6 expected wins in 2015. If Lazor had Tannehill managed to achieve the record Gase and Sherman had achieved with Tannehill, an average 1 point drop off from not behind to behind, that would be roughly another 1.1 expected wins per year. It is difficult to include defensive adjustments because passer rating allowed is strongly affected by win probability. Teams that are ahead play more conservatively and avoid throwing interceptions and because teams that are behind throw more interceptions leading teams tend to start with better field position and score more TDs as well. Basically if Lazor's playcalling had been better and caused an increase in Tannehill's passer rating made it would have helped the defense register a lower passer rating allowed. However, assuming there is no change in the the defense. Correlation of difference between offensive passer rating and defensive passer rating to win% is 0.80 Line of best fit: -32 (0 wins); +32 (16 wins); +4 differential = +1 win. Based on the figures discussed above 2014 Lazor cost 2.4 wins with an NFL average drop off and 1.0 win in 2015; 3.4 wins total. Using Tannehill's actual drop off under other OCs would add another 0.6 wins per season. Given that Tannhill has not had a significant drop off in his passer rating from being tied/ahead to behind under other OCs I would say it is fair to ascribe the majority of the drop off in this situation to Lazor. In the thread mentioned in the OP we discussed the effect of Lazor abandoning the run whenever he was behind and how this was clearly shown in the run/pass splits. So I would say that a conservative estimate is that Lazor cost the the Dolphins a minimum of 3 wins in 2014/2015 due to his playcalling, and maybe as high as 7 or 8 wins.
100.13 to be exact. (He was averaging a 102.65 over that span). That 100.13 would have made him the 6th best qb in the league last year.
damn man,Puly and C-brad should become a team, y'all are smart as hell...glad to have you on this site.
The Ravens game was the biggest game of the year at that point, because if they won, as they did, we would be tied with them with 4 games remaining, with them having the tie breaker, and it also looked as if everyone was trying for 1 spot because 1 AFCW team was already locked up, so that game was huge at the time, the biggest of the year to that point. With Den at 8-4, and losing a tie break game to a now 7-5 Balt, our playoff hopes were in serious jeopardy at 7-5 because of that loss, in embarrassing fashion, it wasn't until after this that teams lost enough for us to have leeway, we dropped to 8th seed after that loss.
Real shock jdang downplaying Rt's numbers during that stretch. Slightly better than Alex Smith?? Laughable agenda he has with Ryan while always crying how he is on the fence with what he thinks about him. Seems like the fence swings one way only Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
While Ryan had a bad game for sure that day , the defense was abysmal. Game was over at the half. Probably worse defensive performance of the season ... but you know , it's Tannehill's fault as usual. Thank god for that made up "injury clause" or for sure it would've been the end of the Tannehill era Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Appreciate the effort, but I don't like this reasoning. You're basically taking all the positives of Lazor for granted, then saying if Lazor didn't have some key negatives we'd have won a lot more. But you don't do the same for Sherman. For example, you're focusing on a 5 point drop when behind with Lazor.. but 5 points from what? From Lazor's average, not from league average! Why is this important? Because Lazor got Tannehill to slightly above league average passer rating in 2014 and to average in 2015, while Sherman (understandably) failed to get a rookie Tannehill anywhere close to league average in 2012 but also failed in 2013. Why take the ability of Lazor to get Tannehill's average rating at or above average for granted? Why not point out Sherman couldn't do that and blame Sherman for the extra losses had he been able to do so? Point is.. you can't just criticize Lazor for not being that good when behind without giving him credit for being so good when tied/ahead. Give him credit for being good when tied/ahead and if anything it's easier to show Sherman was "responsible" for more losses. Again though.. that would be unfair to Sherman (at least to some degree) because he was dealing with a rookie. btw.. only math issue I have without double-checking anything is when you say this: "Average NFL PR 2006 to 2016 (adjusted to 2016 base): 89.13" If you adjust each year's average to 2016 average, then you MUST end up with an overall average that's the same as the 2016 average of 87.6. .. anyway not important as it's just a tiny technical issue.
Effort counts for a LOT. Can't remember the thread but the one you started where you adjusted Luck's ratings by division was VERY informative. Having said that, I'll criticize any problem I see without holding back.
I totally think Lazor did a grat job in the tied/ahead category. Actually his play design/play calling in that situation appears to be better than Gase's. If he had maintained that level iwhen behind then Philbin would still be HC and Lazor would be HC for another team. I looked into the average thing to. What seems to be happening is that defenses are catching up with offensive improvements. There was a period when the average NFL offence was performing sligtly better than they are now. I hadn't looked into that in more detail though so it may also have something to do with passer rating formula not scaling linearly.
I have started collecting data on that again. Early version is that Luck has started pulling away from Tannehill, but the career difference is still small.
Did a quick plot of the passer rating data. Most of the data points are above the straight line drawn from 2006's average PR to 2016's average PR. Cbrad I believe this is what accounts for the discrepancy between the base figure and the average passer rating. If I wanted to analyse historical passing I believe the average passer rating of 2006 to 2016 would be the best number to use as the bade, but because I wanted to compare historical data to present day performance is the reason Imchose to use 2016 as the base.
I'm going to take a wild guess as to why most of the data points are above the line: "average" passer rating in any year combines data from all QB's into a single number.. so add all attempts, completions, yards, TD's and INT's, and then compute passer rating as if it's from a single QB. What I'm guessing you're doing is just plotting passer ratings of starting QB's (with some minimum threshold of attempts), which is totally reasonable, but what happens when you do that is that all the QB's with very few attempts aren't shown. Most of those QB's are not as good as starting QB's and their passer ratings will be less than average. This also explains (I think) why you got an overall average of 89.13 instead of 87.6. You're only looking at starting QB's but comparing it to overall league average which includes everyone. At least that's my hunch for what's going on (explains all the observations). For analysis purposes it's still best to use the league average because that way nothing depends on an arbitrary cutoff point for attempts.
He's still salty about Melty. WHAT AN EPIC CHOOOOOOOKE by a very soon to be 32 year old QB LOLOLOLOL! He will never get another chance . Tannehill will though, and could even surpass HoF LEGEND Russell Wilson with this H.C, that's a scary thought Hey Finster, remind us all again how CLUTCH you think Tony Romo is and why Tannehill will never reach those heights
Why do you act like Matt Ryan stopped answering your calls? And why do you act like Tannehill is anywhere near the same level as either of those guys? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or better yet, why do you even root for the Dolphins? There's plenty of inferior teams out there that would suit you much better . May I recommend the Eagles, they have a "real QB"
I'm actually from Miami. I just don't lie to myself and pretend anything about this team is great. I wish it was, but it isn't. This team hasn't done anything great in my lifetime but I stick around. I'm as real a fan as there is. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think for a second you are not a fan. Just find it odd that you are willing to defend, find excuses, and praise almost anything not wearing a Dolphin uniform. And openly look at all the negatives and eagerly look pessimistically at every thing Miami Dolphin and its fan base. Nobody here is pretending this team is great.....and you know it. Some just feel that things are a lot better than you want to portray it.