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. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Please explain using actual football terms......
     
    resnor likes this.
  2. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Wait, is that your new hero Mahomes 4th from the bottom in that list.....

    Why focus on the category of throws with the least number of attempts and therefor the least validity. Why not this:

    upload_2020-4-3_15-14-1.png

    Combined with this:

    upload_2020-4-3_15-15-10.png

    BTW, Brees and Carr (who were ahead of Tannehill in accuracy), were here in intended air yards:

    upload_2020-4-3_15-17-15.png

    Think about that.... the only two guys ahead of Tannehill in accuracy were in the bottom 3 in average depth of throws while Tannehill was in the TOP THREE.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
    resnor and Etrius24 like this.
  3. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Here is an anonymous list of the top 10 QBs in accuracy % and their corresponding rank in intended air yards.

    Accuracy - IAY
    1 - 32
    2 - 30
    3 - 3
    4 - 31
    5 - 25
    6 - 29
    7 - 5
    8 - 10
    9 - 8
    10 - 13

    Let that sink in for a minute....... In terms of the combination of depth of throws and accuracy, nobody was close to Tannehill. The closest QBs were Prescott, Watson, and Mahomes, but none of them were close to Tannehill in CPOE (which also takes into account receiver separation and pass pressure). None of them were close to Tannehill in % of throws into tight windows.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
    Cashvillesent and resnor like this.
  4. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Take a look at this page for example:

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=all&year_min=2019&year_max=2019&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter[]=1&quarter[]=2&quarter[]=3&quarter[]=4&quarter[]=5&minutes_max=15&seconds_max=0&minutes_min=0&seconds_min=0&down[]=0&down[]=1&down[]=2&down[]=3&down[]=4&field_pos_min_field=team&field_pos_max_field=team&end_field_pos_min_field=team&end_field_pos_max_field=team&type[]=PASS&no_play=N&turnover_type[]=interception&turnover_type[]=fumble&score_type[]=touchdown&score_type[]=field_goal&score_type[]=safety&rush_direction[]=LE&rush_direction[]=LT&rush_direction[]=LG&rush_direction[]=M&rush_direction[]=RG&rush_direction[]=RT&rush_direction[]=RE&pass_location[]=SL&pass_location[]=SM&pass_location[]=SR&pass_location[]=DL&pass_location[]=DM&pass_location[]=DR&order_by=yards

    Scroll way down to the plays themselves on that page, and about 15 rows down in the table you'll see a touchdown pass from David Blough to Kenny Golladay for 75 yards and a touchdown.

    In the row immediately below that you'll see another 75-yard touchdown pass from Daniel Jones to Evan Engram.

    The first play involved negative 0.62 expected points, whereas the second involved positive 0.61 expected points.

    Both plays yield the same passer rating, YPA, and points (7), yet the first is worth 7.62 expected points added, whereas the second is worth 6.39, because the plays occurred within two different game situations.

    Does that help?
     
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I understood how EPA could vary play by play. The difference between these two plays are minor (1.23 point).

    Explain why Tannehill's is lower than expected. Finally try the analysis without the ESPN fudge factor.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Essentially what you have with EPA is a "degree of difficulty" factor embedded within the statistic. The more difficult the situation is for the player, the fewer the expected points associated with it. Less is expected of a player in a relatively difficult situation. More is expected of a player in a relatively easy situation.

    Imagine two gymnasts doing a floor exercise in the Olympics. Both of them nail everything they attempt, but one of their routines involves a far greater degree of difficulty than the other. One of them deserves a 10, while the other something less. But passer rating doesn't do that. It gives both gymnasts a 10.

    Tannehill appears to make his living within situations with a low degree of difficulty. Consequently his passer rating for at least four years of his career, including in 2019, has been strongly discrepant from his EPA per play.

    What may have happened in 2019 -- and this is possibly an empirical question -- is that Derrick Henry's performance produced a comparatively high percentage of such easy situations, and Tannehill capitalized on them, thus vaulting his passer rating into the stratosphere while keeping his EPA per play low.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
  7. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I decided to play around a little bit. I downloaded all the passing plays by Tannehill. The Total EPA is 133 and the average is .47 per play. These numbers are FAR different than either of the other two sites.

    Drew Brees has an average EPA of .40 per play..... hmmm......

    Clearly there are no standards for this term.
     
    resnor likes this.
  8. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Well, apparently, without some BS fudging, Tannehill's passing plays result in a higher EPA than Drew Brees. Also, Lamar Jackson.
     
    resnor likes this.
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Not sure how you're getting that, because when I take the data from this page:

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=all&player_id=TannRy00&year_min=2019&year_max=2019&game_type=R&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter[]=1&quarter[]=2&quarter[]=3&quarter[]=4&quarter[]=5&minutes_max=15&seconds_max=0&minutes_min=0&seconds_min=0&down[]=0&down[]=1&down[]=2&down[]=3&down[]=4&field_pos_min_field=team&field_pos_max_field=team&end_field_pos_min_field=team&end_field_pos_max_field=team&type[]=PASS&type[]=RUSH&no_play=N&turnover_type[]=interception&turnover_type[]=fumble&score_type[]=touchdown&score_type[]=field_goal&score_type[]=safety&rush_direction[]=LE&rush_direction[]=LT&rush_direction[]=LG&rush_direction[]=M&rush_direction[]=RG&rush_direction[]=RT&rush_direction[]=RE&pass_location[]=SL&pass_location[]=SM&pass_location[]=SR&pass_location[]=DL&pass_location[]=DM&pass_location[]=DR&order_by=game_date

    ...the EPA per play is 0.23. That's for both passing plays and runs.

    On this page, which is passes only:

    https://www.pro-football-reference....on[]=DM&pass_location[]=DR&order_by=game_date

    ...the EPA per play is 0.24.
     
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I did it for passing plays because that is what passer rating is based on and you are harping on the difference between EPA and passer rating.

    Here are the passer ratings and average EPAs and % positive plays for the top 5 QBs (by passer rating):

    Tannehill - 117.5 - 0.47 - 58%
    Brees - 116.3 - 0.40 - 57%
    Jackson - 113.3 - 0.45 - 52%
    Cousins - 107.4 - 0.37 - 50%
    Wilson - 106.3 - 0.37 - 55%

    None of that seems oddly skewed for Tannehill. The guy with the highest passer rating has the highest average EPA per PASS PLAY.

    BTW, in the data I downloaded for the 5 QBs, the plays downloaded match the number of pass attempts recorded. So, IMO, the data is correct.
     
    resnor likes this.
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Post a link to the page from which you're getting the 0.47 figure.
     
  12. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    The Guy likes this.
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Ah OK, so you're removing sacks there. That's a problem because of the following:

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/index2ad6.html?p=4152
     
  14. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Yeah, don't care. I pointed out the likely difference was sacks yesterday when you were sure there was some "special situational advantage" Tannehill was getting on passing plays to cause the delta between EPA and passer rating.

    https://thephins.com/threads/titans-to-start-ryan-tannehill.94693/page-165#post-3264096

    Use the same plays with the two and they track each other. Mystery solved.

    This is the type of FOOTBALL explanation that eludes you.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  15. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    His biggest negative play (-10.84) is the ball coughed up for an INT by Kirsker.

    Ryan Tannehill pass short left (defended by Justin Reid) intended for Anthony Firkser is intercepted by Whitney Mercilus at HOU-2 and returned for 86 yards

    Here is Tannehill's 3rd worst play in terms of EPA (-5.38):

    Ryan Tannehill pass complete deep right to Kalif Raymond for 23 yards (tackle by Janoris Jenkins and Chauncey Gardner-Johnson). Kalif Raymond fumbles (forced by Chauncey Gardner-Johnson) recovered by Chauncey Gardner-Johnson at NO-38 and returned for 37 yards (tackle by Jonnu Smith)

    LOL, he gets dinged by deep completed pass that the WR later fumbles......
     
    resnor likes this.
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You could find plays like those for any statistic including passer rating, in both the positive and the negative direction. This is why sample size is important. The sample size above is two plays.
     
  17. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah that doesn't explain it. The correlation between z-score for the discrepancy between EPA per play z-score and passer rating z-score, from 2015 through 2019, is a mere -0.23, and Tannehill doesn't deviate from the league norm in sacks EPA anywhere near as much as he does in the discrepancy between EPA per play and passer rating.

    Sacks EPA z-score
    2019 Ryan TannehillTEN -0.12487
    2015 Ryan TannehillMIA -0.70948
    2018 Ryan TannehillMIA -0.49902
    2016 Ryan TannehillMIA 0.67019
     
  18. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    give it up. You have no idea what you are talking about.
     
    resnor likes this.
  19. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    Except look at Mariotta on the same team with the same situation...

    One of the lowest scoring offensesin football transforms into the #2 scoring offense in football. But you argue Tannehill merely benefitted from this amazing situation...
     
    Hiruma78, FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  20. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Well now that you put it that way....
     
  21. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    The truth hurts. Deal with it.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm writhing in pain.

    You aren't following the discussion well. What we started with here was a discrepancy between EPA and passer rating, and you proceeded to narrow the scope of EPA to the point that it "agreed" with passer rating.

    The issue is that passer rating is too narrow because it doesn't incorporate game situations or sacks. You'd be better off trying to expand passer rating to encompass game situations and sacks and then seeing where Tannehill lies. But you've done the reverse -- you've narrowed EPA to the point that it "fits" Tannehill's passer rating.
     
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. I thought Tannehill was in some magical situation that made his passing easier?

    You’ve spent days trying to figure out some way to explain away Tannehill’s success throwing the ball in 2019. You were mystified by how passer rating could deviate from EPA, and “I’m” not following the discussion well....LOL.

    Also ROTFGL @ we “started” with a discrepancy between EPA and passer rating... that was at least the 100th thing you have invented to discredit Tannehill.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2020
    Hiruma78, Cashvillesent and resnor like this.
  24. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Cashvillesent and resnor like this.
  25. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    Well done... Great point about the Accuracy and the distance of the throws.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  26. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Still waiting for the analysis as to why Mariotta was not thriving due to the situational advantage.
     
  27. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Mariota sucks ***. The guy had one average season in 2016 -- with the stud Murray as the RB. And you could argue that the 2016 roster was better than the 2019 squad. Mariotas full 16 games in 2016;

    27 TDs/ 9 INT . 3426 yards.

    Tannehill would of had a better stat line if he would of started week 1. Another year under the same OC is going to be huge also.
     
    resnor likes this.
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Give him a chance. He is feverishly looking for new ways to discredit Tannehill's 2019 season. He doesn't have time to look at other QBs.

    I'm guessing a whole new expose on sacks is coming. We're sure to find out how sacks are the one true measure of QB greatness and how they will prevent Tannehill from ever being great.......
     
    Etrius24 and resnor like this.
  29. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, I'm glad a few of you have something to do while the 'Rona makes it's rounds in the US. If I had known it was coming, I would have skipped all those RT arguments in 2014-2018 and saved them for now.
     
    Etrius24, FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What are these "different sets" of plays you're talking about. I'm not following here.
     
  31. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Was Mariota's performance significantly different from Tannehill's in 2019, when sample size is taken into consideration? What do you think the correlation between passer rating and Derrick Henry's yards per rush was, game-by-game, for the games Mariota started in 2019?

    Am I supposed to do the work and answer your question, as though I'm accepting the fact that you've placed me on your "witness stand" so to speak, or is any of this incumbent on you to explore in a systematic manner, since you're asking the question?

    The fact that you're asking me to do this work rather than doing it yourself suggests you're biased in favor of Tannehill. Rather than exploring the issue to determine whether Tannehill benefited from a situational advantage, you're content to sit back having already reached a conclusion, while asking somebody else to do the work of exploring the issue. If you were truly neutral regarding the issue you'd do the work yourself and gather the objective information.
     
  32. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Jesus man..........................

    The plays that go into calculating PASSER RATING are different than the plays that were used to calculate the EPA that you were reporting. I merely used the same set of plays (ie PASSING PLAYS).

    LOL at you telling me that I wasn't following along very well.........
     
    Etrius24 and resnor like this.
  33. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL.... biased.... already reached a conclusion.....

    Here:

    upload_2020-4-4_11-40-54.png
     
  34. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    They are much more hilarious now. Watching someone tie themselves into knots trying to explain away Tannehill's performance is too funny.
     
    Etrius24 likes this.
  35. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Precisely. And so the plays encompassed by EPA are more thorough and wide-ranging. Like I said, passer rating is a much narrower representation of a player's performance, and the issue is that you are correspondingly making EPA "fit" passer rating by narrowing it, rather than broadening passer rating and seeing where that puts Tannehill among his peers.
     
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You don't seem to realize that when a player performs significantly differently in just one season out of seven, the first task is to rule out situational explanations, rather than ascribing the season to his individual ability. Rather than do that with any thoroughness, you simply take the season to indicate something you've always believed about the player's individual ability.

    So, turn that mirror on yourself there.
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL........ I'm sure you try to explain how it wasn't......
     
    Hiruma78 likes this.
  38. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL...... "What are these "different sets" of plays you're talking about. I'm not following here."
     
    resnor likes this.
  39. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not when you have a clue of what you are looking at on the field.

    I gave you numerous metrics about passing the ball that very clearly show that Tannehill threw the ball better than anyone else last season.

    Take a break from the stats. NFL Game Pass is free. Go watch some games. Look at the all-22. Try to understand the game a little.
     
    resnor likes this.
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And ironically I agree that he was among the best in the league at throwing the ball in 2019, and I agree that he's always had a high degree of arm talent. He wouldn't have been a top-10 overall pick otherwise.

    However, the question now becomes whether there was a situation at hand in 2019 that allowed him to function almost completely on the basis of arm talent, rather than playing more of the entirety of the position, and the degree to which that kind of situation, if it was present, is replicable. If it isn't easily replicable, then you have a guy whose arm talent can propel him to the heights he experienced in 2019 only when the stars align.
     

Share This Page