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

How much of a Diva was Landry?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by PlayinHarder, Jun 6, 2018.

  1. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016
    This post pretty much explains it. That’s why I’m amazed that they scapegoated Darrell bevell.

    Lots of 4 vertical concept clear outs type stuff which when you are ahead of the sticks eliminates the ability for the d to spy the qb and allows for the qb to run the ball as a ball carrier right up your carry coverage backside.

    What’s truly amazing is how Wilson is able to turn his back to the rush as much as he does and not pay for it. It’s cartoon like even. Most guys turn their back like that and get blind sided and their eggs scrambled.

    Lots of primary reads or bail stuff too taking advantage of his ability to maintain his eyes downfield when flushed. His eye level doesn’t drop until he decides to actually tuck it and run.

    But the days of the d giving up 6 points or less for basically a half decade there and all short fields to work with as a result are over. And with it so is Seattle’s elite contender run.
     
    Carmen Cygni likes this.
  2. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    It’s like what are you really saying, are you telling us Rogers and Wilson achieved greatness because their offenses coaches designed the right systems for them, please, either say it, say that Wilson wouldn’t be Wilson or Rogers wouldn’t be Rogers if they played in a different system, but quit trying to dance around it.
     
    Irishman and Fin-O like this.
  3. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    So where does this leave you in the evaluation of him if his success is scheme driven, it sounds like you think his defense and marshawn made him who he is.?

    Curious as to where you had him in the draft.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
    Irishman likes this.
  4. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Ego causes more failures than incompetence.

    Most coaches will try to get the QB to adjust to their system rather than adjust their system to the QB. As you say with Shanahan and the 49ers a coach still needs straw to make bricks.

    Gase genuinely seems to be trying to adjust his system to the players, but there have been times when he tried hammering square pegs into round holes, but at least he has had enpugh self awareness to stop reinforcing failure, something that was conspicuously absent under Sparano and Philbin in particular.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  5. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Out of the 3 QB's recently mentioned, Wilson, Rodgers, Brady....Brady would be the least likely to succeed in some other place. Could he? Yes. Would he be HoF? Probably not.

    Wilson and Rodgers are smart enough and way more athletically gifted than Brady and would do just fine playing for the Pats and BB. BB would LOVE to have a Rodgers or Wilson to groom and he'd have them winning Super Bowls left and right.

    If Brady was shipped to Seattle or GB I doubt they'd sniff a Super Bowl. Hell, if Brady had not been drafted by BB we wouldn't even know his name.
     
    Irishman, resnor and Unlucky 13 like this.
  6. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016
    Brady can run any pro style or from under center offense you want to dial up.

    Obviously zone read wouldn’t be as effective without the threat of the qbs legs. Which is a big driver of it.

    Patriots already use pistol concepts. Run pass option stuff would be on the table too. Provided the only run option is handing the ball off
     
    Irishman likes this.
  7. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    After 18 years in the league, maybe he could. He would most certainly struggle in offenses like Seattle's or GB's. Not because of the system, per se, but more because he wouldn't have the protection he's accustomed to. Or the cheating. ;)

    However, and like I wrote before, I seriously doubt we'd know his name if he had been drafted by another team/coach.
     
  8. heylookatme

    heylookatme Well-Known Member

    902
    438
    63
    Sep 12, 2012
    I strongly disagree. Brady slipped in the draft because he looked like a slug at the combine, and the cheating certainly doesn't hurt... but Brady's combination of leadership, drive, football intelligence, and throwing accuracy mean that he would have been successful in a lot of different places.

    You want to talk about a quarterback who LUCKED into the perfect situation for him, how about Aaron Rodgers? Rodgers had serious issues as a thrower coming out of college, and supposedly looked so bad in his first couple of training camps that he would have been cut if he hadn't been a first round pick. There's a guy who was unbelievably lucky to go to the Packers, sit behind Brett Favre, and get outstanding quarterback coaching.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  9. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Brady had 7-8 years of learning in the NFL before he looked close to great. He was propped up with great defenses and great O-line play. He was pretty average until then and that was with the cheating. All of those intangibles you mentioned is definitely why he has succeeded (along with cheating and accuracy) but, he needed a system like BB's to develop and play in.

    I won't really comment on your Aaron Rodgers opinion. He's 10x the QB Brady is (physically) with about the same smarts and drive. Granted, it doesn't seem as if Rodgers made football his one goal in life, like Brady has, but to claim that he is lucky makes me laugh.

    I don't understand how people think Brady is all that when every time another QB has filled in for him they put up the same numbers and the team still won. Rodgers gets hurt and the Packers win 3 more games all season. (Out of 9)
     
    resnor likes this.
  10. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Don't forget 2000 when the Patriots went 5-11 without Brady.

    Either way, while I think there's fairly clear evidence Brady improved after many years of learning, let's not act like he wasn't a very good QB from the get-go.

    Here are the z-scores (standard deviations above the mean) for Brady's passer rating by year:

    2001: 1.000
    2002: 0.759
    2003: 0.822
    2004: 0.895
    2005: 1.296
    2006: 0.921
    2007: 3.134
    ..
    2009: 1.007
    2010: 2.499
    2011: 1.763
    2012: 1.295
    2013: 0.270
    2014: 1.040
    2015: 1.562
    2016: 2.290
    2017: 1.791

    The average his first 7 years starting is 1.26 which is top 11th percentile. The average his first 6 years starting (leaving out that amazing 2007 season) is 0.949 which is top 18th percentile. The average from 2009-2017 is 1.49 which is top 7th percentile, and of course that's hurt by 2013 which was the one year he was around average.

    Point is.. the guy was a top 10 QB from the get-go (ranking-wise, every year except 2013). I think it's better to say Brady was from the outset one of the best QB's in the NFL (consistent top 10) but became elite from 2007 onwards, with the one exception occurring in 2013.

    But I do agree with you that he was much less likely to succeed across systems earlier in his career than since 2007.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
    Irishman and mooseguts like this.
  11. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    I agree with that. Out of the 3, imo he is the most system reliant.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  12. JPPT1974

    JPPT1974 2022 Mother's Day and May Flowers!

    410
    84
    28
    Apr 15, 2012
    Great player but was not a team player. As you need to be a team player to click!
     
  13. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Anyone still questioning whether Russell Wilson is an elite qb in this league has been off on the eval since he was coming out of college..jmo.

    He has nothing more to prove..
     
    danmarino, Irishman and Fin-O like this.
  14. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Not sure if you remember when I posted this list, but if you adjust every QB's year-by-year passer ratings to 2017 and then take their weighted average (an average where you weight each adjusted year's ratings by number of passing attempts) you get the following list of greatest QB's in NFL history, assuming you restrict the list to QB's with at least 4,000 passing attempts, and only using regular season stats:

    1. Steve Young, 109.98
    2. Joe Montana, 108.1
    3. Aaron Rodgers, 104.81
    4. Peyton Manning, 102.29
    5. Kurt Warner, 101.46
    6. Tom Brady, 101.04
    7. Tony Romo, 99.91
    8. Dan Marino, 99.63
    9. Drew Brees, 99.5
    10. Jim Kelly, 97.14

    So that's what a purely statistical approach gives you for greatest QB's in history using career adjusted passer rating weighted by passing attempts. Now.. that list is the same if you threshold everything at a minimum of 3,000 passing attempts except that #10 goes to Neil Lomax instead of Jim Kelly.

    Russell Wilson has 2,834 passing attempts in the regular season. He'll clearly go over 3,000 this season. His current 2017-adjusted weighted average career passer rating is 97.6, meaning he'd be 10th best all-time using this metric.

    So other than longevity you're right he has nothing left to prove, at least from this point of view.

    EDIT: forgot to look up Neil Lomax's adjusted rating first! It's 97.94 so Russell Wilson would be #11 all-time. Still not bad lol. Oh, and I forgot to point out these are only for QB's from 1978 because passer rating standard deviation drastically changed in 1978 due to rule changes and has stayed stable ever since.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
    KeyFin, danmarino, Irishman and 3 others like this.
  15. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016
    The biggest system qbs are the ones that have to rely heavily on their legs.

    Cause once they go they don’t have any plan b.
     
  16. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I was expecting Otto Graham to feature in that list as he put up a career passer rating of 86.6 playing in the 40s and 50s, but he only has 2626 attempts, plus another 300 in the post season.

    Out of interest where does Johnny Unitas rank on the adjusted passer rating list? He was usually Referred to as the GOAT before Joe montana/Dan Marino/Peyton Manning/Tom Brady.
     
    Irishman and cbrad like this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Ah! I keep forgetting to put in the other qualifier: I only do those kinds of adjusted passer rating stats from 1978 onwards because there is a sharp and massive drop in passer rating standard deviation from 1966-1977 vs. 1978 onwards. From 1966-1977 the standard deviation averages 14 and then suddenly from 1978 it drops to an average of 11 (effect of rule changes from 1978).

    So that list is only for QB's from 1978.

    Also.. I forgot to look up what Neil Lomax's rating was before writing that Russel Wilson was #10. It looks like Neil is at 97.94 so Wilson would be #11 all-time (I'll edit that post in a moment).

    Anyway, to answer your question Unitas would be at 102.67 so #4. Again though you can't compare adjusted passer ratings pre-1978 vs. 1978-2017 because of the standard deviation.

    The way to fix that is to further adjust by the standard deviation! .. which of course gives you z-scores. Haven't written that program yet but I may do so sometime.
     
    danmarino, Irishman and Pauly like this.
  18. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I remember you saying once that even though Otto Graham was further above the mean than Steve Young, that Steve Young had a higher z-score
     
    Irishman likes this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Out of curiosity I looked at the means and standard deviations for passer rating during Otto Graham's years. It's crazy.

    Mean passer rating in 1953 was 50.9 while in 1954 it was 59!! That's a 15.9% increase in a single year for league average. Or check out the standard deviation in passer rating in 1952. It's 11.5 while the very next year it's 21.9!! That's a 90% increase in a single year!@?! I know this sounds funny, but it's worth looking at the standard deviation of the standard deviations. It's 3.5 during Graham's period while it's only 1.2 from 1978-2017.

    Point is.. comparing z-scores won't do the trick either because the data you're calculating the z-scores from is far less reliable during Graham's period. It's like you need confidence intervals on the z-scores themselves lol. Anyway, this is a moot point because my database starts from 1966, but it was worth taking a quick look at.
     
    KeyFin and Irishman like this.
  20. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Russell Wilson doesn’t fit into that category imo, he uses his legs to buy time and make plays, just like Rogers does.. He runs when there is an open lane and the defense turns their backs on him, which is what smart qbs do..I don’t pigeon hole him, overall he does it all at an elite level
     
  21. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Makes sense from a passing standpoint, but I don’t think those numbers account for the yardage this player gets for his offense with his running Ability, you add that to the equation and he goes strait to the top with Young..

    I’m on the record for years citing that young is the best most dangerous qb.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
    cbrad likes this.
  22. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I’ll take my chances with Steve Young, John Elway, Aaron Rogers, Russell Wilson, Roger Staubach before they “go” and I’ll win championships while they’re here..
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
  23. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Pauly, why isn’t there a qb rating for what these qbs do with their legs as well?, I mean to not include this in how we overall judge them all seems ridiculous..
     
    Irishman likes this.
  24. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Well some peoplelike Football Outsiders with DVOA and ESPN with QBR have tried to make one number to rate a QB.
    However these type of numbers end up being less reliable than passer rating.
    More complexity does not mean more accuracy
     
  25. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016
    That Seattle offense is designed heavily around the threat of Russell Wilson’s legs. Like very heavily. Carmen already noted the wider o line splits etc.

    It’s why they run so much zone read and so many 4 vertical concepts.

    Passing concepts in terms of pocket asks rather simple. Houston with Deshaun Watson pivoted to similar pocket concepts. Predetermined throws easy primary throws which everyone uses to an extent.

    The difference is where with Miami if the primary’s not there the ask is with Tannehill to work to his 2nd or 3rd or even dump progression provided he has time Russell bails the pocket or flushes and the improv takes over. That improv is one of Wilson’s biggest strengths. However that is completely driven out of his legs primary and the question is once they go (ie he can no longer rely so heavily on them and have to play a more pocket game which in turn requires more pocket reads) can he still execute at a high clip or will his warts come out.

    We likely won’t find out until he takes a leg injury or two that robs him of some of that elusiveness and legs threat. But Wilson also lacks eye and head discipline in his drop. Which is fine as long as you aren’t chasing the scoreboard and sticks.

    Seattle will be chasing the scoreboard in 2018 given that gutted defense. So I’d expect to see more robber/bait coverages when they get behind them coming from opposing dcs.

    Give you the primary pre snap take it away post snap. Easier to do also on standard pro style drops etc (which Seattle doesn’t use much) but sticks concepts primarily and again you get behind the sticks and force deeper drops etc and more stand in the pocket or box in pocket play and spy the qb the more likely his head and eyes can be run under post snap.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2018
    Carmen Cygni likes this.
  26. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    I disagree 100%. He was top 10 in not making mistakes maybe, but he wasn't a world beater. Athletically, and even to this day, he's not close to being great. Over the past 2 decades he has gotten better through cheating, hard work, great coaching, and sheer will, but he's no Rodgers or Wilson.
     
  27. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Interestingly enough 2 of the 3 QBs we are discussing are masters at moving well in the pocket.

    And to me, that’s a transferable skill in any offenseive scheme.
     
  28. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Mathematically it's easy to do. Since NFL stats seem to be linearly related to win percentage in most cases (all this means is that if you plot any stat X vs. win% you tend to get a line), you can set up an equation like this:

    Win% = a*X1 + b*X2 + c*X3 + ...

    where a, b, c are the numbers you want to estimate, and X1, X2, X3, etc.. are the variables (X1 might be completion percentage, X2 might be yards per passing attempt, and X3 might be rushing yards per attempt, etc..). If relations weren't linear the equation looks a lot more complicated.

    You can have as many variables as you like and all you do is find the a, b, c, etc.. that minimize the error (the difference) between the right-hand side of the equation and the left-hand side of the equation. Function minimization is standard stuff and is easy to do.

    So what's the problem, at least for me to give you a new passer rating formula that includes QB rushing?

    Something as banal as how databases are structured. I get my data from these type of links:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MariDa00.htm

    Note there is no column in that matrix that gives you QB rushing yards! You want to find them you need to go here:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1984/rushing.htm

    So first I'd have to download those matrices (I have all the ones in the 1st link from 1966, but none in the 2nd), synch them by QB name (not as easy as you think because when you download that stuff the formatting often gets messed up very slightly lol), and then synch that with a matrix that tells you win% just to get all the data in that equation.

    So that's the problem. It's just work. Mathematically it's easy.
     
    djphinfan and Irishman like this.
  29. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016
    one moves well in the pocket one bails the pocket but anyways I waive the white flag.

    Rodgers does an excellent job of stepping up inside before bailing laterally.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2018
    Irishman likes this.
  30. dolfaniss

    dolfaniss Junior Member

    69
    42
    18
    Dec 2, 2007
    I disagree. Brady is better than both. Brady leads and sometimes carries his teams to victories while Rodgers ends up on the IR trying.
     
  31. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Some points.
    1) the assumption in the initial question is that QB rushing is a positive. I’m not sure how true that assumption is. You have some plays where a QB has a choice to run or pass, but statistically passing gains more yards/attempt than rushing so a QB who rushes more because he chooses to tuck the ball and run may get a bonus in the rating, but the better football choice may have been to pass it.
    2) QB rushing, as I see it is broken into 4 categories. (a) kneel downs to end a half [stupid as it sounds the NFL counts these as rushing attempts] (b) designed QB runs (c) Jailbreaks where the QB escapes from pressure; and (d) scrambles here the QB rushes because all the receivers are covered. Category (a) should be discarded, but my gut feeling is that each of the other categories affects win% differently.
    3) you would probably need to correlate team QB rushing to team win% for best league wide accuracy in building the correct model.

    My personal view is that worrying about QB rushing is a bit like worrying about the type of olive in a martini - there are other more important things what type of gin, what type of vermouth, how much ice, shaken or stirred to worry about first.
     
    Unlucky 13 and resnor like this.
  32. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Point #2 is obviously correct, which makes this even more work intensive because you'd have to find the stats for kneel downs and link them to the QB, etc..

    Point #1 is an empirical question. Personally, I have no idea what the answer is so this would be interesting to do, but like I said it's not easy because PFR doesn't format things well unless you're content using Excel (which is like resigning yourself to building a dam to cross a river because you don't have the materials nor engineering skills to build a bridge!)

    As far as point #3, the model I described is attempting to predict win% as best as possible given the variables you're interested in. The magnitude of the scalars (i.e. a,b,c, etc..) tell you how important each variable is for predicting win%, and their signs (whether they're positive or negative) answer point #1 for each variable.

    Point is, there's no need to look at correlations here. A correlation between X and Y tells you how strongly X and Y are related, and whether increasing X tends to lead to an increase in Y or a decrease in Y. However, correlations don't tell you how to predict Y given X. For that you need something like the linear regression model I described.
     
  33. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    13,501
    6,246
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    ....oh boy. :nutkick:
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  34. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    So adding rushing numbers and YPC for a qb is to complex to be accurate? Someone should figure it out, it’s kind of a big deal..unless folks just like to evaluate qbs with Incomplete data.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
  35. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    It Seems to me like your criticizing Wilson for being who he is, a super bowl champion, and very close to another..why, I have no idea..it makes no sense to me when your staring at the accomplishments, the numbers and the film.

    Just because a QB plays stylistically different then a pocket Qb doesn’t mean they are inferior..
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
  36. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I believe in the C brad qb system...

    Who’s the best in your opinion using your staytem?
     
  37. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The numbers aren’t so difficult to find. The harder part is finding out what those numbers really mean.

    2 years ago when comparing Andrew Luck to Ryan Tannehill the rushing ability came up. They had very similar ypc and 1st down conversion% but Andrew Luck rushes twice as often as Ryan Tannehill. Which, based on the frequency of rushes meant that Andrew Luck converted an extra first down once every four games. Now I don’t know how that converts across the whole NFL, but based on that Andrew Luck’s superior volume of rushing it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

    There also is the well repeated story about scrambling QBs who hurt their team by scrambling when they should have stayed back and passed. I don’t have the numbers to do the analysis to work out if its a shibbeloth or not.

    If it were easy someone would have done it by now.
     
    Unlucky 13 and djphinfan like this.
  38. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I mean why don’t we talk about how qbs like Wilson and Rogers give their teams advantages that the progression read qb cannot..
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  39. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I see how that can be complex.. but to eliminate the legs from the equation and just analyze the passing doesn’t seem legitimate to those who can, talk about inaccurate Pauly.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  40. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    When I do comparisons I try to separate things into 1st order (need to have) second order (good to have) and third order (nice to have).
    I find that rolling second and third order items into a rating that involves first order things often makes the analysis less accurate, because of the complexity in getting the interactions between the different parts correct.
     

Share This Page