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

Titans to start Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

  1. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Ok, what’s the tie breaker with this manning vs Brady debate? What can we use that will ultimately decide who’s better? I feel like whoever has the hotter wife should win. Pics attachments encouraged to help decide. GO!
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,742
    7,866
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    The dirty secret is, there isn't necessarily a GOAT. For me, the GOAT in a sport needs to change the game somehow...be transcendent. Think Jordan in basketball, or Tiger Woods in golf.

    Brady doesn't check those boxes for me. I'm not sure Manning does either, but the scales are tipped more in his favor.
     
  3. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    All I know is Superbowl Wins (AKA the biggest accomplishment possible for any player) is not relevant to the conversation because they hurt my incredibly pointless argument regarding two players with nearly identical career passer ratings. In fact throw out the entire playoffs because that hurts the chances of the guy I don't hate winning this argument. Also please throw out supporting WR cast because one guy makes his receivers and the other is part of a magical system. Can I also mention that I really dislike that one QB?
     
  4. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    377
    405
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Are you sure? he seemed so good at it.
     
    danmarino and resnor like this.
  5. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    What do you mean by "throw out the entire playoffs"?? We've been discussing playoff ratings the whole time!! Regarding surrounding cast, you might have a point on offense for Peyton but not for defense. It's VERY clear Brady's had the better defense most of the time (remember.. compare by points allowed).

    And at least for me I have no hatred for Brady. So the only thing left is how you weight SB wins. That's up to you. But the rest of what you said doesn't apply to any of the statistical measures I've posted.

    Where would I place Brady overall? Not sure, but I think maybe around 5th or 6th all-time. When you look at z-score ratings for all QB's (a measure of passing efficiency) and you require the QB to have a minimum of 4000+ passing attempts, the best ever is Steve Young followed by Joe Montana and then Rodgers, Peyton, Warner, Brees.. Brady comes in 8th.

    But by wins added it's Brees and Peyton WAY above the rest (45.8 wins added for Brees over his career and 41.2 for Peyton) with the #3 spot essentially tied between Brady and Marino with 28 wins. After them come Rodgers, Young and Montana. The reason why Brees and Peyton are so high up is precisely because of the bad defenses they often played with while Brady's had fantastic defenses.

    So at least for me, there are 3-4 good candidates for "best ever": Young, Montana, Brees and Peyton. If I had to choose I'd probably go with Montana since he has by far the best postseason rating (114.5 in 2019 numbers). He even has those SB's you like. But I wouldn't put Brady in that upper-most echelon. For me he and Rodgers come right after those 4, so maybe 5th or 6th. And btw.. that's elite company so this isn't a slight against Brady by any means.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2020
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    2,713
    942
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    How are you calculating wins added?
     
  7. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Please keep the nerd stats in the baseball section
     
  8. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Why did everyone stop trying to argue it after the Falcons SB? Couldn't possibly be because there's nothing left to argue or anything right? And what statistical evidence? Brady has a higher career passer rating despite playing more games, a majority of which were not in a dome, and with less supporting talent on offense. He's won MVP's when surrounded with comparable talent to what Manning had basically every single game of his career. Manning can't hold his jock in career accomplishments. He can have the regular season crown for people who care about that sorta thing if you want.



    But please go ahead and fall back on "b-but Manning made his receivers they couldn't have actually been that good on their own" and "s-s-system magically guided the ball into the NE wide receivers hands" because that's literally all these irrational attempts to downgrade Brady's career accomplishments devolve into.



    Manning is old news. Stop hanging onto the dead notion that he's in the same stratosphere as Brady and Montana career accomplishment wise. The only thing to argue now is whether Mahomes has any shot at reaching it because Rodgers probably failed too.
     
  9. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Why would I look at incredibly obscure advanced analytics made by one guy to base my opinion on the all-time great QBs playoff performances? This is like the equivalent of using PFF metrics except people have actually heard of PFF and sort of value their cherry picked stats.


    And again Brady has played 14 more playoff games than the next highest total (Manning), 18 more than Montana, 25 more than Brees, 23 more than Rodgers, and 27 more than young. Increasing samples size against playoff level competition is going to bring the passer rating down a bit especially considering opponents faced usually get better the further in the playoffs a team goes. Factor in his supporting case for a huge portion of those games compared to a Manning, Brees, Young, Rodgers, and Montana and you can see why his passer rating is (slightly) lower with the huge sample size. It's actually still higher than Mannings despite more games being played.
     
  10. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I calculated a defense-adjusted z-score first. To get that you subtract 0.3043 times the z-score for points allowed, because 0.3043 is the slope of the regression line between z-score passer rating and z-score points allowed. Then, knowing that you get approximately 2 wins for every additional z-score passer rating you can calculate wins added over a z-score of zero.
     
  11. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No, these stats are relevant here. I can see you're getting frustrated by actual statistical evidence however.

    Everyone didn't. That SB certainly helped Brady's legacy but don't act like "everyone" thinks Brady is GOAT.

    The statistical evidence I gave you in post after post after post.

    What I did is the exact opposite of cherry picking. What you've been doing IS cherry picking however. What I'm doing is based on sound statistical methodology and reproducible.
     
    KeyFin, Irishman, danmarino and 2 others like this.
  12. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    2,713
    942
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And that’s on an individual game basis, i.e., points allowed in an individual game?
     
  13. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,827
    7,290
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    :hijack:
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  14. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    The majority do. The vocal minority of Colts/Broncos fans and rabid Patriots haters aren’t going to change the general consensus because they don’t like reality. ESPN even stopped bringing it up as a debate topic and they will debate literally anything interesting. You’re holding onto a completely hopeless cause here.

    I don’t think think anyone should use advanced analytics made by one guy from BaltimoreSportsAndLife as some smoking gun in an argument in all-time QB greatness.
     
  15. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,742
    7,866
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    So because you can't refute what he's saying, you instead will attempt to discredit him on a personal level so that you can justify ignoring his evidence.

    Not surprising for a cherry picker.
     
    Irishman, danmarino and cbrad like this.
  16. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No I did in on a season by season basis. The database for individual games is separate and I'd have to write a separate program for that. One day I'll get around to it though because the individual games database has all the playoff games and that would allow me to see any differences between regular season and playoffs for all QB's. Right now I have to calculate playoff ratings "manually" so to say.
     
  17. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.. like I said in this post it will take time before more advanced analytics influences popular opinion:
    https://www.thephins.com/threads/titans-to-start-ryan-tannehill.94693/page-144#post-3250822

    The important point is that you shouldn't just dismiss statistical evidence because of "popular opinion".
     
    Irishman, danmarino and resnor like this.
  18. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,742
    7,866
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Especially because popular opinion is a result of a few talking heads.
     
    danmarino and cbrad like this.
  19. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    2,713
    942
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Since this was once upon a time a thread about Ryan Tannehill, I'd be interested in whether the Titans' 2019 record with Tannehill as the starter was predicted by his defense-adjusted passer rating. Is it possible to look at that? I suspect that 7-3 wouldn't be predicted by a passer rating of 120+ (excluding the Denver game because he wasn't the starter) and whatever they did defensively during that time.
     
  20. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.. so Tannehill's passer rating z-score in 2019 was 2.5877 and that goes down only very slightly to 2.4293 if you adjust for defense. Given that each z-score passer rating corresponds to about 2 extra wins over a 16 game season that would suggest that the expected record for that kind of QB performance over a 16 game season is about 13-3, and defense-adjusted doesn't really change that in this case.

    A 13-3 record is 81% win% which is 1 win higher than the 7-3 record over 10 games, but the 95% confidence interval for 81% win percentage goes from 57% to 93%, and 7 wins (70%) lies within that range.
     
    danmarino and The Guy like this.
  21. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    2,713
    942
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What if anything would allow one to interpret the fact that the finding is closer to the bottom than to the top of that confidence interval?
     
  22. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Nothing. It doesn't matter where in the confidence interval something lies. If it lies anywhere in the confidence interval that means it can be explained by random variation alone. I mean.. over just 10 games it's pretty obvious that things that have little to do with "true" QB ability could cause one game to be a win vs. a loss or vice versa. So nothing unusual about Titans win% in 2019 given Tannehill's passer rating.
     
    danmarino and The Guy like this.
  23. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    2,713
    942
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    It's just interesting, because when you look at the last three years of quarterback data (94 QB seasons), Tannehill's 2019 adjusted passer rating is 2.27 standard deviations above the mean of that group, yet his QBR is only 0.31 standard deviations above the mean, and his DVOA is only 1.39 standard deviations above the mean.

    I know that presents a dead-end as far as analysis goes, but I think it's worth mentioning that there is pretty substantial variation in his 2019 performance among measures of quarterback play that all have about the same relation with win percentage. It's not like he led the league in passer rating and also led the league in QBR and DVOA -- far from it in fact.

    EDIT: For comparison's sake, take Patrick Mahomes, who led the league in passer rating in 2018 (z-score = 1.94 in the above sample). He also led the league in QBR (z-score = 0.85) and DVOA (z-score = 2.05) that year.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2020
  24. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    My frustration stems from this thread in general not you specifically. That being said I do hate advanced stats especially in football. Richard Seymour is a hall of fame candidate and deservingly so. Please show me the advanced metrics that say so
     
  25. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    You know, I think Brady is the only QB in history who has a winning record when throwing the ball more than 50 times. That's an incredible accomplishment if my memory is correct.
     
  26. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Though since some are talking about prior "expert votes", it's worth mentioning that there was also an "expert vote" before the 2017 season:

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...-execs-rank-best-quarterbacks-modern-era-2017

    In that July 2017 vote, ESPN's voting panel was as follows: "Pete Carroll, Tony Dungy, Mike Holmgren, Howard Mudd, Wade Phillips, Mike Reinfeldt, Ray Rhodes, Mike Shanahan, Al Saunders and Norv Turner possess a combined 330 seasons of NFL experience. All 10 are Super Bowl champions, having combined for 20 rings in 30 opportunities."

    Brady finished as the #1 QB of the modern era (explanation for the year chosen - since 1978 - is in the article).
    9 of the 10 football experts ranked Brady #1 or #2, so he easily finished in the top spot.
    And that was before Brady then led his team to another two Super Bowl appearances, in 2017 and 2018.
     
  27. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    The few? No alot of them that actually coached against or played with or without Brady.

    I will take coaches opinions over some nerdy baseball stats.

    I have no idea what to make out of this stat, but out of curiosity, I just looked up Brady vs. Manning in 50-attempt games...

    **50 or more pass attempts**
    --Brady: 13-7 regular season record; 6-2 postseason record = 19-9 total
    --Manning: 4-13 regular season record; 0-0 postseason record = 4-13 total
     
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    There are no such metrics, and I never suggested there are any.

    Others however do act like they have "advanced analytics" that might tell you X or Y when in fact it's well beyond anything statistics can show today. These groups (ESPN, Football Outsiders, etc..) however are peddling their proprietary "analytics" and their primary goal is to sell a product, not to advance the statistical analysis of football. If their primary goal was to advance the statistical analysis of football, they'd make their methodology transparent and subject it to critique by attempting to publish in scientific journals.

    So you need to separate that kind of stuff from what I do, which is nothing more than applying standard statistical methodology in a reproducible way, though I admit that some of the stuff I post here might take some effort to reproduce. And from a statistician's point of view what I'm doing is almost too simple (I know it doesn't look at way lol).

    McNabb also has a winning record in games where he threw 50+ times: 4 wins, 2 losses and 1 tie (1 loss was in the postseason).

    But yes you're right that that's really rare. Generally, QB's throw a lot when they're relied on to help win a game they're losing in the 4th quarter and that usually results in a loss.

    However, before one gets too excited about Brady in 50+ attempt games (as you point out 13-7 in regular season and 6-2 in postseason), note that Brady's win% is terrible in 55+ attempt games: 2-6 in regular season and 1-1 in postseason. So keep in mind that "50" isn't some magical threshold. Brady just does better until a slightly higher threshold.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  29. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Football Outsiders does an excellent job of explaining their methodology.
     
  30. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    On the contrary, they're as non-transparent as ESPN. Consider their explanation of their key stat DVOA:
    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#DVOA

    There's not a person on this planet that through reading that could reconstruct DVOA. They don't show their formula for "success points" (they just give examples), they don't tell you how they arrived at those specific values rather than a different set of values (they just say "with mathematics and trial and error" lol), they don't tell you what the "baselines" for success points that they adjust to are, and importantly they don't tell you HOW they adjust for defense, down and location on the field, etc.. (they just say they adjust.. but how?.. magically obviously).

    They are about as non-transparent as it gets. Just like ESPN. Remember.. transparency implies reproducible.
     
    danmarino and resnor like this.
  31. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    [​IMG]
     
  32. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    As I also pointed out, I have no idea what to make out of this stat. I looked it up out of curiosity.
     
  33. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,742
    7,866
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    That is such a ridiculous chart. Going by it, one would assume that Randy Moss was a worse receiver than Demarius Thomas, for instance.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  34. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    It’s a proprietary metric - I don’t think you should expect that they would just lay it all out for you. I give them credit for explaining their approach.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    They didn't "explain their approach". I literally have no idea what their approach is. Do you?

    All they did is say they solved a problem. They didn't say how. And that problem btw is an example of the type of problem you really can't solve with "advanced statistics" yet: how much to apportion credit among players for an outcome.

    No.. DVOA is totally non-transparent.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  36. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Wow.

    It was clearly listed that Randy Moss had 1 Pro Bowl season with Brady. Not sure what was ridiculous about that fact.

    Also, you do realize that Moss played just 2 full seasons with Brady, right? Do you want to give Brady credit for having Moss while Moss was with the Vikings?
     
  37. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Yes. Just read.
     
  38. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Are you serious? Wow.. you're the first person that claims to understand DVOA from that methods link. I think you're going to have to help me understand DVOA then because I've read it carefully and I just cannot.

    btw.. I'm going to post this response here in this thread, but if this discussion continues we should move it over to that statistical methods thread since that's what it's there for (would fit right in and won't clutter this thread up with statistical methods discussion).

    So let's just start off with the first thing I pointed out that was non-transparent: how they come up with "success points".
    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#DVOA
    Note that they say they're using their own more complex methodology than what was used before. So we should at least have SOME idea of where all those numbers that seem quite arbitrary to me come from if it's (as you say) transparent.

    For example, why did they add 3 points for 10 yards, 4 for 20 and 5 for 40? Why not a different set of numbers? For all I know those numbers were just made up because they "felt" right to someone (probably close to correct IMO). Or why is a fumble worth anywhere from -1.7 to -4.0 points? Again, seems totally arbitrary with no theory or method given behind how they came up with those numbers. Same goes for those red zone bonuses.

    Or more simply: how would I go about figuring out approximately how many "success points" you get for 2nd and 6 at midfield?

    So if you can help me understand that.. would be awesome!
     
    danmarino and resnor like this.
  39. danmarino

    danmarino George Floyd was murdered Club Member

    10,443
    11,418
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    You don't even realize that "a lot" is two words. lol...

    You also don't realize that you've been made to look a fool throughout this entire thread.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  40. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    519
    390
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Reading is hard.
     

Share This Page