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

Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Other NFL' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

Ryan Tannehill is...

  1. A terrible QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. A below average QB

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  3. An average QB

    7 vote(s)
    10.0%
  4. An above average QB

    39 vote(s)
    55.7%
  5. An elite QB

    16 vote(s)
    22.9%
  6. The GOAT.

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  1. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I think the issue with this is it doesnt provide any insight to team building as a GM.

    Let's say you need to decide whether to retain a player or let him walk. You need to make that decision now rather than later.

    The issue with these stats reminds me of technical analysis in the stock market. It works better in hindsight when the final position of the stock is known. Its predictive power in the moment is actually fairly poor or no better than other strategies at best

    So if I'm a GM I cant wait until Tannehill proves it. I have to decide this year using the data currently available.
     
  2. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Well, I'm done debating Tannehill's performance in Miami. I said for the last 3 or 4 of the seasons he started in Miami that if given a quality supporting cast, he'd be a very good starting QB. Between 2015 and 2016, he put up terrific numbers for passer rating, YPA, and wins when his starting (but still mediocre) OL was intact. There were more than 16 games in that sample size.

    Now with the Titans, he is AGAIN showing that with a good supporting cast, he can be a very good starting QB. I don't care that he has flaws. ALL QBs have flaws, even the god-like Tom Brady.
     
  3. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No.. in the absence of data you always assume the distribution is normal (for those who don't know, a normal distribution is that Bell shaped curve). There's a technical reason for this captured in what's called the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) which anyone interested can look up. CLT is one of the most powerful results in statistics and proves that the distribution of the sum of randomly chosen values, no matter what (unknown) distributions you choose them from, ends up in a normal distribution.

    Otherwise, in the absence of data you CAN make good assumptions about the shape of the distribution if you know what type of process you're dealing with. For example, if you're interested in how the average number of events for highly unlikely events is distributed it would be a Poisson distribution.

    So for the current situation (w.r.t. your post about distribution of "jailbreak" pressures), as long as you are willing to distinguish between the number of rushers that weren't blocked it has to be a normal distribution. But if you're interested in the mean number of jailbreak pressures (since that is probably an unlikely event no matter the team – it doesn't happen every 2nd play or so) it probably approaches Poisson. Regardless, you are correct that we don't have any actual data on that.

    Oh.. and while we're at it, what you're calling an "even" distribution is called a uniform distribution (for future reference), and almost no natural processes are distributed uniformly.
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Irrespective of Tannehill's current play demonstrating he can not only play well above average consistently but actually elite level consistently (which btw no one actually predicted with the Titans), it is not true that he ever did that with the Dolphins unless sample size was way too small to make a determination (e.g., a game or two).

    Tannehill never had a lengthly stretch of play where he played like he's playing now, once the proper comparisons are made of course. I keep pointing out for example that his "best 8 game stretch" in 2016 was ranked 12th among all "best 8 game stretches" for all starting QB's in 2016, which is the same as how he was ranked at the end of the year by passer rating among starters.

    More importantly, statistical tests will show that everything Tannehill did over any 150+ passing attempt period (a decent minimum for passing attempts because it's hard to show statistical significance with anything less) was consistent with random variation for an average QB. And that won't change no matter what he does in Tennessee since that's all in the past.

    So while it's true that Tannehill is currently playing like an elite QB, it is not true he ever did that in Miami for a significant stretch.
     
    Irishman, Bumrush and The Guy like this.
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007


    Love the parts where the reviewer can't understand how Tannehill made the reads on the 91 yard TD and the seam pass just before the half. Tannehill said after the game that he saw the safety squat on the TD pass. At that point, it is single coverage and he let it rip. On the play before the half, you can see Tannehill looking at the safety when the safety turns his hips away from the seam route. Doesn't hurt that both throws were absolute dimes.
     
    Irishman, cuchulainn, KeyFin and 2 others like this.
  6. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Who said "elite" and who said just 2016 and who said 8 game stretch? Stop making straw man arguments for the purpose of shooting them down. What I said is true:

    "Between 2015 and 2016, he put up terrific numbers for passer rating, YPA, and wins when his starting (but still mediocre) OL was intact. "

    Debate THAT, not something else....
     
    Mcduffie81 and resnor like this.
  7. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    My response to that is in the post you quoted. He put up numbers consistent with an average QB + random variation. Under no circumstances would I call that "terrific numbers" unless (as I pointed out) sample size is way too small to make any determination.
     
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    There still remains the issue of whether whatever it is that’s causing his current performance can be sustained sufficiently to make him one of the league’s best quarterbacks on a consistent basis.

    Again we have Andy Dalton for example who performed that way in only one season of his career. Obviously whatever variables are necessary for Andy Dalton to play that way cannot easily be replicated, and we still don’t know the degree to which that’s also true for Tannehill.

    Like I’ve said previously, I might be able to get a high school quarterback to play at an elite level in the NFL if I can surround him with the 10 best other offensive players in the history of the league, but what good does that do me if that can’t happen?

    Likewise, we might be able to get Tannehill to play at this level via a set of variables that may be short-lived and never replicated. If so, then that obviously makes him fundamentally different than the quarterbacks in the league who don’t need the stars to align in that way to play at an elevated level consistently.
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    But hopefully as a GM you would have more insight than we do into the degree to which the causal variables in Tannehill’s performance are likely to be replicated, and you could then use that in your decision-making.

    The reason we would need to wait longer than a GM would to make the determination about the player is because we don’t have his vantage point into the inner workings of the organization.
     
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Agree to disagree......
     
  11. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    How about we just wait and see?
     
    The Guy likes this.
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    He always argues this stuff, while ignoring the team around Tannehill and the team around the other QBs who were better.

    When Brady is successful with nobodies, everyone talks about Brady making guys better, but Tannehill never gets credit from these guys for turning guys like Hartline into 1k receivers.
     
    smahtaz, Mcduffie81 and Phins_to_Win like this.
  13. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I apply the same criteria to everyone, and I'm also the only one that has actually shown how to remove the effect of certain surrounding variables like defense from stats like passer rating. So don't tell me I ignore the surroundings. I do the best I can with the stats available.

    Also.. keep in mind your opinion on the surroundings Tannehill faced isn't known fact. It might be, but the evidence isn't yet there.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  14. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    At that, my friend, is the problem..............
     
    Mcduffie81 and resnor like this.
  15. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    The evidence is always there. It only matters how early or late you pick up on it and how much you personally need to determine something.

    If Tannehill is going to continue his success he is already elite whether he has fully proven it enough. The reverse is also true.

    The only thing proof really is, is enough data for someone to accept something. The player doesn't change in the meantime only perception does.

    In other words if I say Burrow will be the best QB ever, I'm not saying that, it's already true or untrue before the data appears. The data just verifies or denies previous opinions.
     
  16. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Try watching games more than actually being a stat-nerd.
     
  17. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    They're is plenty of data to support what I'm arguing, you just ignore it because it isn't collected the way you want.
     
    smahtaz and Mcduffie81 like this.
  18. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Of course it's a problem. There's no perfect solution here.

    You either have biased opinions of people with their imperfect memories, but at least they can watch game film and look for any and all kinds of stuff not captured in stats, or you have stats that throw away tons of info but at least are objective and can be used to make logical inferences not possible with the ambiguously worded stuff from human observers.

    Both have their advantages and disadvantages. In general I'd say you should rely on stats far more than human observers when talking about large datasets and comparisons across eras while you should discard stats and rely on what you see for small sample sizes like what happens in a particular game (or play etc...).

    From that point of view they complement each other more than anything else.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It's only evidence if it makes one hypothesis more likely than the others. Where's that evidence for the claim Tannehill faced more "jailbreak" pressure than any other QB?

    I watch the games, same as you.

    There's plenty of data to argue against what you're arguing. As I said to Alex it needs to get to the point where it clearly supports one hypothesis but argues against competing hypotheses. The example with "jailbreak" pressure is a good one: we just don't have that data. And if you listen to fans from other teams (e.g., in my case I know lots of Redskins fans) they'll say their OL was the worst by far.
     
    Irishman, Pauly and The Guy like this.
  20. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    You're confusing not having the data with being wrong which is the entire point of my post.

    I'm not arguing for that one specific point. My point is that incomplete data doesnt mean something is yet to be determined. Its yet to be PROVEN to a capacity that satisfies your needs.

    An apple doesnt become good for you once you've collected enough data on it. The apple was always good for you, only now you feel satisfied with the proof.

    Tannehill is an apple. Hes either already good or spoiled, the data wont determine that, only unearth it for public view in hindsight.

    So someone saying hes already elite can be right and you can be wrong, as of now, without future data sets. All they will do is confirm it, or of course disprove it, in hindsight like I said.
     
    resnor and PhinFan1968 like this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    My post was in response to your use of the word "evidence". When we talk about "evidence" it's not just the data itself that matters but how that data changes the likelihood of some hypothesis being correct. That's the part missing here.

    Obviously you're right that someone could be correct without "evidence" per se. They might just interpret the available data correctly even if the data doesn't necessarily support one hypothesis more than the other. But I already covered that in the post you originally quoted by saying resnor's opinion might be correct but the evidence just isn't yet there.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  22. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

     
    Mcduffie81, cuchulainn and resnor like this.
  23. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    And this level of play could regress at any time, and probably will...but man!

    I'd love nothing more than to see him continue this deep into a playoff run.
     
    smahtaz and resnor like this.
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That is indeed what we need to do.
     
  25. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    This one cracked me up (and a bunch of others) on a Titans board:

    "I read that he's had 4 games with a 155 QB rating or higher since 2015, while all other QBs combined had something like 16. If that tipped pass didn't land right into a defender's hands, he would have had another (20% of games which featured perfect ratings during that time were from QBs currently on this team)

    Like Clay Travis said, I want to temper expectations. But Ryan Tannehill may be the best quarterback in the history of the universe."
     
  26. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Can we do it without you adding "but it might not continue" to every discussion about how Tannehill is playing?
     
    Irishman, Mcduffie81 and resnor like this.
  27. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Here's one for all you guys who hollered for the team to run play-action and roll Tannehill out more:

    "Ryan Tannehill threw for 276 yards on play action today, the 2nd-most yards on play action in a game over the last 4 seasons.

    @ryantannehill1 now has 2 of the top 5 games in yards on play action since 2016, both in the past 3 weeks (Week 12: 218 yards)."
     
    Irishman and Tin Indian like this.
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What I was responding to was this part of your previous post:
    There’s nothing that allows us to definitively determine how much better, if at all, his current surrounding cast is than his previous ones. Only the adequate time we are both acknowledging is necessary can help us infer how good a surrounding cast Tannehill needs to perform at this level.

    What I’m responding to here primarily is the implicit belief that because Tannehill is performing better, he must also have a better surrounding cast. That isn’t necessarily true. He could be experiencing some other very powerful set of variables that are determining his performance right now, amidst a surrounding cast that’s no better or worse than he’s experienced previously.
     
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    upload_2019-12-11_11-57-27.png
     
  30. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    I really hope this thread doesn’t turn into something each side runs too if he has a bad game.

    It’s immature as hell to log on a message board and claim “see see see”

    Adulting is nice.
     
    Irishman, PhinFan1968 and Bumrush like this.
  31. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    There was a book written about the schtick in this thread in 1954.

    [​IMG]
     
    resnor likes this.
  32. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    It also isn't necessarily false and I disagree that there is nothing that allows us to determine if his supporting cast is better. There is the tape....

    For a moment, pretend that you are the GM of the Titans during the coming offseason. What do you do? You CAN'T simply wait.... You must make a decision to try to keep Tannehill or not based on these games and what you see.
     
    resnor likes this.
  33. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I've always felt that Tannehill as a rookie played some of his best football in Miami. I'll never forget my excitement against the Cardinals on the road where he threw for over 400 yards.

    Tannehill playing loose and being allowed to roam outside of the pocket was exciting to watch.
    Once Mike Wallace signed that overpriced crap contract you saw cracks in his confidence.

    His resurgence in Tennessee may be a byproduct of him needing a full year to recover from his injuries... Maybe his comment about the light bulb going off against AZ before the cheap shot to his knee was valid.

    As I've said over the years I'll gladly eat crow concerning the guy if he can win in the playoffs or late in the season on the road.. While the situation and competition in the AFC South is weaker IMO than in the AFCE, I'll still eat that crow.. But not gladly.......

    As it relates to our beloved Dolphins, it's another black mark on the franchise. Too bad Flores didn't have the opportunity to coach him up.. If I'm Ross I'm seriously considering getting rid of Grier, the same guy that let Tannehill slip away with his shoddy drafting and passed on Lamar Jackson.
     
    Fin-O and PhinFan1968 like this.
  34. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    What if he's just flat out better at determining what makes a QB great than the rest of us? What if he doesnt need the same amount of "evidence" you do to come to the correct conclusion? FWIW I'm not saying this is true.

    You did say that btw, but the way you say it makes it sound like dumb luck if he is right where as I'm saying its not. If that isnt your position I misunderstood you some.

    As I said before, the NFL doesnt give an evaluator, generally anyway, the luxury of using hindsight in this way. A decision has to be made now, not a year from now when you have the necessary "evidence" or "data".

    The NFL requires the ability to accurately scout based on what is currently happening as well as how it differentiates to what has happened in the past and why. Of course you wont always be right and you will probably be right less often than with the luxury of ample "evidence' but again the luxury of waiting doesnt exist.

    Of course we arent GMs and DO have that luxury, but most of us would rather speculate on what is happening and be right or wrong, tuning our own abilities as we go, than to go on saying "I cant decide yet"

    If your opinion is that there isn't enough evidence, the truth is you dont really have an opinion on the subject which is what a forum is for basically.
     
    resnor and PhinFan1968 like this.
  35. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If I am the Titans’ GM I certainly keep him, owing to the rarity of his recent performance and the importance of the quarterback position in the NFL.
     
  36. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I agree but not at the highest QB salary. I think they will settle on a fair contract. I think both sides will want to stay together.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  37. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Here's my problem with these 37 pages of mostly complete garbage- there's no reason to "defend" or "attack" what Tannehill did the past seven years. He played hard, showed a few sparks of greatness, and was deemed average. The why does not matter...it's in the past and has zero correlation with what he's doing in the present. Maybe Miami sucked or maybe he just had an "aha moment" on the bench this season...it makes absolutely no difference.

    What does matter is what he does THIS SUNDAY and the Sunday after that. It's the only thing that matters in the grand scheme of things for his career and his team.

    So can we please drop all of these narratives about who was right or wrong and just enjoy the remainder of the season as civil adults? I really don't want to see my friends here getting banned for calling others stupid & other names. The only thing stupid is trying to prove something that can't be proven...and trust me when I say that Ryan Tannehill is not thinking about 2016 as he's throwing passes today. Whatever good or bad that happened in his career trajectory led him to where he is today and that's all that matters.

    He's playing great football, so can we talk about the present or what's to come in the following weeks?
     
  38. Hoops

    Hoops Well-Known Member

    1,183
    1,484
    113
    Dec 11, 2016

    I don’t agree with that. Maybe not quite this out of the world current run he’s on in Tennessee but 2016 prior to injury he was playing at a plus level clip. After we got thru week 5 vs the titans where gase even said tannehill to that point was one of the most consistent players on tbe team when asked about benching him thru the cardinals game and that cheap shot from Calais Campbell he was ballin.

    part of the problem is people have such a hard time separating qb problem from everything around the qb.
     
    Irishman and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  39. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You'd need evidence for that by looking at the person's record of making accurate predictions. To your point about NFL GM's, that's what I at least hope is what owners are basing their decisions on, though it often doesn't seem that way!

    I'm just pointing out there isn't evidence when some people make it out to be fact. Besides that, my personal opinion is that it's very likely the Dolphins OL was bottom 1/3 of the league. Where in that bottom 1/3 I don't know.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  40. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Just my opinion irrespective of stats, but I only saw this kind of play from Tannehill in individual games here or there, never consistently.
     
    smahtaz likes this.

Share This Page