Is Ryan Tannehill Going to Become a Franchise QB? | Part II

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Shouright, Jan 13, 2013.

  1. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This is a "sequel" to this thread:

    http://www.finheaven.com/forums/sho...Ryan-Tannehill-Going-to-Become-a-Franchise-QB

    I gathered some more data on this, focusing specifically on the percentage of "very good" starts rookie QBs have made since 2004, in comparison to their percentages of "poor" starts.

    I defined a "very good" start as a start with a QB rating of 90 or higher, and a "poor" start as one with a QB rating of 69 or lower. Starts with QB ratings between 70 and 89 were not used in any of these analyses.

    Here are the data:

    [TABLE="class: grid, width: 263"]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]QB
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]%age of Very Good Starts
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]%age of Poor Starts
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Franchise QB?
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Career QB Rating
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Tannehill
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]47
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]47
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Luck
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]31
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]25
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Wilson
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]69
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]19
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]RGIII
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]67
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]7
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Weeden
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]27
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]40
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"][/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Newton
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]44
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]25
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]86.2
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Dalton
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]44
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]38
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]87.4
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Bradford
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]25
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]38
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]82.6
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Palmer
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]38
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]46
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]86.2
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Roethlisberger
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]62
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]23
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]92.7
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Ryan
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]56
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]31
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]90.9
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Flacco
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]44
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]31
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]86.3
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Ponder
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]30
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]60
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]81.2
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Stafford
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]20
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]60
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]82.8
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Gabbert
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]14
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]14
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]70.2
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Sanchez
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]27
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]33
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]71.7
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Young
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]15
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]46
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]74.4
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Leinart
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]36
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]36
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]70.2
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Freeman
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]22
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]56
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]79.8
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Gradkowski
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]27
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]64
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]65.8
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Orton
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]7
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]67
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]79.7
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Edwards
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]22
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]55
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]75.5
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Clausen
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]20
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]60
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]58.4
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Walter
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]0
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]75
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]52.6
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: white, align: center"]Smith
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]14
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]86
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]No
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]79.1
    [/TD]

    [TD="width: 94, bgcolor: transparent, align: center"]EManning
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]29
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: white, align: center"]71
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: transparent, align: center"]Yes
    [/TD]
    [TD="width: 64, bgcolor: transparent, align: center"]82.7
    [/TD]
    [/TABLE]

    The thinking here is that a QB's future "ceiling" may be revealed in how often he's able to perform at a very high level during his rookie season, whereas his future quality of play overall may be revealed in how he minimizes poor play as a rookie while maximizing very good play.

    As it turns out, the correlation between the percentage of very good starts as a rookie and career QB rating is 0.70, which is strong.

    The correlation between the percentage of poor starts as a rookie and career QB rating is -0.37 and is comparatively weak, and that variable will therefore not be used as a basis for any analyses in this thread.

    What the data also reveal is that the average percentage of very good starts among the future "franchise QBs" is 37.6, with a standard deviation of 13.78.

    The average percentage of very good starts among the future "non-franchise QBs" is 19.7, with a standard deviation of 9.63.

    Ryan Tannehill's percentage of very good starts (47%) places him within a standard deviation above the average of the future "franchise QBs," while also placing him nearly three (!) standard deviations above the mean of the "non-franchise QBs."

    So, the take-home message is that Ryan Tannehill, in terms of his percentage of very good starts (QB rating of 90 or higher), which was 47%, played much more like a future franchise QB as a rookie than a future non-franchise QB.

    I think this lends support to people's perceptions that Ryan Tannehill appears to have the makings of a franchise QB based on how often he was able to play at a high level this year. :up:

    For the sake of further comparison, Chad Henne in 2009, in his second season in the NFL (first as a starter), following far more college starts at QB, had a 90 QB rating or higher in ony 23% of his starts, which puts him less than a standard deviation above the mean of the non-franchise QBs, and more than a standard deviation below the mean of the "franchise" QBs.

    In other words, with regard to this particular stat, Tannehill played like a future franchise QB this year, whereas Chad Henne in 2009 played like a future non-franchise QB. I think you could also argue that Ryan Tannehill played even better as a rookie than Chad Henne did this year for Jacksonville, as a fifth-year player.
     
    CalDolFan10x14 likes this.
  2. TrinidadDolfan

    TrinidadDolfan 1st Team All-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 2006
    Messages:
    1,065
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Excellent post.
    Great analysis!
     
  3. MartinTheSNAKE

    MartinTheSNAKE Seasoned Veteran Donator

    Joined:
    Feb 2006
    Messages:
    1,254
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I agree that he is our franchise QB. The flip flopping on this board is ridiculous. People are so quick to jump the gun on this kid its mind boggling. He has all the tools of a franchise QB. He has a cannon for an arm, throws a tight spiral, has good touch, can read a defense, is somewhat accurate, can run, is physical...I mean...Come one people... The kid can make any throw, and he has less QB experience then some Seniors/Juniors in college.

    And i feel like his stats are very misleading. He has had a TON of dropped balls this season, and quite a few dropped touch down passes as well. Not only that, but at least 4 of his INT's were off of the reciever's hands first. He had a lot of games this season where he threw 0 interceptions. Also, he has no play makers at WR. He doesnt have a Brandon Marshall (who i think if we had, we could have been a playoff team this year) who can get YAC and get himself a touch down. He essential had 2 slot recievers as the #1 and 2 option... And then a bunch of 5th stringers to work with. He wasnt even supposed to play this season, but did and still played well and showed enough to prove this kid has potential.

    Get the man a true #1 and 2 reciever. A TE who can catch over the middle and resign reggie and he is going to look like a completely different player. Id like to see some 5 wr packages with reggie as the 5th reciever.
     
  4. Vaark

    Vaark Nihil taurus crappus Finheaven VIP Donator

    Joined:
    Apr 2007
    Messages:
    24,100
    Likes Received:
    950
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just wait! Excellent logical coherent post that will still draw some "thumbs downs" from the usual OCD-level Tanny-hating suspects. (as likely they will present themselves similarly in this one).
     
  5. Joneal7

    Joneal7 Heheheheheheheh

    Joined:
    Mar 2005
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so is a vaark that blue thing? =]
     
  6. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    And that's how you determine whom to put on your ignore list. :up:
     
  7. twohype

    twohype Seasoned Veteran

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    2,249
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OUTSTANDING post, thanks :)
     
  8. Phinatic8u

    Phinatic8u Adam ****ing Gase

    Joined:
    Nov 2008
    Messages:
    15,529
    Likes Received:
    1,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good writeup and everything dude.
     
  9. rdksek844

    rdksek844 Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    Jan 2008
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If he is, it should be obvious. We shouldn't have to dig up states to prove or disprove his potential. All of the other QB's picked before and after have shown that. If he gets wr's to the same caliber as the others, and still does not make the playoffs, then the answer is simple. We shall see next year. Stats wont tell us anything.
     
  10. z926538

    z926538 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 2007
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    How did you pick your QBR thresholds? Was there significant change in the analysis using different thresholds?
     
  11. Sirspud

    Sirspud Pro Bowler

    Joined:
    Jun 2004
    Messages:
    10,018
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The only thing I disagree with is the label of some guys as a franchise QB. Sam Bradford? Not yet. Christian Ponder? Still work to be done.
     
  12. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    If you click on the link at the top of the original post, it'll bring you to the thread where all that was explained. :up:
     
  13. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I think if it were so obvious, there wouldn't be much if any disagreement about it among people who have presumably watched all of his NFL games, yet that doesn't seem to be the case here.
     
  14. King Dingaling

    King Dingaling Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2006
    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    To be a franchise QB, you have to lead your team to more victories than losses. You need atleast a 2:1 TD to Int ratio and a QB rating consistently in the high 80s or 90s. He has a ton of work to do but surrounding him with elite talent is the first step. I've seen some good and I've seen some very bad from him this year, which is expected from a rookie. I'm still waiting for that come from behind 2min drive to win the game. Luck, RG3, Wilson, and even Cousins have done that this year. I want to see a huge jump from last year and then maybe we can say he is the Franchise QB. Until then, he's just another guy with potential.
     
  15. cullenbigcstill

    cullenbigcstill FinHeaven VIP Finheaven VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 2006
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    28
    He performed a game winning drive at the end of the game against a very tough Seattle defense. He also did it against Arizon and NYJ but the kicker missed the field goal.
     
  16. dolphans1

    dolphans1 Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    Oct 2008
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey I am concerned about RGIII and now with Russell Wilson (after today's game) , every year is a new year and strange things happen, injuries, weather, etc. There is always someone, something to blame.

    The only thing I didn't like about Tannehill was his lack of TD's throwing, which translates to low scoring and losing to teams we should have beat.

    Hopefully next season he will be a lot more comfortable and he will improve. With that being said, I felt we could have made the playoffs with Matt Moore and he earned the right to be the starter. I felt we may have sacrificed a season in an effort to prove Ryan Tannehill was the "one", the franchise QB. I knew it would take time and he would have been served best if he sat on the sideline for a season, but that's just me and my opinion.

    If you don't make the playoffs, you have zero chance of making the Super Bowl.

    Unfortunately the Patriots have been dominating our division on a consistent basis.

    Can I run a retraction on Russell Wilson, I don't know what has happened, but they're back in the game.

    d-1
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2013
  17. NUGap

    NUGap Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2012
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm curious, you included Carson Palmer from the 2003 NFL draft. Why did you not include Kyle Boller and Byron Leftwich? Both took the majority of starts in their rookie year and are up to a solid prerequisite number of snaps for statistical significance.

    I ask because I went back and did your correlation between rookie QB rating and career QB rating with Boller and Leftwich included and the correlation bumps from .58 (from your other post) to .65. Which is obviously somewhat significant. It puts it within 4% points of your .69 correlation on "good wins".

    Why this seems important to me is because if we accept this higher correlation as acceptably close to "good wins", then we have to look at that with Tannehill as well. I read your former post and didn't see an explanation of how a QB was "franchise" or not with a metric, so I assume it was qualitative. Thus, in my opinion, I moved Ponder and Freeman to No in the franchise designation. Given that there are reports out there that say Schiano could want Freeman gone after his contract is up - I'm definitely not willing to call him franchise.

    Running it all out with rookie QBR to career QBR and my conditions (Ponder, Freeman, Boller, Leftwich). The average rookie QBR for a "franchise" QB is 86.5 and the average rookie QBR for a non-franchise is 67.15. Finding Tannehill's z-score within the distribution, would put his rookie QBR at 23% of all "franchise QBs" and at 93% of all "non-franchise" QBs. To me, using this specific metric tells me that it's a toss-up as to whether Tannehill becomes a franchise QB. Either way he'll be an outlier. He'll be in the top percentile for rookie QBR for those who bust out or in the bottom percentile for quarterbacks who make it as a franchise guy.

    Obviously it's a great thing that you're using multiple metrics, including this "good wins" and the WPA. I just found it interesting that in terms of rookie QBR, Tannehill will be a bit of an oddity no matter if he booms or busts.
     
  18. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The problem with rookie QB rating is that its correlation with career QB rating plummets from 0.58 to 0.19 when you partial out the variance in both associated with rookie WPA.

    Other than confirmation bias, this is what helps "explain" why Andrew Luck looked so good to so many people who watched him this year, yet had a rookie QB rating in only the mid-70s. His play in the clutch (i.e., WPA) was much better than his play in general (i.e., QB rating), and much better than Tannehill's play in the clutch. It just so happens that one's play in the clutch (WPA) as a rookie is much more strongly predictive of later "franchise" status than one's play in general (QB rating) as a rookie.

    Aside from that, I'm all for playing around with the criterion variable of "franchise" status and seeing what that does to the prediction for Ryan Tannehill. Obviously you can change the threshold for the criterion variable at will. Hell, you could play around with that to the point that you're predicting whether or not he'll be in the Pro Bowl.
     
  19. Phins1020

    Phins1020 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2012
    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The difference between Tannehill and Luck, RG3, and Wilson is weapons. Luck has guys like Wayne, Hilton, Allen. RG3 has an amazing O-Line and Morris. Wilson has a lot of options, and a beast RB in Lynch. Tannehill almost led us to the playoffs with a terrible offense and a defense that doesn't force turnovers. Just blew too many close games and lost to a scrub Titans team.
     
  20. Phins1020

    Phins1020 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2012
    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The difference between Tannehill and Luck, RG3, and Wilson is weapons. Luck had guys like Wayne, Hilton, Allen. RG3 had an amazing O-Line and RB in Morris, and he had some reliable WR's and TE's. Wilson had Sidney Rice, Marshawn Lynch, Golden Tate, and an aggressive defense that gave him various possessions. What did Tannehill have? Hartline was our #1 WR, Bush probably set a record for negative runs in a season, our O-line is nothing amazing, and the defense was good, but could not force turnovers. Regardless of all that, we blew about 3 games early on in the season, and we got blown out by a scrub Titans team. Tannehill also threw like 8 of 13 interceptions early on. If things go just a little bit different, Tannehill would have gotten us into the playoffs with a pathetic offense and a defense that does not do the offense any favors. There is doubt in my mind this guy can have a monster year with just 2 or 3 more reliable options on offense. To top it off, he showed that he can run the ball if needed towards the end of the season. There is a lot that Tannehill can do that we did not show off because we were too limited and conservative this season.
     
  21. xSxPxHx

    xSxPxHx Scout Team

    Joined:
    Jan 2007
    Messages:
    1,529
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48

    Great Post, but my answer is no. I hope I eat crow though and hope I'm wrong.
     
  22. Awsi Dooger

    Awsi Dooger A True Fan

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Messages:
    7,790
    Likes Received:
    220
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Those numbers may hold some value but like the other poster I was confused regarding names included and names missing. If you're going back to 2003 then Byron Leftwich has to be included. He started the vast majority of games for Jacksonville, certainly more than Andrew Walter later did for Oakland, yet he's in the sample. Kyle Boller started more frequently as a rookie than Walter did.

    I've done tons of stuff like this, primarily team oriented and for betting purposes. The idea is to make sure it's not designed specifically toward a conclusion you already have in mind. For example, to always catch a team (or player) you know fell slightly on one side of a statistical barrier while rejecting another that you know fell slightly outside. I'm not saying you did that, far from it. But it's always a danger. In a breakdown like that a quarterback who consistently puts up 91 or 92 can look fantastic since every one of those games is embraced.
     
  23. roy_miami

    roy_miami 2020 cant get here soon enough Donator

    Joined:
    Sep 2008
    Messages:
    10,353
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Interesting stats, I guess the only conclusion you can draw from them at this point is he's wildly inconsistent from game to game.
     
  24. maralieus

    maralieus Lets get those balls deep!!

    Joined:
    Mar 2006
    Messages:
    4,675
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think he is franchise caliber. I just use the eyeball test, if he looks comfortable in the pocket, and looks the part when throwing then we are doing good. I see him as being better than the other rookie class QBs when all is said and done. Call me crazy, and maybe I am, but give him some weapons and I bet we are in the playoffs no problem next season. The AFC is getting weaker, in a couple years we may be the class of the AFC if we can get a good draft this year.
     
  25. dlockz

    dlockz Hall Of Famer

    Joined:
    Sep 2004
    Messages:
    46,087
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    113
    well i would say he was a rookie with poor weapons so his numbers and performances are not exactly shocking. I think he is quite on pace to do well. I think the success of Wilson and Griffin make the bar seem way too high but as a rookie he looked fine
     
  26. SouthPaul

    SouthPaul FinHeaven VIP Finheaven VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 2007
    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Great analysis with numbers to back up your point. I for one am very excited about the future of this team and that's something I haven't been in some time.
     
  27. tay0365

    tay0365 FinHeaven VIP Finheaven VIP Donator

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    11,728
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Great job shouright, thanks for all the work.
     
  28. Fin Fan in Cali

    Fin Fan in Cali Joanne Shaw Taylor Super Donator Finheaven VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 2004
    Messages:
    33,229
    Likes Received:
    2,303
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you brother! :up:
     
  29. D0lphan72

    D0lphan72 War... War never changes Finheaven VIP Donator

    Joined:
    Dec 2009
    Messages:
    3,525
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    48
    excellent post, the one thing i must disagree on is that cam newton is NOT a franchise quarterback
     
  30. tay0365

    tay0365 FinHeaven VIP Finheaven VIP Donator

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    11,728
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Wow, then I guess the Colts royally messed up allowing Peyton Manning to continue after that rookie year, Drew Brees in his 1st year starting did not look promising, Brett Favre 1st full year stating looked in consistant, Eli Manning in his 1st year starting looked almost as bad as big brother.... also lets not forget QBs like Elway, Aikman, or Theismann to name a few others that did not start with a bang. Finally according to what you expect of a franchise QB, Luck should also not be starting.
     
  31. SCLSU Mud Dogs

    SCLSU Mud Dogs foos-ball is the devil! Donator

    Joined:
    Mar 2007
    Messages:
    8,463
    Likes Received:
    775
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dynamite post.
     
  32. CANDolphan

    CANDolphan Seasoned Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 2006
    Messages:
    3,107
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I love this thread and the thought process behind it, but it concluding that Christian Ponder is a franchise QB is... troubling
     
  33. Mcganiel

    Mcganiel A True Fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2005
    Messages:
    2,808
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Great post.
     
  34. sirvmac

    sirvmac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2006
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Very insightful post!
    The more I look at Tannehill, I feel there is a lot to like.
    I'm more worried about our system/Sherman than Tannehill to be quite honest.
    I know I'm in the minority but imo Tannehill is being held back.
    Sherman isn't doing anything to help him or to make it easier on him.
     
  35. dolphinsbshaw72

    dolphinsbshaw72 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2007
    Messages:
    436
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Um hello!!!! Thought he did that in the Seahawks game!!!
     
  36. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Moving him to the "non-franchise QB" group changes the findings regarding Tannehill non-signifcantly.
     
  37. CANDolphan

    CANDolphan Seasoned Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 2006
    Messages:
    3,107
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This is said in a rather confusing way, so apologies if I misunderstood you, but I think it calls into question the metrics you are using to measure and ultimately crown "franchise quarterback"

    Simply put, Christian Ponder might be one of the 3 worst QBs in the NFL. I'm not even kidding. He lacks the arm, he lacks the progression in his reads, and his footwork is pretty questionable. He's carried by Percy Harvin and AdP. It's not even close.
     
  38. KingNick88

    KingNick88 Ray Finkle

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Messages:
    682
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bravo, man! Bravo!
     
  39. Shouright

    Shouright Banned Hammered

    Joined:
    May 2004
    Messages:
    15,064
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    There are ways of going about determining who is and is not a franchise QB other than by using QB rating. However, QB rating has what we call construct validity and predictive validity, insofar as it 1) strongly correlates with the consensus perceptions of QB quality (despite possible exceptions to the rule, such as Ponder, perhaps; i.e., no correlation is perfect), and 2) is strongly correlated with winning.

    In other words, the QBs who are widely thought to have the best ability typically have the best QB ratings (though there are exceptions to the rule), and QB rating is also strongly correlated with winning. There may be other ways of determining who is and is not a franchise QB, but I'm not sure those ways will have both of those important characteristics.
     
  40. CRIOS

    CRIOS PERFECT PHINS '72 Finheaven VIP Donator

    Joined:
    Jun 2003
    Messages:
    4,419
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Tanne needs at least two years behind center in order to verify if he will be given the franchise tag. It's too early now.
     

Share This Page