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

Comparing Tannehill to Luck,

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, May 8, 2016.

  1. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    There have been a few threads recently which people have been comparing Tannehill to Wilson. To my mind that's completely stupid because Wilson has inarguably a better QB than Tannehill. A much better comparison figure is Tannehill to Andrew Luck.
    As Teams both Indy and Miami have been pass heavy, and don't consistently run the ball as well as having inconsistent/poor defenses. They are both AFC teams and play many common opponents. So there is solid basis to compare Luck and Tannehill.

    Starting point Tannehill's career passer rating in 85.2. Luck's is 85.0.
    So as passers there is very little to distinguish between the two QBs over their careers.
    But since RT17 and Lucky to play against the AFC South are in different divisions a better point of comparison is to compare their performances against common opponents.

    1: Rest of the AFC East(BUF, NYJ, NE)
    Tannehill
    510 of 888 attempts for 5523 yards. 30 TDs and 25 Ints. Passer Rating 75.39
    Luck
    169 of 306 attempts for 1962 yards. 11 TDs and 12 Ints. Passer rating 70.47

    2: Rest of the AFC South (HOU, JAC, TENN)
    Tannehill
    151 of 224 attempts for 1759 yards. 11TDs and 9 Ints. Passer Rating 90.61
    Luck
    384 of 647 attempts for 4825 yards. 34 TDs and 13 Ints. Passer rating 91.89

    3 AFC West
    Tannehill
    154 of 253 attempts for 1683 yards. 11 TDs and 3 Ints. Passer Rating 93.7
    Luck
    156 of 252 attempts for 1676 yards. 11 TDs and 3 Ints. Passer rating 91.1

    4: AFC North
    Tannehill
    134 of 217 attempts for 1523 yards. 7 TDs and 2 Ints. Passer Rating 89.7
    Luck
    154 of 264 attempts for 1865 yards. 12 TDs and 6 Ints. Passer rating 85.8


    5: NFC
    Tannehill
    377 of 566 attempts for 4034 yards. 26TDs and 14 Ints. Passer Rating 91.4
    Luck
    305 of 546 attempts for 3579 yards. 30 TDs and 20 Ints. Passer rating 80.4

    6: All non Divisional opponents
    Tannehill
    665 of 1026 attempts for 7240 yards. 44TDs and 19 Ints. Passer Rating 92.08
    Luck
    615 of 1062 attempts for 7117 yards. 53 TDs and 29 Ints. Passer rating 83.52


    Against the AFC East, AFC North and NFC Tannehill is significantly better than Luck.
    Against the AFC South and AFC West Tannehill and Luck are about the same.
    There is no group of opponents where Luck has performed significantly better than Tannehill.

    I am in now way trying to pump up RT17, who has been a flawed QB so far. While I believe RT17 has been badly served by his coaches that is not the point of what I'm looking at here.
    What I can't understand is why so many people are high on Lucky to play in the AFC South.
     
  2. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,380
    5,028
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Phoenix, AZ
    This should go well...
     
  3. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    People keep saying Luck has been a much better QB than Tannehill. I just don't see it in the numbers.
     
  4. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Taking the numbers. If Tannehill and Luck swapped divisions.

    assuming 10 games a year against non-divisional opponents and 6 games a year in Division.

    RT (AFC South QB) average season would be
    295.7 completion of 448.5 passes (65.9%) for 3317.7 yards (7.4 ypa), 20.4 TDs and 12.5 Ints. 91.45 rating
    Luck (AFC East QB) average season would be
    283.5 completions of 499 passes (56.8%) for 3284 yards (6.6 ypa), 22.1 TDs and 16.1 Ints. 78.18 rating.
     
  5. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,732
    22,194
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Because Tanny hasn't done anything remotely comparable to Luck's 3rd year. Yes, Luck was bad last year. We'll see soon enough if it was an anomaly or injury. QB rating is a good indicator but it's just one. In 2013 Tanny had a respectable 92, Luck was 4 pts higher not a huge difference, but 700 yards more, 13 TDs more and only 4 INTs more. His accuracy percentage was 5% less but his ypa was .8 yards higher. These are chunk plays.

    Luck has a lot of improvement to make. But with Luck, you're looking at just culling his mistakes a little. I think it's easier to make a 16 INT guy a 10 or even 12 INT guy vs. a 27 TD guy a 40 TD guy. His 2014 was excellent for a 3rd year player. You can play with the numbers and they do provide some insight. But at the end of the day, Luck has played to heights Tanny has yet to reach.
     
    DolphinGreg, Finster and jaymoney like this.
  6. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    IN 2014 Luck had an overall rating of 95.6.
    Boosted by 6 games against the AFC south where his rating was 111.2. Against the rest of the league his rating was about 90.

    In 2014 PFF had Luck rated as the number 11 QB precisely because his number were inflated by playing against bad defenses. And who did PFF have rated at the 10th best QB? Ryan Tannehill.
     
  7. bran

    bran Senior Member

    4,572
    1,524
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    New Hampshire
    be careful to some posters on here andrew luck is a god beyond any kind of criticism, personally i don't see anything special when watching luck, sure he can shred the **** teams in the afc south, but outside of that division he is incredibly mediocre iMO.
     
  8. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,542
    1,738
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    You can argue that Luck is a tiny bit better than Tannehill but nowhere near the QB he was expected to be by now, while Tannehill has probably exceeded expectations since the draft kn 2012. I mean, Luck was the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning and Tannehill was a project expected to sit his first year and yet their career stats are very comparable.
    Granted, they both have room for improvement but if Luck was as great as his draft reports indicated, he should have blown Tannehill out of the water by now.
     
    Pauly, resnor, number21 and 1 other person like this.
  9. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,828
    27,021
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    The objective evidence is that Tannehill and Luck have been at least comparable with Tannehill having been slightly better. Anybody who looks at those numbers and starts arguing that Luck has been a better QB is simply demonstrating their bias.
     
    danmarino, Pauly, resnor and 5 others like this.
  10. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    43,795
    21,266
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Andrew Luck has been an avg QB at best. He's basically riding off his college success and pedigree. Indy is screwed if he doesn't improve.

    I would hope Tannehill improves to the point where he isn't compared to guys like Luck.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
     
    Pauly, cuchulainn and eltos_lightfoot like this.
  11. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    4,207
    1,158
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    did you mean to put Tannehills name in there?
     
  12. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    4,207
    1,158
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    Colts made playoffs year before, Luck was injured and out a lot last year, they did not make the playoffs.
     
  13. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,415
    4,973
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Ohhh boy.
     
  14. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree I drink your milkshake! Club Member

    33,349
    23,233
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Luck was 2-5
    Hasslebeck was 5-4

    using your logic.
     
  15. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,985
    28,012
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    I don't know if I'd call Luck average. He's definitely above average IMO, but I do agree he hasn't lived up to his hype.
     
  16. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,230
    6,300
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    Another Luck vs Tannehill thread? Good God Almighty!!!

    Fine, I'll chime in. If you want to know why Indy has had more success than Miami, it isn't who was quarterbacking....it was who was coaching.
     
    danmarino, Pandarilla and Shane Falco like this.
  17. Tin Indian

    Tin Indian Rockin' The Bottom End

    6,609
    2,333
    113
    Feb 10, 2010
    Palm Bay Florida
    I would go with that at least partially, but Lucks division has been a freakin cakewalk the last few years and helps to bump his numbers somewhat.
    Le'ts see what happens this year with him healthy against a for real Jaguars team and a improved Texans team. I don't think his numbers will fare as well.
     
  18. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    22,679
    22,583
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Really good post, Pauly. Thank you.

    Before they were drafted, I felt that Luck was the second best QB prospect I'd ever seen in the 25 years or so I've been paying attention to such things, after Peyton Manning. I thought that Luck was a once in a generation calibre talent, who was a sure thing and heads and shoulders above anyone else, either in the 2012 class or ones in the near past. I think that a whole lot of other people thought the same thing, and its colored their judgements of him to this date. But to this point, he has been good but not great, and certainly not the epic QB I thought him to be. He may become that, but he isn't yet.

    And Tannehill has played as well or better compared to Luck, point blank. The stats Pauly laid out say as much. Its not one game, or one opponent. Its vs every group of teams in the league over a four year period. Luck has benefited from better coaching, being in a weaker division, and in some cases having better teammates, and the Colts have won more games most seasons that the Dolphins because of that. But that doesn't mean that Luck is awesome, and the fact that some people say that Tannehill is hanging by a thread is insane.
     
  19. Surfs Up 99

    Surfs Up 99 Team Rosen

    1,459
    1,390
    113
    May 5, 2016
    [​IMG]

    For convenience, I took Pauly's data and made a table for easier reading. I also added completion %, yards per attempt, TD%, and INT %.

    I am not expert, but IMO, the ratings are misleading. For example, looking at the AFC West Tannehill (93.7) actually has a higher rating than Luck (91.1); however, they have the exact same TD's and Interceptions, and Luck has a 1% higher completion % than Tannehill. Why does Tannehill have a higher rating? I guess it's because he threw for whopping 7 more yards? So, IMO the actual ratings, unless there is a huge difference, need to be taken with a grain of salt. As for who is better? Hard to say. Tannehill seems more cautious, has a better completion %, and takes care of the ball better. On-the-other-hand, Luck seems more aggressive, scores more TD's, but is also a little more careless with the ball.
     
    DolphinGreg, fins1, Pauly and 3 others like this.
  20. Marino1384

    Marino1384 Member

    772
    160
    0
    Dec 8, 2007
    Colts also had the worst defense they've had since drafting luck. Plus add in the fact that just about any team would win 2-3 more games atleast with even just an average qb compared to a back up.Not saying Tannehill is better but as the OP pointed out there isnt as wide of a gap as people think despite luck being constantly considered a top 5 qb while some barely consider Tannehill top 10
     
  21. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,945
    7,692
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Interesting.. something is wrong there. IF the numbers are correct, then the passer ratings look like they've been calculated wrong.

    I'm getting 90.0774 for Tannehill and 90.9722 for Luck for AFC West using the numbers in the table. Oh, and for those doing the calculations themselves, don't round off the numbers before entering them in. Just enter the raw COMP, YDS, TD, INT and ATT numbers and use the formula: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating

    So Luck having a slightly better rating than Tannehill makes sense because each component is divided by ATT, which is 1 less for Luck, meaning he is ever so slightly more efficient except for Y/A. Good catch!
     
    Pauly, Pandarilla and Surfs Up 99 like this.
  22. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    4,207
    1,158
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    Did you miss the he was injured part?
     
    number21 likes this.
  23. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    43,795
    21,266
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    He simply hasn't performed very well relative to his peers. His accuracy is not consistent and he has struggled to read defenses. The only thing he has going for him is his ability to avoid sacks. But he will need more than that going forward.
     
    cuchulainn likes this.
  24. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree I drink your milkshake! Club Member

    33,349
    23,233
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Nope, I didn't. Just one of those "excuses" you talk about
     
    Pauly, cuchulainn, resnor and 2 others like this.
  25. Marino1384

    Marino1384 Member

    772
    160
    0
    Dec 8, 2007
    And you're going to tell me Tannehill has not been injured or hit in the beatings he takes on sundays? Every player gets hurt during a season, just because he's not missing any games doesnt mean he's not hurt, dude was pissing blood... Thats not normal unless you are, you know, injured...and if you're injured and its hurting your play then you shouldnt be in the game. You cant give luck an excuse of being injured when he chose to be in the game and force bad throws.
     
    resnor likes this.
  26. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    4,207
    1,158
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    Ohhhhh so he missed games because of his injuries??? No? didn't think so.
     
  27. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,985
    28,012
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    That's because Tannehill is tough as nails. Elite toughness if you ask me.
     
    fins1, Uncle Tom, Pandarilla and 2 others like this.
  28. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    4,207
    1,158
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    I agree he is very tough, but should he be playing if his injuries are hurting the team? Some would argue he cannot lift the team up when he is completely healthy.
     
  29. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,300
    2,170
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Good write up, and best point made, games aren't played on a piece of paper.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  30. muskrat21

    muskrat21 Well-Known Member

    1,381
    829
    113
    May 11, 2014
    Luck has been to the playoffs /kicks hornet nest.
     
    Pauly and Finster like this.
  31. invid

    invid Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,654
    3,203
    113
    Dec 9, 2012
    Tim Tebow.
     
    fins1, cuchulainn, Pandarilla and 3 others like this.
  32. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,300
    2,170
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I have long thought that on these type fan sites, there should be a "humor appreciation" button, a "lol" button if you will, because you don't always want a comment to just be;

    lol
     
    muskrat21, Tin Indian and Pandarilla like this.
  33. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,300
    2,170
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Picks up wasp nest and throws it at hornets nest...
     
    muskrat21 and Pauly like this.
  34. Shane Falco

    Shane Falco Banned

    975
    503
    0
    Nov 22, 2015
    That is one damn fine chart.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  35. ripper1961

    ripper1961 Active Member

    199
    136
    43
    Jan 13, 2014
    Probably the main difference is trying to tackle Luck is like trying to tackle a mule.
     
  36. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    10,119
    7,953
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    I agree with both Pauly and Stringer... Luck has done nothing of note to distinguish himself appreciably over Tannehill, despite having more support from his coaches and team mates.
     
    Brasfin likes this.
  37. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Thanks a lot for doing that. I wanted to keep the data clean and readable, but your chart helps make the comparison easier to see.

    I agree totally that the PR formula is quite sensitive. As a result I take differences of 1 or 2 points to be negligible.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  38. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Another way of looking at divisional strength is to look at the strength of the defenses. To try to keep this an apples to apples comparison I will use passer rating allowed.

    AFC East (BUF, NE and NYJ)
    In the period 2012 to 2015 these 3 teams have had an average passer rating allowed of 83.4
    Tannehill has a rating of 75.39, or he has underperformed by 9 points against these teams.
    Luck has a rating of 70.47, and has underperformed by 13 points against these teams.
    Both QBs are significantly worse than average, with Luck being worse.

    AFC South (JAC, HOU, TEN)
    From 2012 to 2015 these teams allowed opposing passers a rating of 91.0
    Against these teams Tannehill has a rating of 90.61.
    Luck has a rating of 91.89
    In other words both Luck and Tannehill have, over their careers, performed the same as NFL average QBs against the AFC South.
     
    Unlucky 13, resnor and Fin D like this.
  39. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I did want to try to keep this thread focused on QB performance rather than team performance, but since some posters think that team wins is an indicator, let's try to sort out the division effects.

    Ryan Tannehill
    Career: 29 of 64 (45.3 win %)
    AFC East*: 8 of 24 (33.3 win%)
    AFC South*: 4 of 7 (57.1 win %)
    Out of Division: 21 of 40 (52.5 win %)

    Andrew Luck
    Career: 35 of 55 (63.6 win%)
    AFC East*: 1 of 7 (14.3 win%)
    AFC South*: 17 of 19 (89.5 win%)
    Out of Division: 18 of 36 (50.0% win%)

    * (Indianapolis and Miami results removed)

    Again once you remove the divisional effects there really is no significant difference between Luck and Tannehill in team win%. Luck again benefits by playing in a weak division. Also I think Luck win% against the AFC South is unsustainable. Without doing any statistical analysis I think he's benefited from some good fortune that is very unlikely to continue into the future.
     
  40. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,035
    2,857
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Let's compare Tanny and Luck's 2014 seasons.
    Luck
    Overall: 380 of 616 for 4761 yards. 40 TDs. 16 Ints. 96.5 rating
    Own Division: 134 of 206 for 1733 yards. 16TDs. 3 Ints. 111.2 rating
    Rest of League: 246 of 410 for 3028 yards. 24 TDs. 13 Int. 89.2 rating
    6-0 in division
    5-5 -v- rest of league.

    Tannehill
    Overall: 392of 590 for 4045 yards. 27 TDs. 12 Ints. 92.8 rating
    Own Division: 152 of 236 for 1499 yards. 7 TDs. 5 Ints. 83.3 rating
    Rest of League: 240 of 354 for 2546 yards. 20 TDs. 7 Int. 99.1 rating
    3-3 in division
    5-5 -v- rest of league.

    Once again, once you remove the benefit of playing in the AFC South from Luck he is not better than Ryan Tannehill.
     
    Unlucky 13, Brasfin and resnor like this.

Share This Page