Another Take on the Offensive Line, Ryan Tannehill, and Sacks in 2013 | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Another Take on the Offensive Line, Ryan Tannehill, and Sacks in 2013

Geforce said:
Of course Ryan Tannehill is one of the variables in the totality of sacks. All quarterbacks are.

While this article from Football Outsiders doesn't cover the entire 2013 season, it does try to break down why sacks occur. You should see that the Dolphins offense line gave up 35 of the 45 sacks due to blown blocks. According to Football Outsiders, a blown block is when a blocker is simply physically beaten by a defender.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/under-pressure/2013/under-pressure-sacks-confusion
Click to expand...
Thanks - this one deserves at least two thumbs up.
 
tazthenomad said:
Your point is spot on. Either you believe that RT regressed at an astonishing level in this area compared to other parts of his game where he improved or there are other factors here.
Click to expand...
Except that when you compare the Dolphins to other teams in the league with regard to the "other factors" that would most likely explain the team's performance in this area, Tannehill is the biggest outlier in the league.

Given that his play really didn't improve significantly, objectively speaking, it's entirely possible that when more was put on his plate in terms of running the offense, he was overloaded, and he responded by being unable to manage a similar amount of pressure on him from opposing defenses. He may have been unable to manage the increase in the "multi-tasking," so to speak, that he was asked to do.

---------- Post added at 11:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:25 AM ----------
tazthenomad said:
Thanks - this one deserves at least two thumbs up.
Click to expand...
And meanwhile the variable alluded to in the post is a non-significant predictor of sack rate in the NFL.

You gave me the impression that you knew something about statistics at some point. I'm disappointed.
 
Gravity said:
Except that when you compare the Dolphins to other teams in the league with regard to the "other factors" that would most likely explain the team's performance in this area, Tannehill is the biggest outlier in the league.

Given that his play really didn't improve significantly, objectively speaking, it's entirely possible that when more was put on his plate in terms of running the offense, he was overloaded, and he responded by being unable to manage a similar amount of pressure on him from opposing defenses. He may have been unable to mange the increase in the "multi-tasking," so to speak, that he was asked to do.
Click to expand...

Objectively speaking?
 
Geforce said:
Objectively speaking?
Click to expand...

He will deflect, deny, distract..... don't bother. The point is made (several times) in this thread. He has tried the "Tannehill is to blame for the sacks" angle several times and gets proven wrong each and every time. He'll wait a few weeks and then try again.
 
Gravity said:
Are you confused?
Click to expand...

Only by your use of the words objectively speaking. Just because you use statistics in your analysis doesn't make you or them objective.

Subjective information is one person's opinion. In a newspaper, the editorial section is the place for subjectivity. It can be based on fact, but it is one person's interpretation of that fact. In this way, subjective information is also analytical.

Student research papers are usually subjective, in that the writer formulates a thesis statement and uses sources that support that thesis. Bear in mind that there is usually another equally valid viewpoint that can be supported with other sources.
Click to expand...
http://www.lib.odu.edu/genedinfolit/1infobasics/subjective_vs_objective.html
 
I'd like the mods to take action against the OP for false advertisement in the thread title.

You can't tell me you've got another take when you've already started over 50 threads about this same subject in the past year.
 
Gravity said:
I was making a distinction between significant improvement on the basis of objective statistics, using traditional definitions of "significant," and subjective perceptions of improvement via one's TV screen, based on nothing objective.
Click to expand...

Define significant improvement.

Taking into account what Tannehill did his rookie season, what would you through objective statistics, consider significant improvements this past season.
 
I think you get a little too wrapped in this data.

I don't really need anything beyond my 40 + years of watching this game to know I saw a QB improve from year 1 to year 2...it just so happens the numbers back it up.
 
Geforce said:
If you already posted the numbers in another thread, it shouldn't be any trouble for you to post those numbers here.
Click to expand...
Well given that I did all the work, I think we should probably yield to my perception that it'd be easier for you to simply click on the link that I supplied. ;)

---------- Post added at 12:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 PM ----------
BlueFin said:
I think you get a little too wrapped in this data.

I don't really need anything beyond my 40 + years of watching this game to know I saw a QB improve from year 1 to year 2...it just so happens the numbers back it up.
Click to expand...
How do you know you weren't biased in the direction of seeing him improve?

And actually the numbers don't back it up, but of course you're free to believe whatever you'd like. :)
 
Gravity said:
Well given that I did all the work, I think we should probably yield to my perception that it'd be easier for you to simply click on the link that I supplied. ;)

---------- Post added at 12:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 PM ----------

How do you know you weren't biased in the direction of seeing him improve?

And actually the numbers don't back it up, but of course you're free to believe whatever you'd like. :)
Click to expand...

Well some numbers do back it up. QB rating, completion percentage, td to int ratio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom