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
    And I pointed out the obvious flaw in yours. You cannot separate the player from the team. You are using passer rating as a measure to distinguish Brees from Tannehill over the periods being discussed. You cannot do that with passer rating alone. You should know that.
     
    The_Dark_Knight likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Nothing in the rest of that initial post annuls your claim that you agreed TDK had a point => that the stats are similar.
    There's no flaw in the argument I made, which is that the stats themselves aren't similar. You're the only one creating the strawman.

    I suggest you drop it. There's nothing substantive we're talking about.
     
  3. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007

    Drew Brees passer rating in SDG (on a better team) - 84.9
    Ryan Tannehill in Miami - 87.

    Similar. Period.
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Brees #3 in passer rating in a given year. Not similar, when the context is Tannehill doing extremely well in a single year on a new team. Brees had already shown he could play at an elite level (using just the stats) before switching teams. Tannehill didn't.
     
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why are you changing the argument? He list the stats FROM ALL THE YEARS not just one. Weren't you accusing him of cherry picking?


    Let's look at the first year with the new teams, shall we?

    Brees - 96.2
    Tannehill - 117.5

    Hmmm.......

    Tannehill had a better passer rating with the old team and with the new team........
     
  6. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Geez.. I already addressed these issues before for multiple years. TDK was going through things year by year, so I pointed out differences in TD%, Y/A, etc.. for multiple years. Besides, when comparing two sets of stats you can't just look at the mean you have to look at the distribution of the stats, and that's why it matters that you have a #3 passer rating in there with Brees with the old team.
     
  7. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    What that shows is that his performance was more volatile, not substantially better.

    Similar numbers their years with their first teams. Period. You won't convince me otherwise.
     
  8. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah I didn't say he was "better" across all years. I said those stats aren't "similar".
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but Brees's upward variation for a season, prior to changing teams, is precisely what distinguishes him from Tannehill. When you look back at Brees's career, you can say there was a hint in San Diego of what he would do in New Orleans. There was no such hint for Tannehill with the Dolphins, based on season passer ratings alone.
     
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Well as long as we are cherry picking portions of their careers with their first teams, I pick games 6 - 13 from 2016 for Tannehill. His passer rating over that stretch was 100. Similar enough to 104 for you? Only 167 fewer attempts than Brees.

    Not an arbitrary selection either. It is the point at which Gase himself said the rest of the players were getting the offense and catching up to Tannehill. It is also the period where he enjoyed a similar running game that was afforded Brees.
     
    Cashvillesent likes this.
  11. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Which is why people who understand in better look deeper than just a single number..... Plenty of us had hints.
     
  12. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I've already shown that Tannehill's best 8-game stretch in 2016 was #12th best in the league if compared to all other best 8-game stretches for all starting QB's in 2016. So he wasn't better in that 8-game stretch relative to others than he was for the whole year, where he also ended up #12. So sure you can pick a stretch, but the comparison has to be the correct one.
     
    Pauly and mooseguts like this.
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That isn't consistent with his current odds of winning the league MVP in 2020. Those are folks who look as deeply as possible, and their prediction is that he finishes middle of the road.

    The fact still remains that it's a good bet to view Tannehill's 2019 season as an anomaly, to bet against its happening again, and to bet he's nothing more than average in 2020.

    If you did that with 100 QBs with his history, you'd come out way ahead.
     
  14. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Still a similar number. 100 vs 104. You can't avoid that. I don't care what the rank was. You account for team differences and I'll account for rank.
     
  15. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Can't begin to describe how little I care about your 100th attempt to find a meaningless number to discredit Tannehill's 2019 performance.

    If you bet against a repeat performance the following season from every QB that ever posted a > 115 passer rating, you'd be way way way ahead.
     
    Cashvillesent and resnor like this.
  16. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    First you have to adjust for era, so in this case add 6.5 passer rating points for Brees. That makes it 10.5 points difference which is about a standard deviation difference. And second, Brees' best 8 game stretch in 2004 had an unadjusted passer rating of 117.23, so add 6.5 to that and you get more like a 24 point difference in passer ratings. TOTALLY different.

    Sorry they're not "similar" by any stretch.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  17. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Still waiting for the adjustment for the HOF RB and TE. Similar until then.

    Oh, and 84 vs 87.....
     
  18. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No, they're dissimilar until then. You want to go by the evidence we have, not the evidence you wish you had.
     
  19. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sorry disagree. Pointless to try to convince me. You won't.

    84 vs 87
     
    Cashvillesent and resnor like this.
  20. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No problem. Just know that your point of view is not considered valid statistical reasoning. Would never work in science either. It's what you have evidence FOR that matters, not what hypothesis you like.
     
  21. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Fine. Neither is the assumption that passer rating is reflective only of the QB. Ignoring difference by era is no worse than ignoring differences due to surroundings. It is the differences in surroundings that are largely responsible the year over year differences for the SAME QB (e.g. Brady 2006 vs Brady 2007).

    And before you argue you never implied that, this discussion started about whether the performances of Brees in SD followed by his first season in NO (and then the rest of his career) can be considered an indicator of potential future success for Tannehill based on his performance in Miami followed by his first year in Tenn.
     
    Cashvillesent likes this.
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    But if Tannehill drops by your predicted 12 or so points in 2020, you're going to call that "normal fluctuation" and not attribute his 2019 passer rating to his 2019 surroundings?
     
  23. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    TD percentage was illustrated in the stats that I posted. And you're right...if I had highlighted TD percentages, it would have shown that Tannehill and Bree's TD%s were not only very similar, in in some cases, Tannehill's TD% was HIGHER than Brees.

    So who's cherry picking now?
     
    Cashvillesent likes this.
  24. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Let me see if I can explain it to you. Surroundings can enable or inhibit efficient performance by a QB. It cannot create efficient performance by a QB.

    Here is a simple example. Completions are a large part of the passer rating equation. To complete a pass, it must be thrown and caught. If the QB throws it accurately and the receiver drops it, it inhibits efficient performance by the QB through no fault if their own. If the receiver is open and the QB misses the throw, the surroundings enabled the efficient performance but did not create it. The QB still has to do their part.

    I'll never attribute his 2019 passer rating to his 2019 surroundings. I acknowledge that his 2019 surroundings enabled his 2019 passer rating. But, Tannehill made the throws. By all accounts, his throwing throughout 2019 was excellent. That is backed up by stats (on target %) and by reviewing film. Now it is possible for surroundings to make the completions easier (no pass pressure, wide open receivers, short throws, etc) but this is NOT what the stats from 2019 say (air yards per attempt, expected completion %, CPOE). By the same token, IMO, the surroundings in Miami inhibited his efficiency.

    Look, 2019 happened. It is in the books. There is data and film that can be analyzed to gain a better understanding. But, nothing that has happened before or will happen later will change 2019.

    A 12 point drop can be due to many things (for ANY QB, not just Tannehill). Let's not forget, it is a 12 point drop from a rating that no QB is the history of the league has maintained over time. None. I've already showed you that. Drew Brees is the first QB in the history of the league to post consecutive 115+ seasons. I'm guessing the average drop off from a 115+ season is 10 points.

    A quick check of the likely candidates (Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Roethlisberger) shows that Brees is the only one to have consecutive 115+ seasons. Sticking with Brees, he had 3 seasons with a passer rating above 100 from 2009 to 2013. The point drops the following season were 19, 14, and 7 for an average of 13.33. It is only the last 5 seasons that he has become so consistent.

    You are continuing to attempt to hold Tannehill to an unrealistic standard.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2020
    Pauly and resnor like this.
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The CPOE statistic is one I like (outlined here for those interested: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-stats-introduction-to-completion-probability), but here's what's odd about it with regard to Tannehill's career:

    In 2019 his expected completion percentage was 62.2.

    In 2018 it was 65.4.

    In 2016 it was 61.7.

    (CPOE wasn't tracked prior to 2016.)

    If his surroundings in Miami were supposedly so bad, why was his expected completion percentage for two of those seasons either virtually no different or better than his expected completion percentage in 2019?
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah for Tannehill it was higher in some years, some years not, but the distributions don't look similar. With Tannehill you have 4 TD% in the "average" range between 4-5%, one way below at 2.5% and one way above at 6.2%. With Brees it's 2 way below, one way above and one average. It's tiny sample size so there's no way to talk about statistical significance, but the distributions do not look similar. And don't forget that a 1% difference in TD% is about 5 TD's over the course of a season.

    Also, as I pointed out before, Brees was #3 in passer rating in 2004, something Tannehill never came anywhere close to in Miami. No, we're not looking at similar sets of stats.

    And no I don't cherry pick.
     
    Pauly and The Guy like this.
  27. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Plenty of potential reasons. The answer is in the article you linked:

    1. Air Distance: As distance between the quarterback at the time of the throw to the location of the receiver at the time of the catch increases, the likelihood of a completion decreases. Passes traveling more than 40 air distance yards have roughly a 20% chance of completion, while passes traveling 10 air distance yards have a roughly 80% chance of completion.

    2. Target Separation: As the distance between the receiver and nearest defender increases, the likelihood of a completion also increases. The thickness of the each data point of the plot shows the density of passes for each level of target separation which suggests the majority of passes come with less than 4 yards of target separation.

    3. Sideline Separation: As the distance between the receiver and the sideline decreases, the likelihood of a completion also decreases. The probability of a completed pass decreases rapidly at 5 yards of sideline separation. Controlling for all other factors, passes to the sideline just inside the white paint have a roughly 30% chance of completion.

    4. Pass Rush Separation: As the distance between the quarterback and nearest pass rusher at the time of the throw decreases, the likelihood of a completion also decreases. A quarterback throwing with no defenders around has a higher probability of a completed pass compared to a quarterback with a pass rusher within a few yards at the time for the throw.

    5. Passer Speed: As the speed of the quarterback at the time of the throw increases, the likelihood of a completed pass decreases. Speed below 8 MPH has little effect on the probability of a completion, however, as the speed of the quarterback increases above 8 MPH, the chance of completion decreases dramatically.

    6. Time to Throw: As the duration of time increases from snap to throw, the likelihood of a completed pass decreases. Most passes occur between 2 and 3 seconds after the snap, and the probability of a completion declines significantly after 3 seconds.


    There 6 variables. The combinations that can produce similar expected completion % are huge.
     
    Cashvillesent, Pauly and resnor like this.
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    But that doesn't address the underlying issue, because if the quarterback's surroundings are largely responsible for determining the expected completion percentage, and the completion percentage over expectation (CPOE) is determined largely by the quarterback and his ability, then why didn't Tannehill simply overshoot the expected completion percentage in Miami by roughly the same amount as he did in Tennessee?
     
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Again, could be many reasons. Comfort in the system, confidence in your teammates, health, quality of the receivers, or just how well the QB is throwing the ball. As noted by someone else, players are not robots. 2016 was much closer to 2019 than 2018 was.

    There were reports in 2016 that the receivers did not know their assignments early in the season. If a guy run a 12 yard in breaking route and he was supposed to run a 10 yard in breaking route, the expecting completion % on paper might be the same as any 12 yard route, but the QB is sure as hell going to throw a less accurate throw and be less likely to complete it. Things improved as 2016 went along and he finished with a CPOE of 5.4%. I would love to know what it was after the offense was clicking.

    It looks like 2018 is the outlier, not 2019.

    2016: Expected 61.7, actual 67.1, CPOE 5.4 (6th)
    2018: Expected 65.4, actual 64.2, CPOE -1.1 (26th)
    2019: Expected 62.2, actual 70.3, CPOE 8, (1st)
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2020
  30. Dorfdad

    Dorfdad Well-Known Member

    4,052
    2,347
    113
    Dec 9, 2007
    Can we move this from this forum he’s no longer a dolphin!!
     
    Losferwords and mooseguts like this.
  31. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    I can't believe you're still arguing with that dude lol...he's been proven wrong and intentionally misleading COUNTLESS times, and should be disregarded completely.
     
  32. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    covid-19 boredom......
     
  33. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Hey, what's the site record for posts and views of a thread?
     
    resnor and Irishman like this.
  34. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Club probably has that record down. They keep threads going on for a LONG time. I rarely go there (prefer it here) and have like 5 posts or so in the last half year or more lol.. but I just checked and they have a Tua thread that's 202 pages long right now lol.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    So it still demonstrates my point that BOTH quarterbacks with their first teams, their stats were virtually identical.

    I’m bored with repeating myself. I know what I know and I’ll be satisfied with the outcome I know is coming
     
  36. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    What? No, they're not. Did you not read my post? Sorry when one QB comes in #3 in passer rating with the old team while the best the other does is #12, the stats are not "virtually identical". Not sure what you're looking at if you think they are.

    Anyway, given that you "know" the outcome that is coming => sustained Brees level play for many years to come, let's just let Tannehill show us if you're right or I'm right about the future. Like I said, your prediction if correct would be an absolute first in NFL history so the credibility you would gain if you're right is tremendous. But if you're wrong, and the stats say you are almost certainly going to be wrong, then you really need to stop acting like you "know" these things.
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Well Tannehill does have the highest passer rating in the first year with a new team in league history. So, he is on his way.
     
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here's the issue with the above: in 2016 the correlation between passer rating and CPOE was 0.77. In 2018 it was 0.79. In 2019 it was 0.78.

    So if we take the average of those figures, then passer rating predicts 61% of the variance in CPOE.

    Now look at Tannehill's figures those years:

    2016: Expected 61.7, actual 67.1, CPOE 5.4 -- passer rating 93.5 (league average 89.3)
    2018: Expected 65.4, actual 64.2, CPOE -1.1 -- passer rating 92.7 (league average 92.9)
    2019: Expected 62.2, actual 70.3, CPOE 8 -- passer rating 117.5 (league average 90.4)

    So what we're seeing there with Tannehill is a correlation between CPOE and passer rating similar to that seen league-wide.

    What that likely means is that in previous seasons of his career (2012-2015) his CPOE was average, just like his passer rating, leaving 2016 as the single outlier during his career in Miami.

    That doesn't square with the idea that his surroundings in Miami were poor and he was somehow surmounting them.
     
  39. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Don't expect me to debate imaginary numbers. That is far fetched, even for you.

    IMO, the debate over the surroundings in Miami is closed. Unless you discover some real information, it's over.
     
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That isn't far-fetched at all. The correlation between CPOE and passer rating (league-wide and for Tannehill) is what it is. I didn't invent it.

    What would be far-fetched is to believe the correlation between CPOE and passer rating 2012 to 2015 is markedly different from what it is 2016 to 2019. But apparently you believe that.
     

Share This Page