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

Merge: Report: Joe Philbin wanted to replace Ryan Tannehill with Derek Carr

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by muskrat21, Jan 10, 2016.

  1. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    You've never seen a QB escape a free DT and throw a TD pass? Do you only watch the Dolphins play Kyle Orton/Matt Cassell QB'ed teams?
     
  2. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    How about an ANOVA, with the dependent variable's being sack percentage over the course of a season, and the independent variable's being low versus high sack percentage quarterbacks, over the course of several seasons for each?

    If the sacks were due to season-to-season variation in offensive lines, then the between-group variation wouldn't be significantly greater than the within-group variation. This fits with Roy's "Payton Manning" point, above.
     
  3. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,516
    8,905
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You're still not teasing apart whether within- or between-group variation is due to OL variance or QB play variance. You could put all the variance on either or distribute the variance on both and all such theories will predict the same data. Once again the problem is having no independent means of determining OL play variance.

    btw.. in the scientific literature, ANOVA is going out of style (happening slowly, in one field after another). People are using regression instead. Both give the same information where ANOVA is used, but regression is more general.
     
  4. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    And there you have the reason why quarterbacks might be more responsible than their offensive lines for their own sacks, in addition to their own pressure.

    Again, we can tend to get so focused on how our team's quarterback is a victim of what's going on around him that our ability to even generate these alternative hypotheses is impeded, regardless of whether they're even true.
     
  5. heylookatme

    heylookatme Well-Known Member

    902
    438
    63
    Sep 12, 2012
    Peyton Manning when someone on his line completely whiffs a block:

    [video=youtube;DttfyOeU3vw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DttfyOeU3vw[/video]

    Clearly his fault.
     
  6. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Tannehill is average, simple as that.
     
  7. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    How many seasons of play for one QB do you think we'd need to safely say that the sample represented theoretically large enough variation in his line play during that period? Presumably his own ability wouldn't vary as much during that period.
     
  8. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    What would be interesting to investigate that in my opinion is some study of the trajectories of the careers of other QBs, where it was (or wasn't) shown that they played at some inadequate level until what was going on around them changed significantly. At least if that could be shown historically, it would lend credence to the belief that Tannehill is only X, Y, or Z (or all three) away from being much better.
     
  9. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,516
    8,905
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Really depends on the argument you're trying to make. But if it's a play-by-play stat a single season should be enough. Only exception is if the event is exceedingly rare (e.g. safety given up by OL). If it's a game-by-game stat, maybe several years is fine? I don't think you have to worry anywhere near as much about sample size (unless it's absurdly low) as much as the analysis and interpretation. 99.9% of the critique will probably fall on the latter.
     
  10. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,678
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No. Explain why you used to argue that all WRs were the same and now you're arguing all olines are the same.

    We can run all the numbers you want but if the premise is wrong, then the results don't matter.
     
    resnor likes this.
  11. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,470
    5,085
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Note to self: Do not click on this thread again.
     
    Brasfin likes this.
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Nice strawman. I've never claimed Tannehill is elite.
     
  13. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I know it's crazy to think that a QB might struggle to lead his offense to points because his oline is so terrible that he's always dealing with short times to throw and defenders in the backfield. In other words, being down three scores could just easily be a function of the offense being poor due to poor oline play and no run game.

    Why is it that the anti-Tannehill guys always try to boil every problem down to Tannehill? Is really getting old that people approach evaluating a team sport by focusing on one player on the offense.
     
  14. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,470
    5,085
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    When particles of Tannehill and Anti-Tannehill meet, there is a super massive explosion.
     
    Fin D, Brasfin, resnor and 1 other person like this.
  15. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Hahahahaha Elite. No. That word does not describe Tannehill at all. I hope I see no claims of Elite. Let him prove he is a top 20 again first. Mediocre, Average, Middle of the Pack, Overpaid, etc., are all words that describe Hennehill.
     
  16. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    Hennehill? What are you a six year old? He is also a top 20 quarterback.
     
    resnor likes this.
  17. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    That's a possibility as well. Like I said in the post you quoted, we need a deeper analysis to explore these possibilities.

    I'm a pro-Tannehill guy, in that I want him to succeed so that the Dolphins have a much greater chance of being successful, but more importantly, I'm a "know what's really going on by investigating it objectively so I don't get too hopeful and get let down like I did with Chad Henne" kind of guy.

    And I'm saying nothing about what you are or are not here, only what I am.
     
  18. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    I'm not sure you're getting what I'm saying here -- the idea would be to take let's say eight consecutive years of QB play for two groups of QBs, one high and the other low in overall sack percentage during that period of time, and see whether an ANOVA would show the between-group variation in sack percentage, year-to-year, to be significantly greater than the within-group variation.
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,516
    8,905
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, as I said in post #445, what would you conclude? If between-group variance is greater, what's the conclusion? You can't say the difference was more due to the OL than QB or vice versa (based on what would you argue that?). Same thing if within-group variance is greater.

    Point is, stats will not tease apart relative contribution of OL to QB as long as both play together almost all the time. No amount of analysis on any other stats will change that. So if you do this ANOVA, the results have value in and of themselves in that it's data we didn't have, but it says nothing about relative contribution of OL to QB.
     
  20. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    If the finding were that the between-group variation was significantly greater, you wouldn't think it would indicate that characteristics of those QBs, independent of the variation in all of their offensive lines year-to-year, were responsible for their sack rates?

    If on the other hand the within-group variation was significantly greater, then year-to-year variation in offensive line play, among both groups, would be driving the bus.
     
  21. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,516
    8,905
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No I wouldn't because you're looking at differences in sack percentage, which are probably in large part due to differences in OL's. So you automatically have two different groups of OL along with two different groups of QB's. How do you know that the variances in those two different groups of OL are the same?
     
  22. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Im sure in your delusional opinion RT17 is a top 5 QB. Im not surprised by how you guys think anymore, this guy has proven for 4 years to be average and you guys will defend him like he is a top 10 till he is off the team next year. He is a coach killer and a player killer. Over 20 different OL in his career but they all suck right? Has nothing to do with our numbskull QB that dont know the game of football.
     
  23. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    Over eight years, though? I would think there would be variation in OL play over that length of time, in both groups, while there would be far less variation in QBs' response to pressure in the form of sacks, in both groups. You'd essentially be investigating whether there is a stable "sack avoidance" characteristic among QBs, that withstood variation in OL play.
     
  24. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yes, our oline has collectively sucked. Who from our oline from the past four years is either highly sought after by other teams, or is starting on other teams and playing well?

    I would imagine that there are teams who would be interested in Punt. Incognito is doing ok. Other than that, who? You act like we've had good players on our line. We haven't. The few good ones we've had also can't stay healthy.
     
  25. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Of course there is variation in QBs ability to avoid sacks. That's not even the discussion. In order for the QB to have to avoid the sack, it means that an olineman had to fail at his job, perhaps several.

    No one is arguing that Wilson possesses an innate ability to avoid sacks that Tannehill does not, for instance.
     
    Fin4Ever likes this.
  26. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    That's true, but we'd have to know whether that represents something significantly worse for the Dolphins than it is for other teams to know whether it distinguishes the Dolphins' offensive line play from that of other teams. For all we know the league could be a collective wasteland of offensive line talent, by and large. Or it may not be, but by focusing on the Dolphins alone, we can't possibly know.
     
  27. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Tannehill is too stupid of a QB to understand what a broken pocket is. (Which happens almost every play of every game, contrary to the belief around here that Miami is the only team that deals with pass rush). I swear most of you only watch Miami games and have no understanding of what happens around the league.
     
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,516
    8,905
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You're the one who wants an "objective" analysis. The interpretation you're proposing won't be based on anything but conjecture.

    Like I said, no statistical analysis can circumvent the fact the same QB and OL play together most of the time.. it's a limitation that will show itself no matter how you try to slice up things.
     
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    That's hilarious.

    Often I post about stuff I see during other games, in regards to what happens to "better" QBS when their protection breaks down. I usually get mocked, and people tell me it doesn't matter because these QBs have established themselves as "winners" or some other such nonsense.

    It's more likely that you don't truly understand just how bad our line actually was, convinced with a complete lack of understanding as to how a developing QB handles that, when also faced with the other hurdles Tannehill had to deal with. Those hurdles being the things you like to label as "excuses."
     
  30. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Lets stop this developing thing. This guy is close to 30, his development is over.
     
  31. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Was he developing in year one? Two? Three?

    Let's stop acting like his development wasn't stunted by a crappy oline, and crappy coaching. Normally QBs get three years to develop. Tannehill came in with limited college starts. In a perfect scenario, I don't think it would be outrageous, with good coaching, to have given him 4 years. Regardless, I don't think he needs more development. I think he needs better coaching, not bottom of the league oline play, average play from them would be fine, and better defense. We win plenty of games with two out of those three.
     
    RevRick likes this.
  32. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    Im sure all the coaches he got fired would of said they could of used a better QB. Works both ways. Same thing for all the OL that have come and gone blocking for this moron.
     
  33. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    Poor Philibin and Sherman, thank god that they landed on their feet as head coaching or coordinators... Oops How many times has Sherman been fired now? Also feel bad for Dallas Thomas, Fox, Clabo, they are very good players held back by the quarterback. Bye the bye don't call morons if you are going to continuous sound like one.
     
    resnor likes this.
  34. 407PhinFan

    407PhinFan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    1,247
    1,907
    113
    Oct 20, 2011
    All those great coaches, like Mike Sherman who is coaching a high school somewhere!!!

    And Joe Philbin, who is an offensive line coach. Guy couldn't even get a coordinator job.

    Who else did he get fired? Bill Lazor? Bill Lazor got himself fired for being insubordinate to the wishes of the HC. If he didn't want to be fired, he probably should have done what Campbell asked, which was establish some semblance of run pass balance.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. NCPhinFan

    NCPhinFan Active Member

    172
    154
    43
    Sep 22, 2014
    It seems like Ryan has improved his game every year. His deep ball improved considerably this season and I can't wait to see how he does under Gase's system if we can get an offensive line.
     
    407PhinFan and resnor like this.
  36. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    I was callin our QB a moron. Which he is, I still wonder if he knows who is in oir division yet? Judging by our division record, I doubt it. I cant wait for him to go live his passion as a surgeon or doctor because he is a very average QB ad thats not a debate. That just what it is.
     
  37. Laurence

    Laurence Banned

    80
    19
    0
    Jan 20, 2016
    I wish that were the case, but according to Pro Football Focus, his accuracy (controlling for drops) on passes thrown 20+ yards in the air actually decreased slightly, from 37.7% to 37%, in 2015. He completed more of those passes, which is probably what made it seem to increase, but he also threw more of them, hence the very similar completion percentage.
     
  38. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    He is far from a moron, but I get that you unable to be objective or at least look at his play rationally. He is a good quarterback that will never be great in my opinion. With a competent coaching staff he will be pretty good. He has his limits and it is laughable at best to say the former coaching staff and FO put him or the team in a position to win. They never played to his strengths or surrounded him with a good line. Mind you they tried but injuries have killed the middle line and there is no depth of any kind. But again your need to personally attack him and come up with lame attacks on him, tells me all I need to know about your objective in this type of conversation.
     
    resnor likes this.
  39. shamegame13

    shamegame13 Madison & Surtain

    3,451
    903
    113
    Dec 15, 2014
    He doesnt understand the game of football. Simple as that. Cant feel pass rush for the life of him. I can bet anything that he looks at football as a "job" and not something he "loves to play". He will be off the team after Gase realizes this guy is a fraud who gives off false hope of a top 10 QB and all the homers on these forums will sadly cry and whine, all the meanwhile, Miami Dolphins will have gotten better as a team.
     
  40. Patssuck

    Patssuck Well-Known Member

    1,160
    432
    83
    Dec 2, 2012
    M.I.A
    Yea because if he saw it as a job he would play a meaningless game behind this **** line after pissing blood the whole week. Talk about conjecture Keep it petty. That is all you bring.
     

Share This Page