The Talent Surrounding Ryan Tannehill | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

The Talent Surrounding Ryan Tannehill

S

Shouright

☠️ Banned ☠️
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
15,051
Reaction score
18
Age
51
Here is your list of rookie QBs who have gotten significant playing time since 2004:

QB
Rating
Win%
Rating Z
Win% Z
Ben Roethlisberger
98
1
1.80
2.74
Joe Flacco
80
0.688
0.51
1.24
Matt Ryan
88
0.688
1.08
1.24
Mark Sanchez
63
0.563
-0.71
0.63
Russell Wilson
91
0.6
1.30
0.81
Andrew Luck
77
0.6
0.29
0.81
RGIII
105
0.455
2.30
0.12
Cam Newton
85
0.375
0.87
-0.27
Andy Dalton
80
0.563
0.51
0.63
Vince Young
67
0.615
-0.42
0.88
Sam Bradford
77
0.438
0.29
0.03
Jay Cutler
89
0.4
1.15
-0.15
Trent Edwards
70
0.556
-0.21
0.60
Kyle Orton
60
0.667
-0.92
1.13
Eli Manning
55
0.142
-1.28
-1.39
Matt Leinart
74
0.364
0.08
-0.32
Matt Stafford
61
0.2
-0.85
-1.11
Josh Freeman
60
0.333
-0.92
-0.47
Jimmy Clausen
58
0.1
-1.07
-1.59
Colt McCoy
75
0.25
0.15
-0.87
Charlie Frye
73
0.4
0.01
-0.15
Alex Smith
41
0.286
-2.28
-0.70
Bruce Gradkowski
66
0.273
-0.49
-0.76
Blaine Gabbert
65
0.286
-0.56
-0.70
Christian Ponder
70
0.2
-0.21
-1.11
Brandon Weeden
70
0.2
-0.21
-1.11
Ryan Tannehill
70
0.4
-0.21
-0.15
AVERAGE
72.89
0.431
STANDARD DEVIATION
13.97
0.208

As you can see, the average rookie quarterback who has gotten significant playing time since 2004 has a QB rating of 72.89, a little more than two points higher than Ryan Tannehill's current QB rating.

The average winning percentage of those teams during the games those QBs started was 0.431, which is just a tad higher than the Dolphins' current winning percentage (0.400).

The key columns here are "Rating Z" and "Win% Z," which indicate how many standard deviations from average the rookie QB's rating falls, as well as how many standard deviations from average the team's winning percentage falls.

A number of 1 or higher in those columns indicates that the value (either QB rating or team winning percentage) falls at least one standard deviation from average, which puts it at the 84th percentile or higher. In other words, a score of 1 or higher makes the value better than at least 84% of the QBs or teams in the sample.

That's the level at which I'd personally call a value "significant" in this (or just about any) sample. In other words, only if the number in the "Rating Z" and "Win% Z" columns is 1 or higher would I call it "especially good."

As you can see, there are only 4 teams of the 27 listed -- 15% -- that have managed to do significantly better than the average team that's started a rookie QB since 2004.

So, the take-home message is this: if you believe this team should be doing significantly better than its record right now, realize that you're expecting the team to function as well as only 15% of teams with rookie QBs have since 2004.

On the other hand, there are 5 teams of the 27 above -- 19% -- that did significantly worse with a rookie quarterback than the Dolphins are doing right now.

So, when we evaluate how the team is doing right now, IMO we should realize that the team is working with a rookie QB, and based on the recent history in the NFL, there is an 85% chance the team won't do significantly better than it is right now under such circumstances.

IMO we should also realize that the team is nowhere near the 19% of teams that performed significantly more poorly than average with a rookie QB. Instead, the team right now is safely among the 81% of teams that did not perform significantly more poorly than average with a rookie QB.

In other words, contrary to popular belief, there is no cause for alarm regarding the talent surrounding Ryan Tannehill right now in my opinion. :)
 
Cool chart and thanks for the post..... Having said that, If you think that there is no reason to be alarmed with the talent around Tanny you have lost your mind. We are not solid at any position on O.
 
who is panicking? QB is the least of our problems.
 
I wouldn't go so far as to call it drivel, and it's nice to see someone actually use some of the concepts being taught in college statistics (don't see that very often), but if you're doing so in an attempt to sell the thought that there's not a significant lack of talent surrounding Tannehill on offense, could have spent the time it took toput together this analysis a bit more constructively by simply taking a nap.
 
Dolfan4life! said:
if you're doing so in an attempt to sell the thought that there's not a significant lack of talent surrounding Tannehill on offense, could have spent the time it took toput together this analysis a bit more constructively by simply taking a nap.
Click to expand...
Ah well, I did this and I took a nap, too, so I got both covered. ;)
 
The talent needs to get better around RT. However, RT needs to make playmakers out HIS play at QB.
 
Interesting metric. Thanks.

As to the talent level two things are at issue: 1) Scheme on the offensive line, and 2) weapons at the WR and TE positions.

The offensive line was built for a power rushing scheme and trained in a power rushing scheme. Now they are being asked to be a zone block scheme unit and are displaying mixed results because its a change and some players are less ideal fits for the system. A player by player analysis reveals a lot.

Jake Long is an excellent LT having a poor year for him, but is still above average. Injuries, scheme, who knows what else, but I'd call this one a down year as opposed to a predicter of future ability. Joey Incognito was and is a journeyman. He is a physical brawler and not a good fit in the ZBS system, so hopefully he improves, but eventually he will probably be replaced. The only thing is that Incognito brings a physical, nasty and protective of our players attitude that is lacking on our line. Only Pouncey shows much nasty outside of Incognito. Mike Pouncey is a stud and has been playing like it. We are fortunate to have him anchoring our line as he plays well in every system and is our brightest bright spot. John Jerry is everything that Pouncey is not. Jerry is slow of thought, short of ambition, lacking in physical attitude, not protective of his teammates, unaware of his surroundings and generally NOT a hard worker. He is big, quick, strong and fits the physical qualifications, which is why he always remains a tantalizing physical talent who never seems to become a decent player. Martin has the speed of thought and very quick feet, but lacks the functional strength and technique to hold up against the NFL caliber bull rush so he is overcommitting to it and also falling prey to the speed rush. But, he has the tools both above the neck and below the neck and I believe will make a large stride towards becoming a good RT over this next offseason. Year 2 should be a huge improvement for him IMHO.

Overall, these 5 starters will be considerably better at this next year, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a new G. Both of the current starters subpar.

In the passing game we have no deep threat. This means we're facing 8 and 9 men in the box and cannot run the ball. Even if one of our WR's wins his 1v1, the other team is confident that a DB can run him down and prevent the TD. Hartline wins his 1v1's vs. bad CB's, and while that's not hugely impressive, it is the best we have. He is also fairly dependable. Bess can win in space over the middle, but is poor at RAC and not a real 3rd down go-to guy. He has the best hands on the team and a little quickness to gain separation, but is generally an inferior WR in all but those short underneath routes. We lack a red zone target. So even if we do dink and dunk our way into the red zone, we can't finish the deal through the air and the run is played so closely that we aren't successful.

I like Fasano. But, he's a little better than average at everything and great at nothing. He isn't fast enough to be a deep threat or challenge the seam. He isn't big enough to be dominant in the red zone or overmatch DB's in the deep middle of the field. I'd say he is a good all around TE but in a 2 TE setup he is an ideal #2.

Our running game suffers from the OL issues and a lack of a deep threat. It is built on getting speed guys like Bush and Miller to the second level and letting them wreak havoc with their speed and elusiveness. But, when the box is stacked, they can't make it to the second level very often and our ground game appears inept. We have no Ray Rice or Doug Martin type back to break through tackles and then use his speed. But then again, those guys don't see as many stacked boxes as we do because they have speed WR's to keep the safety back.
 
Digital said:
Interesting metric. Thanks.

As to the talent level two things are at issue: 1) Scheme on the offensive line, and 2) weapons at the WR and TE positions.

The offensive line was built for a power rushing scheme and trained in a power rushing scheme. Now they are being asked to be a zone block scheme unit and are displaying mixed results because its a change and some players are less ideal fits for the system. A player by player analysis reveals a lot.

Jake Long is an excellent LT having a poor year for him, but is still above average. Injuries, scheme, who knows what else, but I'd call this one a down year as opposed to a predicter of future ability. Joey Incognito was and is a journeyman. He is a physical brawler and not a good fit in the ZBS system, so hopefully he improves, but eventually he will probably be replaced. The only thing is that Incognito brings a physical, nasty and protective of our players attitude that is lacking on our line. Only Pouncey shows much nasty outside of Incognito. Mike Pouncey is a stud and has been playing like it. We are fortunate to have him anchoring our line as he plays well in every system and is our brightest bright spot. John Jerry is everything that Pouncey is not. Jerry is slow of thought, short of ambition, lacking in physical attitude, not protective of his teammates, unaware of his surroundings and generally NOT a hard worker. He is big, quick, strong and fits the physical qualifications, which is why he always remains a tantalizing physical talent who never seems to become a decent player. Martin has the speed of thought and very quick feet, but lacks the functional strength and technique to hold up against the NFL caliber bull rush so he is overcommitting to it and also falling prey to the speed rush. But, he has the tools both above the neck and below the neck and I believe will make a large stride towards becoming a good RT over this next offseason. Year 2 should be a huge improvement for him IMHO.

Overall, these 5 starters will be considerably better at this next year, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a new G. Both of the current starters subpar.

In the passing game we have no deep threat. This means we're facing 8 and 9 men in the box and cannot run the ball. Even if one of our WR's wins his 1v1, the other team is confident that a DB can run him down and prevent the TD. Hartline wins his 1v1's vs. bad CB's, and while that's not hugely impressive, it is the best we have. He is also fairly dependable. Bess can win in space over the middle, but is poor at RAC and not a real 3rd down go-to guy. He has the best hands on the team and a little quickness to gain separation, but is generally an inferior WR in all but those short underneath routes. We lack a red zone target. So even if we do dink and dunk our way into the red zone, we can't finish the deal through the air and the run is played so closely that we aren't successful.

I like Fasano. But, he's a little better than average at everything and great at nothing. He isn't fast enough to be a deep threat or challenge the seam. He isn't big enough to be dominant in the red zone or overmatch DB's in the deep middle of the field. I'd say he is a good all around TE but in a 2 TE setup he is an ideal #2.

Our running game suffers from the OL issues and a lack of a deep threat. It is built on getting speed guys like Bush and Miller to the second level and letting them wreak havoc with their speed and elusiveness. But, when the box is stacked, they can't make it to the second level very often and our ground game appears inept. We have no Ray Rice or Doug Martin type back to break through tackles and then use his speed. But then again, those guys don't see as many stacked boxes as we do because they have speed WR's to keep the safety back.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with the overall premise, but I appreciate the thoughtful response. :up:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom