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

Thoughts on Rosen's Debut

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by KeyFin, Aug 9, 2019.

  1. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Thinking back over the last 5-6 years, how many times did someone here say, "It's not really fair to judge Tannehill when he's getting lit up almost every play?" I personally said it dozens of times because our line really has been that bad. So when I see a young QB in Rosen get the &$%# knocked out of him while he shoves the defender to the ground...then dances around a 2nd defender and launches a 20 yard bullet...wow. That's all I can say. Wow.

    And to top it all off? On most of those plays where he was getting pounded and knocking defenders to the ground...the kid was smiling. He was having the time of his life while his line did nothing and big, mean men were trying to kill him.

    I watched the game online so I don't have the luxury of going back to review, but my initial impressions of Rosen were sky high. He throws a good ball, he's super tough and he just doesn't seem to know how to give up. He almost reminds me of a Cam Newton type of QB that never stops dancing while looking downfield.

    For those who didn't see the game, Rosen threw a pick on his 2nd or 3rd drive. It was a bad pass where he didn't see the coverage rotating....clearly Rosen's fault. But he also had close to a dozen gorgeous throws while under extreme pressure. We're not talking about a collapsing pocket here....there literally was no pocket. Rosen would get hit once, twice and he would keep moving and shoving defenders. On one pass to Preston Williams, he was wrapped up at the waist for a full second before tossing about a 12 yard strike....that one absolutely blew me away.

    By the way, Preston Williams will be a WR1 somewhere next season. The kid is phenomenal and easily worth a 1st round pick.

    Despite anything else that happened, we know today that Rosen is a gamer. Does he have some stuff to work on? Definitely. But now I absolutely see why we went after him and I do believe he lives up to the hype. Rosen is going to be a stud in a couple of years and I really hope he's still in a Dolphins uniform.
     
  2. Destroyer

    Destroyer There for every play.

    2,734
    913
    113
    Oct 25, 2010
    Maryland
    Don't you mean a WR1 in Miami next season.
     
    Tin Indian, Fin-O and resnor like this.
  3. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Here's a video of all his throws from yesterday:



    I do think you really can't evaluate the guy because it's only preseason, but remember his issues are primarily about decision making, and you can see a lot of throws were an INT waiting to happen. So sure after "no pocket presence" Tannehill a guy with decent pocket presence looks refreshing, but I'm not seeing good decision making here yet.

    Again though.. have to wait till the regular season to see whether he's improved or not.
     
    danmarino, Dorfdad and KeyFin like this.
  4. Surfs Up 99

    Surfs Up 99 Team Flores

    1,505
    1,436
    113
    May 5, 2016
    If there were a line with pessimism on one side and optimism on the other I would say I am on the optimism side, but just barely. With so many variables at play, it's tough to gauge just how well Rosen did. Sure, I am with you, Key, and liked a lot of throws Rosen made. However, it's who he is playing with and playing against that is mudding up the waters for me. Part of me is thinking that a legitimate QB would be slicing and dicing up a second rate defense playing a vanilla scheme. However, the other part of me is saying how can I expect that when our second rate offensive line is doing a great example of a turnstile. As they say, time will tell. I am pulling for the guy and hope he continues to improve. He's got nothing to lose by laying it on the line. A tie in the competition with Fitzpatrick most definitely will favor Rosen.
     
    Irishman and KeyFin like this.
  5. TheHighExhaulted

    TheHighExhaulted Well-Known Member

    2,005
    1,530
    113
    Jan 15, 2008
    New York
    I saw a quarterback, when he had time and a pocket, who looked very good.
     
    Irishman and KeyFin like this.
  6. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Most NFL QB’s are good when you give them time and a clean pocket. Tannehill was good in those situations too.

    Rosen made too many ill-advised throws as you can see in that video. Why try to force a completion when being tackled? Roethlisberger and Luck can do that maybe but Rosen? That type of decision making will lead to unnecessary turnovers.

    Also even when he had time to throw you saw him occasionally force it into coverage. This is precisely one of the things he needs to stop doing. Well like I said it’s only preseason but if that were a regular season game I’m not happy.
     
  7. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I DEFINITELY hope so...but you never know.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  8. Makados10

    Makados10 Active Member

    268
    134
    43
    Apr 24, 2010
    I just don't see anything "elite" about him. He looked comfortable out there, which he should have with 13 starts last season. Other rookie and 2nd year QBs are earning rave reviews out of their camps and Rosen has not for a reason.

    On a related note, Preston looks like an elite prospect in his first camp as a rookie. He'll get even better but it doesnt take multiple seasons to figure out that kid has a bright future.
     
    resnor and KeyFin like this.
  9. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Thanks for posting that!

    I saw 2 throws trying to avoid the sack that he shouldn't have thrown (one was Williams circus catch, the other went into the ground).

    I also saw 5 bad decisions on throws (the pick, targeting the wrong receiver, etc.) Some were caught, some weren't.

    He also threw 4 or 5 50/50 balls to Williams which most of us would also say are ill-advised...but Williams caught every single one of them. A few of them were deep passes on 3rd down though so I guess we'd count them as less of a gamble....those were pretty much a punt with potential upside. =)

    I saw three good throws (right receiver, generally on target) that were a little low or to the side (in other words, no chance for YAC).

    So that's 10 throws that weren't great, plus 5 more that were a gamble. He ONLY seemed to gamble with Williams though so I'd call them calculated anyway. I also counted 11 throws (mostly with a clean pocket...3 or 4 were scrambling) that were big-time, NFL caliber throws perfectly placed.

    As you said, 10 bad/poorly placed throws is definitely cause for concern...especially when we add in the jump balls on top of it. But at the same time, in his very first showing as a Dolphin, he set us up for three TD's. We can also say that he was facing 2nd-4th stringers most of the time and he had a ringer in Williams...so all of this means a lot of nothing.

    I think the important part was that the line struggled, Rosen gambled too often and managed to look decent (and at times dominant) overall. I'll take decent in preseason 1 since we saw a boat-load of potential.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2019
    cbrad likes this.
  10. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,899
    27,160
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    IMO Rosen performed as expected. He had some beautiful passes and some questionable decisions. That's his history going all the way back to college. Williams bailed him out on those 50/50 balls, but those same passes every week will as result in a ton of 3-4 interception days. That's the pitfall of evaluating on the result of the play rather than what the QB did.

    I was encouraged that Rosen shook off that early INT. I like the resilience. Though I'm not sure if he just looked better b/c Atlanta took out most of their starters after that. I loved that deep pass down the sideline. The footwork and timing were perfect. He's always best when he goes with that initial read. But it seemed like he missed some quick reads too. He inexplicably seems to ignore the play design at times. I'd like to see him get some time with the starters as the preseason progresses. I thought the OL without Tunsil was equally bad all night and obviously he had great WR play so it's not as much about giving him a better supporting cast as it is about seeing him against better competition.
     
    brandon27, cuchulainn, resnor and 2 others like this.
  11. Destroyer

    Destroyer There for every play.

    2,734
    913
    113
    Oct 25, 2010
    Maryland
    Hopefully the coach alternates who starts each preseason game.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  12. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,247
    6,326
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    My prediction is this...

    Fitzpatrick will start 7 games this season before playing himself out of a job. That’s just his history. Rosen will will come in and barring any catastrophic injuries on the OL, Miami will win 6 of those final 9 games of the regular season

    After last nights game I’m optimistic of this being a Cinderella season in Miami
     
    Irishman and KeyFin like this.
  13. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I mean, imagine Williams spread out left, Parker to the right and Stills, Wilson or Grant in the slot. We have two QB's who like to throw the ball a country mile and two legit WR1 targets (if Parker really is that guy...). Then we have a speedster that nobody can figure out how to cover and two versatile backs- the pieces are in place for a potent offense.

    My only problem is the damn line- talent means little if the QB can't buy a little time. It's been our achilles heel for over a decade now and we keep cutting/trading the few good ones we have to save money. If they somehow halfway figure it out this season though and the defense also improves (which you'd expect under Flores and the new scheme- how could it actually get worse anyway?!?), this could be a team that shocks a lot of people.

    It could just as easily be a 3-13 team though, so we'll have to see how things shake out. There's still a lot of puzzle pieces that don't fit into the big picture yet!
     
    Surfs Up 99 and resnor like this.
  14. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,798
    42,520
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I'm neither out or in on Rosen....but he didn't look good to me last night at all. He looked completely over his head.
     
    resnor likes this.
  15. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    678
    602
    93
    Jan 2, 2016
    Dude, you gotta be kidding me. Look at his ball placement. He threw multiple big boy passes that I haven't seen a Dolphins' QB throw in a long time.

    Someone else commented that when he actually had time to throw the ball, he looked great.

    I am honestly curious as to how you would describe his ball placement.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  16. muskrat21

    muskrat21 Well-Known Member

    1,385
    830
    113
    May 11, 2014
    my thoughts are: it was preseason week 1.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  17. firedan

    firedan Well-Known Member

    1,731
    622
    113
    Oct 31, 2008
    palm beach county fl
    I give him a C+ in his limited 1st preseason game.Some good.some bad and some ugly but something to build on.
     
  18. Colmax

    Colmax Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,306
    3,261
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    For a guy with a tennis background, he surely looked “heavy-footed” in the pocket. That’s kind of the biggest thing I noticed.

    It’s preseason, so it’s about trying things and working out the kinks with limited play-calling and backups.

    A handful of passes were stupid good. There were some that were just ‘meh’, and others that were awful.

    I do hope he becomes better at recognizing the pass rush in the pocket, because I am not sure Miami is going to be elite in the O-line dept. (assuming that he gets playing time during the reg season).
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  19. ExplosionsInDaSky

    ExplosionsInDaSky Well-Known Member

    1,976
    1,067
    113
    Sep 13, 2011
    Well first of all I saw the O line giving him NO TIME what so ever when he first got out there. The INT was absolutely on him and uncalled for. He had Parker open to his left for what would have been at least positive yardage. Some of the throws I thought we errant and gutsy, and there were times where Preston Williams just made him look good. I do like his pocket presence, he's got a little Aaron Rodgers to him and I really hope he can unlock that at some point. The talent is definitely there and I don't think we should pay too much attention to the BS camp rumors we hear, but with that said. I doubt he's our opening day starter unless he really balls out these next three preseason games. Still....We need to know sooner than later what exactly we have with him.
     
    KeyFin, Surfs Up 99 and tirty8 like this.
  20. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I agree. If he's not the guy, we want to know as soon as possible. If he is the guy...same thing. He did make several plays that we haven't ever seen from a Miami QB as far as I can remember (pushing defenders to the ground, rolling well outside the pocket with heavy pressure, a few freaking incredible mid-range bullets, etc.).

    So I'm personally encouraged by what I saw. He's not a natural day 1 starter yet but I'm okay with that- just keep letting the kid get reps and take shots. People just need to remember that we have plenty of time with him- he doesn't have to be the starter this year or even next season. The big thing for me is that IF this kid develops, he could be the second-coming of Marino for a very long time.
     
    ExplosionsInDaSky likes this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Let's not go overboard here lol.

    Marino comes in around 10th or so all time using era-adjusted passer rating (z-scores) which is impressive, but Marino's most impressive stat is that he has the 2nd highest z-score for TD's in any single NFL season behind Peyton Manning for QB's with 6+ games started that season. Manning in 2013 tops the list with 55 TD's when league average was 25.125 and standard deviation was 8.0673 giving him a z-score of 3.7032. But Marino's 1984 season is #2 with a z-score of 3.4576 (48 TD's when average was 21.9643 and S.D. was 7.5301).

    And Marino did that in year 2. You think Rosen is up to that challenge? Using 2018 numbers, Rosen would need to throw 56 TD's in a single season to beat Marino and 58 to beat Peyton. QB's in that top 10 all-time category are in another class really. I think the ceiling for Rosen is more like "consistently above average QB" which would be awesome btw. We're not looking at anything elite here even IF he develops.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  22. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Yeah, maybe an eventual Marino comparison is too strong- but I couldn't think of anyone elite yet not one of the best of all time at the moment. And like I said, maybe he never gets anywhere near that level...that certainly wasn't a prediction. But the kid has some awesome evasion skills and a great arm; that's a rare combination these days. What we don't know is how he will process the field in the next few years....and that's really 90% of being an NFL QB. I'm just really excited to see a young guy handle pressure that well compared to what we've had the past few decades.

    For instance, I know he shouldn't have thrown that pass to Williams when he was in the grasp, but Tannehill would have been strip sacked there 9 times out of 10. To see someone that young stay composed, drag the guy a few feet, scan the field and then get a pass off (it was an ugly pass....but that's not the point)....that potential is super, super rare these days. And he throws a great ball with a clean pocket so I think he has a ton of room to develop.

    Like you said earlier, maybe he never gets there and his ceiling is pretty low. I'm just happy we have a real candidate developing...I'd be just as happy if he's a bust and we have a new guy in the same situation a few years from now. The only way to get better is to bring those types into camp and let them develop, and we just haven't done that for a very long time. To me it's been our #1 weakness as a franchise.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  23. IdrA

    IdrA Rebuilding for Eternity.

    3,300
    1,140
    113
    Oct 15, 2011
    Upstate, SC
    I would say B+ based on the strength of our OL but it's subjective I guess. He made several nice throws down the sideline, and also got out of trouble when the OL got blown up on more than one occasion. There were a few late throws on timing routes, and that one bad pick, but as basically a redshirt (pro) freshmen, he did better than I expected.

    I'd like to see at least 2 quarters of him every preseason game, and the starting position certainly shouldnt be a lock for Fitz, he needs to earn it. He got little playing time in game 1, but the few throws he did get were just ugly.
     
  24. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Were they? I didn't get to see any of his drives. The articles online said he moved the ball pretty easily....was he not that great? And how did the 1st string line (minus Tunsil) do?
     
  25. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,899
    27,160
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    You're much more optimistic than I am. IMO IF he develops he could be a nice back-up or lower tier starter until we find a franchise QB.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  26. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    221
    251
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    I'm beginning to believe that it's not what your QB is capable of, but how well the coaching staff uses what a QB is capable of. I do not agree with the "QB carrying a team on his back" thinking. It blinds you to reality for two reasons:

    1) We never really know what a QB is capable of, although many posters believe they do.

    2) All that counts is winning and that is based on how well the team performs, not just the QB. For better or for worse, this is really where the coaching staff has the most effect.

    This is what I like most about football; it really is the ultimate team sport.

    If you are more interested in individual effort, watch baseball where every player has their moment in the sun. It occurs when a player is at bat. Defensive skill is also on display one player at a time, but only after a hit or a pickoff play by the pitcher or the catcher.
     
  27. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That just doesn't fit the data. In general, the more elite the QB (the more we'd say the "QB is carrying the offense") the more it's the QB and not the coaching staff.

    Take Peyton Manning for example. Look at the performance of his teams' offense in terms of points scored both before and after his tenure:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/index.htm
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/index.htm

    First the Colts. For the 20 years prior to Manning (1978-1997) the Colts on offense (by points scored) ranked on average 21.5 with their best ranking being 9. Manning comes in (1998-2010) and look at the difference! 9 top 5 rankings on offense out of 13 years with an average of 6!! Then Manning leaves and it's back to the gutters: rank 28 the very next year with the same coach.

    Then with Denver. Denver was averaging rank 20 on offense with a range of 19-25 for the 5 years prior to Manning, then with Manning they go 2, 1, 2 and 19 and this is NOT the QB?? In fact that last year they went 19 is precisely because Manning was a shell of himself. And of course once Manning leaves it's rank 22, 27 and 24.

    Of course it's the QB and not the coach! If it was the coach you'd see changes based on when the coach changes with a decent correlation. But you can see that Indy had that great performance on offense regardless of whether it was Mora, Dungy or Caldwell, and Denver with Fox and (one of the worst QB's ever in) Tebow had a pathetic offense while the very next year Manning comes in and makes that the best offense in the NFL.

    Similar thing with Wilson and Seattle btw:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sea/index.htm

    With others like Marino it's hard to see because Miami was already a good team before him, but in general the better the QB the more it's the QB and the less it's the coach. I do agree with you when we're talking about more average level QB's however.


    ** The usual disclaimer about ranks obviously holds here: ranks don't really measure anything (difference between rank N and N+1 isn't the same for every N, and rank N doesn't mean the same thing if the number of teams in the league changes!) but those links use ranks and it's good if you can see for yourself the dramatic change so I used that. Using z-scores will give you the same dramatic result of course.. I mean the differences are HUGE.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  28. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,899
    27,160
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    While the fit between the team/scheme and the QB is vitally important, I wouldn't say, "We never really know what a QB is capable of". There are certain skills that are required in all schemes and QBs with elite skills absolutely carry/elevate teams.

    There are different ways to do it, but all QBs must be able to make plays within the system on a relatively consistent basis and be able to make plays when the system fails (ability to improvise). How consistent they are with those system plays and how well they improvise on non-system plays determines whether they are elite, can carry the team and winning. If you put a really good team around him then the QB won't have to improvise much and the team will still win much of the time. If the team around him is not so good then he will have to improvise successfully more often for the team to win. One recent example was Goff. He looked like crap in an ill-fitting system under Fisher. Then he looked fantastic for most of the year with a good system and a good supporting cast. Then in the SB, the Pats did a great job of changing the defense late each play forcing Goff to improvise more often and he struggled.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  29. Surfs Up 99

    Surfs Up 99 Team Flores

    1,505
    1,436
    113
    May 5, 2016
    Stats like this is where I get confused, but the way I see it is I am giving up the farm in next years draft to grab a franchise QB if there is one. I mean, why not just go for it? Let's get our guy and build from there. He can hone his skills while he waits until we can surround him with more talent.
     
  30. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I don't see any other viable strategy unless some miracle occurs and Rosen turns out to already be the answer (proved this year).

    There's also a downside to building the rest of the team first: you make it less likely you'll be able to grab that franchise QB later on because you'll have too good a record to pick high.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  31. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    To be fair, Manning is not a typical representation of a QB leading your team. Personally, I'd say he's the best who ever played because he was a QB and a head coach all wrapped into one. Manning wasn't just elite...he was two or three levels beyond that. The Colts were 14-2 the year Manning got hurt and then 2-14 the next season (in suck for Luck)? That's really the only stat we need to prove Manning was the team.

    Wilson does prove your point though as does players Like Rodgers, Brees, Big Ben, etc. Again though, these are elite players who are a notch above your typical QB...so of course they have a bigger effect.
     
  32. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    71,798
    42,520
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    If a coach forces the qb to hand the ball off or only throw screens, chances are his stats will be poor. If the oline is terrible and the qb isn’t allowed to audible and the play called is bad for the defense, the QB stats will suffer as well.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2019
  33. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    221
    251
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    I would point out that Manning's performance with Denver is intertwined with the performance of his OC, a guy named Gase. After Gase left, Peyton's performance dropped off. The Denver Defense was very good and got even better in Peyton's last year; the year Gase wasn't there. I feel that shows that the biggest difference in Peyton's performance during those two years was due to his OC, Adam Gase.

    I would also point out that Tim Tebows best performance as a QB was while he had Adam Gase as the QB coach.

    I feel these two examples of two very different QB's, both being on the same team during a consecutive three year period show the results that a good coach had on two very different QB's.

    I just don't see any other explanation that is as good or better in explaining the improvement in each QB's performance under coach Gase then after with other coach's, while the QB's were playing on the same team.

    Also, doesn't the fact the those two QB's were playing on the same team eliminate, to the extent possible, a lot of potential variables that could effect a QB's performance, such as the performance of the OL?
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  34. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    221
    251
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    I don't disagree, but to put more of a point on my concept of what a QB's capabilities are is not based on extremes like a strong arm vs. a weak arm, but more on a QB's ability to get the receiver a catchable ball.

    This would include anticipating where the receiver will be when the ball gets there; anticipating where the opponents will be when the ball gets (hopefully) to our receiver; knowing which receiver offers the best chance of a clean reception based on the route run and the defenses response, and the variations of trajectory and force on the ball to successfully meet those conditions.

    What fans see on the field is only a small percentage of what the coaches see every day, and for that reason alone I feel the coaches have the best information to help a QB be successful.

    I hope this clarifies my original post to some extant.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Gase was QB coach in Denver from 2011-2012 and then OC from 2013-2014. These were also the 4 years Fox was HC. If coaching was the primary driver of QB or offensive performance, then why is it that with Tebow you had a 72.9 rating in 2011 while from 2012-2014 you had a 105.8, 115.1 and 101.5 rating with Peyton?

    That's the main question to ask here. If it's coaching then the QB shouldn't matter too much. If it's the QB then the coach shouldn't matter too much. Clearly the Denver experience shows it's the QB. And the same is true for that Suck for Luck year 2011 in Indy where you had the same HC with essentially the same team but the QB changed. Once again QB was the difference.

    Also, Gase didn't improve Peyton's play in any significant way. Using z-scores so we can compare over time (even 5-10 years difference requires this) Peyton's best years were actually in Indy from 2004-2006 with z-scores of 2.93, 2.21 and 2.02 while in Denver from 2012-2014 his z-scores are 1.76, 2.46, 1.27.

    And Tebow? He only really started one year (minimum 150 passing attempts) so by default that's his "best year". It's also by default his "worst year" in case one would prefer to make that argument (if you ignore sample size it actually was his worst year):
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TeboTi00.htm
     
    Irishman and KeyFin like this.
  36. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Side note- I read yesterday that Tebow's baseball season just ended and he struggled this year. If he was any ordinary player, it would be his last year taking a roster spot. Because of his name though I'm sure a minor league ball club would play him until he's 50 if that's what he wants to do.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  37. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    221
    251
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    My point was that those QB's played better with Gase coaching then without him. Since Gase was with Manning for just one year and Manning had a different coach the second year, My range of observation was for just those two years. It is true that this represents a very small sample size, but it is also true that Manning's performance was noticeably lower after Gase left.

    It is true that Manning and Tebow played at two very different levels QB skill, I was pointing out that in both cases where Gase was involved followed immediately with a year where he wasn't involved, they played their best football. The fact that Tebow never played a second year could certainly be described as a "0" for any statistical analysis.

    I don't know what statistical method would apply to these small sample sizes I'm limiting my comparisons to.
     
  38. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,978
    7,753
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.. like I pointed out in my previous post Gase was with Manning for 3 years, not 1. And the z-scores I pointed out from 2004-2006 vs. 2012-2014 show it isn't true that Manning played his best football when Gase was coach. He played his best under Dungy.

    As far as what statistical test to use in cases like these, you use a "t-test for unequal sample sizes".

    Peyton Manning z-scores:
    1998: -0.5703
    1999: 1.2710
    2000: 1.4042
    2001: 0.5659
    2002: 0.8978
    2003: 1.8301
    2004: 2.9293
    2005: 2.2060
    2006: 2.0189
    2007: 1.3295
    2008: 1.1643
    2009: 1.1340
    2010: 0.6768
    ..
    2012: 1.7560
    2013: 2.4563
    2014: 1.2729
    2015: -2.5245

    Let's first compare Manning's 3 years with Gase vs. all other years. A t-test shows there's a 32.52% chance that the stats under Gase came from the same QB as the stats under all other coaches Manning had. So we can reject the hypothesis that Gase improved Manning in any way that couldn't be explained by random variation alone.

    And if that's true, then 2015 isn't a "Gase vs. no Gase" thing. It's just a question of how anomalous 2015 was in Peyton's entire career, and a t-test says that 2015 is the only anomalous year in Peyton's entire career with a 0.0356% of coming from the same QB that produced all those other z-scores. That type of result generally happens only if the QB is injured, and anyone who watched Peyton in 2015 can attest to him just not being physically the same QB as before. So 2015 is also most likely a QB issue and not a coaching issue.
     
    danmarino, Surfs Up 99 and Irishman like this.
  39. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    25,899
    27,160
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    If you follow most of the analysis on this forum, both here and especially in the club, you'd find that it usually focuses on things like timing and ball placement, reading defenses, etc. You rarely see people focus on simple (and often meaningless) things like strong arm vs. weak arm. There are a few who don't get beyond, "he throws a nice ball", but that's few and far between. In my experience this forum tends to be a little more nuanced in their analysis than most others on the internet. And we're fortunate enough to have many posters with considerable experience, coaching and scouting and/or with access to inside information.

    Obviously, the coaches get to see more and have more info, but this is a football forum so the whole point of it is to talk about what we do see, whether it's in the games or from our guys at practices reporting back. IMO there are people posting here with enough knowledge to make reasonable evaluations about what a QB is capable of and it would be a mistake to just ignore or dismiss that and claim. "we really don't know what a QB is capable of".
     
    djphinfan, danmarino and Irishman like this.
  40. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,742
    7,521
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    That's the thing though- we all value different traits to determine what actually makes a good quarterback. How could so many here love Tannehill while just as many hated him? I mean, we all watched the same games....but came to very different conclusions. The same goes for Matt Moore, Cutler, Osweiller, etc....there was zero consensus.

    My personal evaluation has changed over the years sort of because of Tannehill; I look for-

    - Can he keep the drive alive/get to the end zone?
    - Can he handle pressure & stay poised?
    - Is he a leader on/off the field (but mainly "on")?

    If all three of those things are "yes", then I can really care less about the football traits we're seeking. QB IQ? Meaningless if the guy can score. Big arm? If he's keeping the drives alive, it's big enough. Ability to read defenses? Again, I'm not hung up on that stuff if we're scoring with the guy...I'm fine with a coach dumbing it down if necessary. Size, speed, mobility, pocket awareness...all that stuff is great to watch, but it's not a key to actually winning (hence Dan Marino).

    For me SO FAR, both Rosen and Fitzpatrick have checked all three boxes. I know Fitz will "crap the bed" in some games and so will Rosen since he's also a young gunslinger. At this point though I don't even care about INT's or QBR, my only concern is winning. And if a guy can do those three things above consistently, then chances are we'll win more than we lose. That's all I'm worried about personally.

    Again, that's just me...and I'm sure cBrad will have an anurism once he reads this. =)
     

Share This Page