Between 2004 and 1014, the average win percentage for the 45 QBs with at least 350 pass attempts in a season whose QB ratings fell within the range where Ryan Tannehill finished in 2013 (79.2 to 84.2) is 50%, or about an 8-8 record.
During the same period (2004-2014), the average win percentage for the 38 QBs with at least 350 pass attempts whose QB ratings fell within the range where Ryan Tannehill finished in 2014 (90.3 to 95.3) is 61%, or about a 10-6 record.
So on average, his improvement in QB rating from 2013 (81.7) to 2014 (92.8) is associated with a corresponding improvement of about two wins on average in a regular season (8-8 to 10-6).
Furthermore, the correlation between the number of Pro Bowl players per team and win percentage in the NFL in 2014 is 0.77.
The correlation between the number of Associated Press (AP) All-Pro first- or second-team players per team and win percentage is 0.76.
So I think it's clear that if you deem Ryan Tannehill the Dolphins' franchise quarterback and continue to surround him with the necessary talent, 10-6 -- a playoff-caliber record -- becomes the Dolphins' "floor" as a team, and it's "ceiling" naturally will be defined by how much talent with which it can surround Tannehill.
He's now doing his part, however, to give the Dolphins a floor that's associated with a playoff-caliber record, and for that reason he should be built around in the future in my opinion.
Page 1 of 2
-
vt_dolfan, smahtaz, Disnardo and 1 other person like this.
-
Nice post op. I agree with pretty much everything you said, i just think people put alittle to much weight on the qb. While it is the most important position in football, the qb has next to no affect on how the special teams or defense performs, which was evident on our losses to detroit and green bay. Tanny's stat line is pretty similar to matt ryan's (a little short on yards, but you get the point), and the falcons finished with a poor record as well due to failures outside of the qb position ( mainly on defense). Point in case, having a quarterback is important and neccissary for winning a championship, but cannot be relied upon to compltely carry a bad team.
Tannephins likes this. -
We need a more reliable running game. We are a very 1-dimensional team that is heavily reliant on a young QB. It's foolish of the HC, OC and the fans to think that they are going to get a dominant offensive performance out of a system that is so incredibly reliant on the abilities of such a young and developmental QB like Tannehill. Regardless of what individual fans believe, Ryan Tannehill throws A LOT of passes. Way too many for a QB with his experience level. Fans are critiquing him because he is most of the team's offense. I can't think of many QBs who were asked to do as much as he is throughout their first 3 seasons. Andrew Luck comes to mind immediately but that's pretty elite company. The problem with that is that it's allowed us to get away from the running game too much. We are quickly losing any physicality we had on offense.
Everything Ryan Tannehill brings to the table should be an asset to an already competent offense. Instead, it's the other way around. Ryan is expected to create offense and to be perfect in his reads. There isn't much margin for error.
Look at what NE did in 2008. They lost Brady but they were still able to be offensively competent with a young and inexperienced backup. It wasn't Bill Belichick that made that happen. The team could run the ball. They could pass protect. They had competent WRs. They had an OC that could game plan around the limitations of the young QB.
You see the same thing in Seattle with Russell Wilson.
It's a mistake for Ryan Tannehill to be as critical to the success of the Dolphins offense as he is.
I would say that this team needs to get serious about fixing the O-line and building up a competent running game. The reason we're so reliant on our defense is that our offense is not nearly complete. We need to be a more physical team. Wallace can be a threat in this offense. Hartline can certainly be an asset as well so I hope he'll restructure so we can keep him while getting rid of Gibson and Matthews to save money.
At the end of the day, we need to make the kinds of moves this off-season that will help our offense gain the physicality that it needs. The first step in making the defense better is taking pressure off of them late in games. Unfortunately, while our offense puts up points, it's not doing enough in the 4th quarter and thus our defense has to take over.
If we continue to fix the offense in the right way, we'll help out the defense in the process and people won't need to freak out and start saying we need an entire rebuild.MAFishFan, cuchulainn, DPlus47 and 3 others like this. -
Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member
I think the definition of "franchise QB" needs to be clarified in all of our minds...While I agree with you in most of your post, there is a difference between Marino and Tanny. We all called Marino a franchise QB, what does that make Tanny ?? He's not anywhere near Marino's level.. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you say a franchise QB is one that will be leading the team forward and the 'search' for that guy is over for now, you are right... If you say he's comparable to Marino, Brady, Brees, etc (as many fans tend to measure QBs by) then that's not even close...jim1 likes this. -
To me "franchise QB" means you aren't looking to replace the one you have or develop an unproven one. You're settled at the position with the player you have and the point to which he's developed as a player. That doesn't mean some franchise QBs aren't better than others, however, and certainly Marino was better in his prime than Tannehill is currently.
-
Glad you've come around, shou. The Tannyhill fanboy club welcomes you with open arms.
-
Something is not adding up. How do you have a 100 passer rating for a game, the team commit no turnovers, the team misses no field goals and you only manage to score 13 points?
When Lazor came here I was hoping to get an answer to the question of how much Foles stats were Foles and how much were they the result of Kelly's system, ie were his extremely impressive passer rating stats manufactured by the scheme? I still don't know the answer, but my guess is Foles is actually very good and Kelly's scheme in part also accounts for the inflated passer rating stats.
I'm a big proponent of passer rating but all stats have flaws and the 93 rating feels like it was created from smoke and mirrors to me. The 93 rating is nice. The 0 games with a passer rating below 70 is nice, and probably a big reason for the 93 overall rating. But when you look at other measures he's not up to par:
Games with 90+ passer rating: 7 This is OK but not great. You would like to see this get up to 9 or 10 to have confidence you have a franchise QB. Very few franchise QBs don't have a season of at least 8 games with 90+ rating in their first 3 seasons. Eli Manning and Tom Brady are 2 but the game has changed a lot even from the days they began their careers. Of modern day "franchise" QBs only Dalton doesn't have a season of 8+ games with a 90+ rating.
Games with 10+ AY/A: 1 This is certainly not good, its pretty bad actually. Tannehill only has 2 such games in his career. Wilson has 4 just this season. Wilson has 13 in his career. Luck has 4 this season. Even Dalton has 7 in his career.
yards/attempt rank: 28th Don't need to say much about this one and it kind of balances out the nice passer rating stat.
Obscure stat here but we had 7 games where we only scored one offensive TD. AFC teams when scoring one offensive TD and their record in those games:
Miami 2-5
Tenn 1-6
Clev 0-6
Oak 0-6
Jags 0-6
Jets 0-5
Buff 2-2
S.D. 1-3
Hou 1-2
K.C. 1-2
Cin 1-2
Pitt 0-3
Denver 1-1
N.E. 1-1
Balt 0-1
Indy 0-1
Like another poster said, we need a definition of "franchise QB." If Jay Cutler is considered franchise then franchise isn't good enough for me to consider the position solved. I know I would be pissed if we extended him right now. I need to see at least one stat that spells possibly elite. Breaking franchise records set 20 years ago isn't good enough for me. -
But even if they are, and there is still improvement left between where Tannehill is playing now and his ceiling for that reason, you're still talking about a QB who, even if he's being misused in that way, is doing his part to get his team to a playoff level. Hell, 9 of the 38 teams (nearly a quarter of them) since 2004 who've had QBs in the 90 to 95 QB rating range have finished the season with between 12 and 14 wins. 10 wins is merely the average associated with where Tannehill is playing now. Obviously they'd need to get a good bit more talent around him to get from 8-8 to that much higher 12- to 14-win range, but it's nearly a 25% probability even with Tannehill's continuing to play as-is, with no improvement on his part.
-
I think keying in on the progression is appropriate. I mean, if you look at Tannehill's numbers this year in a vacuum you're probably not that impressed. But then you look at the talent around him the first couple years when Brian Hartline was his #1 WR and things become a little clearer.
Then consider his OC who was arguably worst in the league at making adjustments. THEN consider that, oh yeah, this dude had about 20 starts EVER before taking his 1st NFL snap.
If the trend continues, then I agree, it'll be about the talent he's surrounded with.resnor likes this. -
wait.. shou being piston honda, right? or dolphingreg?
#confused -
-
I think you have to consider that Tannehill's QB rating was boosted a good deal by his completion percentage and TD to interception ratio, and then if you look at his 2014 season and compare it to let's say Alex Smith's 2011 season in San Francisco, where he had a 90.7 QB rating and the team went 13-3 and made it to the NFC Championship by surrounding him with seven Pro-Bowlers and Vernon Davis (who oddly wasn't one that year), you'll get an idea of what I was getting at in the original post. And that's where Tannehill is roughly right now (a low-90s QB rating), which one could argue is only a point on a linearly progressing developmental course, rather than a developmental endpoint as it seems to have been for Alex Smith in 2011.
-
And even if his rating didn't improve, and he would've been surrounded with let's say three more Pro Bowl players this year (in addition to Wake and Grimes), chances are the team would've won at least 11 games. The average number of wins for the teams with five Pro Bowl players in 2014 was 11.4, and certainly Tannehill's play (nearly a 93 QB rating) wouldn't have detracted from that.
-
The very short and controlled passing game is jacking up his QB rating by leading to a higher completion percentage, I think that's the missing link. A solid QB rating is nice, but that alone doesn't make him a franchise QB. He's a solid QB who has to get better at crunch time performance, comeback victories, throwing deeper passes, pocket presence, etc. Tannehill is making progress in spite of his shaky OL and defense, but he has a ways to go before he's a franchise QB.Mexphin, Bpk, shamegame13 and 2 others like this.
-
yes, the more great players you find to surround the qb the more irrelevant the qb becomes..shamegame13 likes this.
-
It sounds like your definition of "franchise QB" and mine probably differ.
-
THill's, Brady's and Eli's 3rd Season Stats
Well let us take Eli Manning and Tom Brady's stats on their 3rd season at QBing in a professional level, shall we? And lets us look at Thill's stats on his 3rd season and see if anything adds up...
Eli Manning's 3rd Season (2006)= 301 comp, 522 atts (57.6% comp), 3,244 yds (6.2 YPA), 24 TD's, 18 INT's, and 77 QBR... and season record 8-8, with Tiki Barber and Jeremy Shockey as Offensive Prow Bowlers... their Offense scored 22 PPG and their Defense allowed 23 PPG...
T. Brady's 3rd Season (2003)= 317 comp, 527 atts (60.2 % comp), 3,620 yds (6.9 YPA), 23 TDs, 12 INT's, and 86 QBR... and a Season record of 14-2 (won the SB), no Pro Bowlers on Offense...their Offense scored 22 PPG and their Defense allowed 15 PPG...
THill's 3rd Season (2014)= 392 comp, 590 atts (66.4% comp), 4,045 yds (6.9 YPA), 27 TD's 12 INT's, and 93 QBR... and a Season record of 8-8, no Pro Bowlers on Offense...their Offense scored 24 PPG and their Defense allowed 23 PPG...
Looking at these number, you bare to see that it is a team game for the most part... one thing for sure is that these 3 QB's on their 3rd year are similar in performance... but you all must admit that based on these numbers THill is a bit better... I know its hard to admit...
The numbers speak for themselves, and as a team you need more than a franchise QB to make a difference... and by looking at these numbers it is starting to sink in for me...Tone_E, Brasfin, Mcduffie81 and 4 others like this. -
A QB whose play makes a team settled at the position, so that the team doesn't have to try to address it with some other player. And when you consider that the average number of wins by QBs who play like Tannehill did in 2014 is a playoff-caliber number (about 10), I'd say he's doing his part. In other words, he's playing the QB position at a "playoffs" level, and I think a team with a QB of that nature would be foolish to move in another direction at the position. Instead, you move toward surrounding him with other talent.djphinfan likes this.
-
The thing about the short passing game you mentioned is that he didn't throw a significantly lower percentage of deep passes (20+ yards in the air) this year than he did last year. The difference this year was that he became much more accurate in the short and intermediate ranges, which boosted his overall completion percentage. In other words, he didn't scale his game back from what he did last year; he played roughly the same game, but became more accurate at it. Now, if "franchise QB" for you means an improvement in all those other areas you mentioned (bolded above), that's sure fine, but that for me would mean he's actually become an elite QB, and not just a franchise one. Again, a franchise QB for me is simply one that makes a team feel settled at the position, so that it has no plans of trying to address it with someone else.resnor likes this.
-
Guest
I was more of the opinion that he was going to collect a bunch of Fist Bumps and then 'reveal' his secret identity as Shouright to teach us a lesson about confirmation bias and how we treat dissent. I just hope the reveal goes something like this:
[video=youtube;cNgxyL5zEAk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNgxyL5zEAk[/video] -
"Oh, son of a *****" -Jim Ross, and pretty much everyone on the board just about.
:sidelol:
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 4 -
Eh, agree with the sentiment, disagree with stat monkery
The 4th qtr is EVERYTHING, THill is waaay to inconsistent in that Qtr to think he has went from "pretty good" to knocking on the top 8.
I'm glad we have him, in fact as I look at the Qb draft class this yr there is not a single prospect I'd even consider replacing THill.Disnardo likes this. -
You all are missing one very super duper very important factor here.
When comparing Thill to these other QB's.............which of these QB's were getting hammered like THill has the last 2 seasons.
Were damn lucky THill hasn't gotten injured or gone David Carr/John Beck on us.Mexphin, speed, resnor and 1 other person like this. -
A franchise QB is a young guy whom you are comfortable with going forward for the next 3+ years. Tannehill is that guy, IMO. With the exception of Andrew Luck, I believe Tannehill is the best young QB in the league over Foles, Wilson, RGIII, Geno (lol), Manual (lol), Glennon, and i'm going to add Mariota and Winston to the list too while im at it. He's the guy. This season sucked due to no playoffs but what i did see was strong, steady QB play that eventually does get you there.
speed likes this. -
ok your post above explains your difference in the meaning, I think generally franchise is accociated with elite..
Hmmm, so once you think the position can manage a game your good....
Well, we'll disagree here, I think there's one more level to reach to be franchise...
I think Flacco is a perfect example, most wouldn't consider him elite, but I consider him franchise because I know he can play at a certain level in playoff time, I know he can make a pass from inside the pocket by quick precise movements that allow him to reset amongs the chaos , and I know he has the great anticipation and specific qb athleticism to break outside the pocket and make plays...interesting that I have defended that cat for years and now a lot of folks are coming around on him..especially after the display he put on us in our crap venue.
It all comes back to the same trait I talked about in the beginning. -
If you're going to equate playing in a way that's associated with a playoff-caliber number of wins (about 10) on a season with "managing a game," keep in mind that there have been only 10 QBs other than Tannehill who have reached that level in their 3rd season in the league or sooner since 2004. In other words, you don't typically get someone who can "manage a game" at QB as well as Tannehill did in 2014, within three years of entering the league. Again, another reason to move forward with him and surround him with greater talent, rather than moving in another direction at the QB position (again my definition of "franchise QB"). Here's your list: http://www.pro-football-reference.c...pos_is_db=Y&draft_pos_is_k=Y&draft_pos_is_p=Y
-
Ok, that's good to know, and I'm ready to try and do that..and have said that I believe I can get to the playoffs and win 10 regular season games with Ryan's game as is while adding a better team around him, my criticism is very specific to what happens when the tempo gets turned up a notch in the playoffs..I think wins at that level are determined by qbs who can make individual plays with their feet and anticipation, and the precision for how they combine both to evade pressure..
I acknowledge that having a much better oline might help in this regard..but it does get gray for me.resnor likes this. -
If you are going to compare statistics from 2004 - 2014, you need to adjust for inflation.Mexphin and Tannephins like this.
-
Well take a look at these numbers Padre... I know you are not a stats man but these are the numbers... not trying to change your mind...
THill was sacked 46 times this year... no big surprise to anyone...
But do we all know that 21 (45%) of the sacks were in the 4th quarter???
In the first 9 games he was sacked 6 times in the 4th...
In the last 7 games he was sacked 15 times in the 4th...
In the last 4 (Balt, NE, Min, Jets)he was sacked 13 times in the 4th...
Now Jaguars OL gave up the most sacks this year with 71...
In the 4th they gave up 25 sacks all year, that is only 35% of their total... and only 4 more than Miami...speed and cuchulainn like this. -
True. Average QB rating is 4.6 points higher in 2014 than it was in 2004. If you restrict the range in which Tannehill falls currently (90.3 to 95.3) to the past three seasons (2012 through 2014), that range is associated with 9 wins on average (range = 6 to 12 wins). If you expand it to the past five seasons (2010 through 2014), that range is associated with 9.6 wins on average (range = 6 to 13 wins). Over the last two seasons, it's 8.7 (range = 6 to 12 wins). If you look at this season alone, that number is 8.4 (range = 6 to 12 wins). So it's obviously decreasing with time, though hopefully that's offset with further improvement by Tannehill.
-
Ahh..'Nardo, a "franchise" Qb can overcome those sacks.
This is why I'm in "like" with THill, not love, like.
To me, he is Alex Smith jr, until he hits deep passes consistently there he shall remain. -
I disagree with this. It's not only the sacks, but the pressures, the hits, the short time to throw. No QB can overcome such poor line play without some other parts of the team being elite. Without an elite defense to keep games close and/or get points themselves, without an elite running game to share the load and the punishment, and/or without elite weapons to make things easier when the games is hardest, no QB can overcome this alone.
-
In Alex Smith's third year he completed 48.7% of his passes and had a qb rating of 57.2. THill has already surprassed Alex Smith.MAFishFan, speed, Disnardo and 1 other person like this.
-
Not necessarily. If the team had managed to find some better defensive players (and almost anyone but Olivadotti for DC) for most of Marino's career, do you not think that his record would be much more significant than it is today. Marino did all of his skillful work without a defense (or at least one which at least resembled a professional team defense.)
It would seem that a better defense, a better line, and some more skill at RB would more enable a good quarterback to show his abilities rather then make them irrelevant.cuchulainn likes this.
Page 1 of 2