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. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Tennessee as a franchise has always been a first run team, even dating back to the Oilers-Moon days.....etc.

    Tannehill proved that even without a run game he can step up and make huge plays.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  2. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No it doesn't, not if you have a QB who can perform like Tannehill did yesterday. Then it makes sense to continue to let the QB drive down the field and score points and put the nail in the coffin, while forcing the opposing team to pass almost exclusively and teeing off on its QB.

    Replace Gardner Minshew's game-losing INT with a game-winning touchdown pass and your theory about what made sense goes out the window. The Titans lose the game in the name of offensive "balance."

    Hey, we lost, but we had balance!
     
  3. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    As good as Wilson is, Seattle has been a run first team.

    So, how can you be smarter than NFL coaches?
     
  4. Hexonx

    Hexonx Active Member

    202
    71
    28
    Sep 24, 2009
    It seems like everyone forgot how good of football Tannehill was playing with a terrible OL before he got hurt. None of this surprises me at all on how well he is performing and Im happy for him.
     
    Irishman, resnor and KeyFin like this.
  5. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Scroll back up and re-read. I did. I never said anything about point differential. I said I didn't care if you win by one point or by 3 touchdowns...a win is a win is a win.

    Don't go putting words into my mouth.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    There are lots of NFL coaches who have little to no awareness of analytics, or don't subscribe to them in the name of tenacity. Teams would go for it on fourth down a lot more often if coaches were well-versed in the relevant analytics. Likewise Seattle would be a better team if it used Wilson more and ran the ball less.
     
  7. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    "I don't care if you win by one point or by three touchdowns."

    "I never said anything about point differential."

    :blink:
     
  8. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Yea...and? How does that translate into "point differential is meaningless"? What were my exact words?
    Your point prior to that had to deal with points and that was my reply.
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If the margin of victory is meaningless to you, then point differential is meaningless to you. Margin of victory is point differential.

    What you're saying is that teams that win by 1 point per game are just as good as teams that win by 20 points per game. You can't possibly really believe that.
     
  10. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    C'mon.. this is simple. All that matters at the end of the day is whether you won or lost. Point differential does NOT matter at that point. Where point differential matters is in PREDICTING wins and losses. Not sure why there's an argument here.
     
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Sure, but all of this emanated from the point that the Titans would be a better team if they passed the ball more and scored more points, assuming they could get similar performance out of Tannehill under those conditions, because it would make them more likely to beat more teams and better teams. The Dark Knight disagreed with that and said essentially "only winning matters," as though the Titans' point differential is meaningless.
     
  12. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I agree with TDK that "only winning matters" in the sense that you don't have to do more than necessary to win. So no need to care about point differential from that point of view.

    Where what you're saying has merit is predicting the outcome when they face a stronger opponent and (for example) have to score a lot more points. Then the question is whether they can do that consistently, and that's where demonstrating they can do it in easier games through large point differential would give you more confidence they can win tougher matchups.
     
  13. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Thank you Brad!
     
    Irishman and cbrad like this.
  14. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Thats because stats in football are pretty idiotic.

    Football is probably the most team friendly sport ever.
     
  15. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, and this was my original point about that -- note the distinction between nail-biters and convincing wins:

    The issue is whether they are employing an offensive strategy that gives them the strongest possible likelihood of winning, with their current personnel. Winning by one point game after game (for example) when they could be winning by let's say 8 points per game obviously means they aren't employing the strategy that gives them the strongest likelihood of winning.

    So The Dark Knight went off on his personal tangent about winning from there, I suppose, when it was obviously a point that could've been agreed with readily.
     
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah you needed some help from somebody. The point you were making was ridiculous.
     
  17. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Nope, needed no help from anybody. My argument is sound. I think you just didn't like that another stats guy that you respect sided with me.
     
    KeyFin and Cashvillesent like this.
  18. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You think he sided with you only because he had to clarify how the point you made was completely unrelated to the one I made originally that you responded to. Like I said, a The Dark Knight tangent. All cbrad did was bring you back to the actual original point. Not my fault you weren't there to begin with.

    In other words, you missed the point, and he helped you see it.
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    So this is an interesting question. Which strategy actually does give you the highest probability of winning? I think coaches are predisposed to running the ball with a lead (stats clearly bear that out) to both run out the clock and decrease the probability of turnovers. Is that really the best strategy? Not sure. Certainly Belichick and Brady didn't implement that in many games, preferring to instead drive the nail in the coffin. But maybe it is the best approach. Hard to say.

    I think that statement of yours is more the beginning of an investigation than a question whose answer is known.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  20. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You sure we shouldn't just ignore the question and say "only winning matters"?

    Is it an interesting question, or should The Dark Knight's tangential response to it close the book on it?
     
  21. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Which strategy gives the better chance of winning is all dependent on each individual team. There are some teams that are offensively built for passing and neglect their running game. Some teams are built offensively for a running game and their passing game is mediocre. And then there are teams that are strongly balanced in both their passing and running game.

    Now my philosophical look on offense mirrors the Titans; balanced play calling on rushing and passing. Always has been. I truly believe that if the Dolphins had an effective running game during the days of Marino, we'd all be saying, "Tom Who?" That balance opens your playbook up so much when you are effectively running and passing the ball, but since Mike Vrabel and the Titans are an anomaly...

    If your team has the lead, keep doing what you've been doing. If you're running the ball, run it. If you're throwing the ball, throw it. Be who and what you are. Make the other team stop you. Don't suddenly change up what's worked all game long just to run out the clock.
     
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The answer is known to some degree insofar as EPA per passing play is so much higher than EPA per running play, league-wide. So with all else equal (and I realize all else is never equal in this context), it makes more sense to pass the ball than to run it.

    The question is why the Titans, with the QB who led the league in passer rating and YPA last year and whose passer rating was nearly perfect through the first half yesterday, were nonetheless imbalanced toward the run game (compared to the league norm) such that they had a roughly equal number of pass dropbacks and runs through three quarters.

    One could argue that they had a lead and were attempting to run the clock out, but that's an awful lot of clock to run out for not so huge a lead. And obviously that strategy, if they were using it, wasn't effective because the Jaguars tied the game halfway through the fourth quarter.
     
  23. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here's an article that examines the above, with the following conclusion:
    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2020/finding-optimal-passrun-ratio

    So therein lies some insight, possibly, with regard to Tannehill -- he's far better on play-action than non-play-action, and so to preserve his level of performance, the Titans simply cannot ride him at the expense of their run game, or his effectiveness on play-action will decline, as will his performance in general.
     
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    This is precisely what the Titans didn't do yesterday, and what gave rise to my original point -- that they would've scored far more points had they ridden Tannehill, assuming he could've maintained his level of performance. They started the game favoring the passing game at a 2:1 ratio and leapt out to a 14-0 lead with 5:43 remaining in the first quarter.

    At that point the Titans were on-pace to win the game 147-0. Obviously they could've never sustained that pace. The point, however, is that they abandoned an approach that was working extremely well, in favor of one that nearly lost them the game.
     
  25. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Ryan had a fantastic day without his best WR and little production from Henry, nothing to criticize about how he has played this year beyond one missed TD that cost me a cover last Monday!
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  26. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Interesting responses, but I think it's more complicated than that. Both of you are looking at efficiency, i.e., what "works" best statistically (the EPA argument) or what "worked" best in the game. The problem is that scoring probability per drive in the NFL is low, even for good teams — for all teams it averaged 36% in 2019 (that is, only 36% of drives ended in a score). So what "worked" is still most likely to fail and give the ball to the opponent.

    That's why any analysis has to include an estimate of the value of giving the opponent less time to score.

    For example, if you look at all passing plays from 2007-2019 and randomly choose from that distribution 3 times (simulate passing 3 times in a row), on average you'll make a 1st down 73.74% of the time. If it's 3 rushing plays in a row that number goes down to 57.41% (all this removes all game context of course, but bear with me). But over that time 38.82% of all passes resulted in incompletions, stopping the clock. So what's the extra value of NOT stopping the clock when playing with a lead?

    It's possible to solve this problem statistically through a simulation that includes not just type of play and yards gained, but also time taken per play and game context. But I don't know of anyone who has done that. It's an interesting problem.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2020
  27. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    You also have to take into account how the team is constructed.
     
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I've been trying to explain this to a certain poster for months. The Titans are built to be balanced while playing from common formations. They like to be be able to run or pass without changing personnel groupings too much. The TEs, especially, give them this flexibility.
     
    Irishman and The_Dark_Knight like this.
  29. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What we do know about the Titans' game yesterday in this regard is that they were 94% likely to win the game when up 14-0 with 5:43 left in the first quarter. The Jaguars were then 53% likely to win with five minutes left in the fourth quarter (the game was tied at the time).

    So their strategy yesterday at least was ineffective. They squandered what Tannehill and the passing game did in the first quarter (with a 2:1 passing ratio) in favor of "balance" that was highly ineffective in putting a game away that theoretically could've easily been put away.
     
  30. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Yea, because the Jaguars were going to throw an interception every other possession that the Titans were going to score a touchdown.

    God you really don't know football!!!!!! Football is a game that's played by 11 different men against 11 different men...human beings, each with physical limitations. They aren't digital avatars with a computer programming that are manipulated by an acne faced punk kid sitting in his mother's basement screaming at the top of his lungs for his mommy to bring him another Yoohoo!

    Any team can beat any team on any given Sunday...because its a game played by men, which makes your mathematical formulas and stats sheets as useless as **** on a man.
     
    KeyFin, FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  31. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    This is what you will not find in your stats:

    https://www.musiccitymiracles.com/2020/9/21/21449266/ryan-tannehill-is-fearless-titans

    I really don’t think you can overstate how good of a throw that is. Tannehill knows he is going to get blasted. One, that has to be scary to see a guy barreling down on you like that. He’s an NFL player, so it’s not like it is the first time it has happened, but that can’t ever be a good feeling.

    Two, he has to adjust the way he throws the ball there. He can’t step into that throw like he normally would. Having to adjust your body and arm to make that throw is something that is really special.

    Three, he has to throw it to where he expects Adam Humphries to be because he throws it before Humphries makes his break.

    I just thought we needed to take a minute and highlight how awesome this individual effort was by Tannehill.

    Not to mention, 3rd and 9 IN THE RED ZONE in a ONE SCORE GAME. It was exactly this type of play that made him so great last season. It is this type of play that probably cannot happen at the same rate it did last season and this is where part of the regression may come from. But, yesterday.....

    I can guarantee you that play lowered his expected completion percentage and increased his CPOE......
     
    KeyFin and resnor like this.
  32. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Then there is this - https://phinphanatic.com/2020/09/21/admit-miami-dolphins-wrong-ryan-tannehill/

    The Miami Dolphins made a mistake with Ryan Tannehill and you should admit it.
    When the Miami Dolphins traded Ryan Tannehill to the Titans, it was applauded as long overdue, in reality, it was just needed.

    The Miami Dolphins wanted to get rid of Ryan Tannehill so badly that they agreed to pay his guaranteed money to get a trade done. Now, maybe they should be rethinking that move.


    As is often the case in the NFL and especially with the Dolphins, former players move on and move up and that is exactly what Dolphins fans are talking about with Tannehill.

    Last year Tannehill’s success was due to the running of Derrick Henry. His success was the dink and dunk passes but he still couldn’t win you a game. By the end of the year Tannehill had the Titans in the playoffs, knocked off the Ravens and the Patriots and came one game from the Super Bowl.

    Through two games to start 2020, Tannehill is picking up where he left off. He has six touchdowns, four coming on Sunday. He has no interceptions and is completing more than 70% of his passes. In week one, his passer rating was 97.9 and on Sunday it was 145.7.

    In two games this season, Tannehill has led his team on game-winning late 4th quarter drives. Pressure situations that Tannehill shrugged off. So why now? Why not with Miami?

    For starters, faith. The Dolphins coaches didn’t have the faith in Tannehill to let him play the position like he knows how to play. Joe Philbin handcuffed him in the huddle and Adam Gase, as we found out, really can’t coach after all.
     
    M1NDCRlME and resnor like this.
  33. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

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

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Have you read anything at all about how win probability is calculated?
     
  35. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Win probability doesn't win football games.
     
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Did someone say it did?

    Umbrellas don't win football games either. That statement is about as relevant as yours.
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Irishman likes this.
  38. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You implied it did. Put away your stats sheets. Put away your Harvey Goldstein formulas, put the calculator away and actually WATCH the game and by watch the game, watch more that just the quarterback.

    If you did, you just might learn to appreciate the human element that factors into football
     
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Win probability takes all of that into consideration. You’re merely illustrating that you know nothing about it.

    Here’s an idea: do a little learning about something before you speak about it.
     
  40. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I never claimed to be a statistician but I do know the sport of football. I’ve watched and studied the game since September 1972
     

Share This Page