I understand the premise just fine. You're saying the oline play is irrelevant to the level of QB play in 85% of the instances its been checked. That means 15% of the time that's not true. So, you saying the oline's play is not a factor is wrong. You should be saying its less likely based on the spreadsheet. Surely you understand the difference... 87% of Scots in Scotland do not have red hair. Following your logic, none of them do.
Of course, we keep coming back to this: if olines have such little impact on QBs statistical performance, then why do teams bother to pay more than the league minimum for any player on their offensive line? It would stand to reason, if GMs were following the same statistical analysis that you are, that they would also determine that oline play has little significant bearing on the QB, and would simply not pay more than $525k for a player with more than one or two years of playing. I think we are seeing a problem where you seem to be arguing something I am not. I am not saying that a QB is good or bad based on performance of oline. I'm saying that for a QB, of any skill level, to play his best, he needs a good oline. Sure, a great QB will still put up good stats behind a bad oline, and a bad QB could put up good stats behind a great oline. But, to argue that a great QB wouldn't put up better numbers behind a good oline than behind a bad oline is silly. Oh, what statistics again were you using to determine what affects YPA? Like, hypothetically, QB A is playing behind a line that gives him an average of 1.8 seconds to throw. Would you expect to see QB A have a greater than 7YPA? What other factors could affect his YPA other than oline? Could receivers who excel at getting YAC affect QB A's YPA?
That (bolded above) isn't what it means. It means that only 15% of the variation in QB ratings is associated with variation in QB pressure. 85% of the variation in QB ratings is associated with (an)other factor(s). So, what that means is that even if the Dolphins had the absolute worst offensive line in the league in terms of QB pressure (and they don't), and that improved to the absolute best offensive line in the league in terms of pressure (unlikely to happen), that degree of improvement in QB pressure would likely be associated with only a 15% increase in QB rating.
Ok fine. So, if he had a better oline his 92.8 QB rating would have been 106.72. Which would have been good for 3rd, behind Romo & Rodgers. Brady would have been 6th, Manning whb 5th, Luck whb 8th, Wilson whb 11th.) Seems to me the difference in oline play is the difference between elite and not.
That (bolded above) would likely be true only if the Dolphins had the worst line in the league in terms of QB pressure (and they don't), and that improved to the best line in the league in terms of pressure. Any other set of conditions -- such as having a better line than the worst, which improves to something worse than the best -- results in a more meager predicted improvement in QB rating. It would help the discussion if you actually read what I wrote before responding, because now I'm repeating myself, and I won't be doing that for long.
10% improvement then? He'd still be in the 100s @ #4 5% improvement then? He'd tie Brady for Top 5. Don't get pissy with me, cause you're own BS shot down your own BS agenda. Considering you're a poster who has been banned multiple times and is pretending you're not them, then not doing the math on your own mission to paint Tannehill as a bad, then changing your angle each time to only get it proven wrong each time...maybe you wouldn't have to repeat yourself. Consider this shellacking, to be your chance to walk away from this topic, once and for all.
Exactly. YPA, like Passer rating, measures the effectiveness of the passing game as a whole, not just the QB.
It makes a world of difference, which is why we paid Albert and drafted James. It's why more OTs go in the 1st round than QBs. Of 11 players, five of them are OL. They open holes in the run game, anyone want a balanced offense that doesn't require the QB to throw 35-40 times a week? They protect the QB so that he can read the defense/throw accurately, so the OC doesn't have to scale back the pass game or leave extra blockers in. Its all interconnected. Better DBs give the pass rush more time to rush, a better pass rush gives the DBs less time to cover. But what I'm hearing is that we might as well cut Wake, Albert, Pouncey, Vernon etc bc good QBs will be good no matter who's rushing them. Lol.
Even just the 5% predicted figure would require that the Dolphins offensive line move from being merely average in terms of pressure, to being among the very best in the league, whereas Tannehill improved his QB rating over 10 points (nearly 13%) from 2013 to 2014, alongside an actual increase in the frequency of pressure his line surrendered between the two seasons.
Are you including the games before Albert went down? That wouldn't paint the right picture, because that line was much better than the one after. And also, we'd likely improve the guard positions this offseason actually improving that version of the OL even more... I'd guess if you take the OL after Albert went down and compare it with an improved version of the line before he went down (which was not elite by any means) and we'd see that 5% increase in passer rating, maybe even more.
That's great! Tannehill improved, even in spite of his oline!! Now, let's factor in receivers running poor routes, along with an oline that has Tannehill being hit on almost every dropback, and we can certainly see one of the problems with his YPA. This idea that simply because he improved, it somehow invalidates the importance of the oline is silly. Would you rather have an oline that can block, or would your rather have turnstiles? The idea that a QB's job isn't easier behind a competent oline is completely silly, and is simply stats telling you crazy things. Simple terms: do you want to make your QBs job easier or harder? Again, if the oline was so unimportant to QB play, teams would not be paying linemen more than the vet minimum, and would simply take their wondrous savings, and put it into the receivers, running backs, and defense. You can't tell me every GM wouldn't love to have another 10 million (or more???) to spread to other parts of the team. However, since we see GMs all over the league drafting OTs high in the draft, and putting some serious cash into their olines, we can all assume that olines are very important to the overall functioning of the offense.
Shhh...this cannot be statistically proven by looking at the YPA. Clearly the QB who has a low YPA has a low YPA simply because he refuses to throw to the open guy downfield. I mean, if the team REALLY believes that Tannehill is simply disregarding the open guys downfield, in favor of throwing to a back out of the backfield or Landry on a 6 yard slant, then would they really be considering a multi-year deal for him?
Certainly a plausible theory, but overall, Tannehill's performance was no different after Albert's injury than it was before it. In fact, his average QB rating was nearly 2.5 points higher afterward.
They weren't merely average. They were below average. They played average or above during his run from Oakland to Albert getting hurt. And he played lights out. That run is skewing your season long view. Surely, you understand how that happens. Further more, I don't buy your arbitrary assessment that 5% increase means they have to be near the very best when 15% would also require them to be the very best. Show your work on that.
Tanny improved yes. The thing that gets me, is his ypa crept up just a little, while his accuracy numbers jumped significantly. Tells you the passes he was asked to throw was reduced significantly (simple math). This is a strong armed QB being asked to throw a lot of Chad Pennington passes. Shoot Pennington has a higher YPA than Tannehill. Strikes you as odd, doesn't it? Until he gets that YPA up while maintaining those good accuracy numbers, our offense will always be limited.
19.8 points allowed per game in 2008. 23.3 points allowed per game in 2014. Just throwing that out there.
One thing about that though? Pennington almost never put his defense in bad spots...he was the ultimate team caretaker.
Your not even on the same subject as me. I was talking about pure QB play. Nothing else. Pennington and Tannehill dont play defense.
Alex Smith has never been as efficient as Pennington was in 2008. Pennington should of got MVP votes that year.
If you're calling Tannehill's 2014 season a "good stats year" because you think his stats were better than Pennington's in 2008, think again. All of the important stats were better for Pennington in 2008 than for Tannehill in 2014, despite that the average performance in the league with regard to those stats has increased between those years.
I hear you, but let's not act like Pennington was efficient in a vacuum. Being efficient gave us the best chance to win and that suited Pennington's skillset to a tee. But without a good OL and run game simply being efficient isn't enough to win games. Hell, Tannehill could go 18-25 for 175 yards in his sleep, but we'd never win like that b/c we don't have Ricky & Ronnie to carry the rest of the load.
Staying healthy is kinda important. If Moreno or Albert had stayed healthy we'd have made the playoffs.
Pennington was a top 5 QB that year as far as efficiency goes. It was a god send season from the QB position.
it really was, dude did whatever it took to convert, running, throwing, you could tangibly see how leadership teleports itself into other players and how it made them focus harder..love that dude..We knew we were toast in the first quarter of that raven game when we saw how the ravens figured out how to braket the field where he could no longer work the middle of the field..they forced him to throw outside the numbers and he couldn't get it done.
Again, being efficient is fine when you have a run game/OL and a defense. When you don't, your QB is going to have to throw more. I guarantee you that Tannehill's efficiency would have increased if we had Moreno to slam people with 15-20 times a game in addition to Miller. Instead Moreno is hurt and Miller can only handle 15-20 touches a game, where is the rest of the offense (60-70 plays) coming from? The passing game, and the defense knows it. The QBs who can remain efficient under those circumstances are the truly elite ones, pretty much any decent QB can be efficient under ideal circumstances. Edit: Keep Pennington, gimme Ronnie & Ricky in their prime on the 2014 team and we might've won 12-13 games.
Thinking aloud. The thought always runs thru my head when I hear if he was healthy, you can't be a good player if you're not playing.
Not sure what happened in the middle of this thread to get it on Pennington, but I couldn't agree more with Simms. Miami finally has the QB position figured out. Time to fix everything else.
Tannehill's efficiency in 2014 was unrelated to anything having to do with the running game -- numbers of rushes, ratio of rushes to passes, rushing yards, yards per carry.
Because strong armed Tannehill has a worse ypa than a noodle armed Pennington, with a similar accuracy number meaning Tanny dinked and dunked through the year. This was by design (Lazor removed chunk plays for a while)
Moreover, when Pennington did throw downfield in 2008, he performed better than Tannehill did in that area in 2014.
There was def an attempt by Lazor to augment the lack of run game w/ short passes, which brought the overall YPA down but was necessary bc we couldn't get any more than 15-18 carries out of Miller and we had no one behind him.
