How Long Does It Take Great QBs To Break Out

[Sons Of Shula]

BTW, what the heck is that ridiculous stat thing flashing underneath my details at left? Don't tell me some moderator or administrator tried to be cute. That is not my doing and I'd like it to be removed. It looks like I placed it there. Until recently I've had to view this site on Printable View only and had no idea there was a moronic flashing gizmo in that spot. A sig or similar should be voluntary, not forced.

You know what they say; "If the Shou fits...".

 

[BlueFin]

Very fair article. When the author immediately identifies Adjusted Net Yards per pass attempt he's a big favorite to know what he is talking about. Likewise anyone who ignores or denounces a stat like that is a huge favorite to have no clue what he's talking about.

There are helpful litmus tests all over the place in this racket.

And favoritism is what I've been spotlighting in relationship to Tannehill and all of our recent moves, including the stadium. Where's 60% and where is 40%? We find the 40% (or lower) path almost without exception and somehow rationalize it as sensible if not brilliant. Drives me nuts. I've watched the 40% guys blow out in Las Vegas since the mid '80s. They apply the adjuster mindset. Unfortunately there's no juice in this business. Go 7-9 or 8-8 while playing into 11/10 deficit and you grind toward broke. The recent Dolphin front office and too many of the apologist fans are 40% types but there's little if any penalty for it. Loud and wrong today equals the same tomorrow. Lessons never learned.

Tannehill didn't start a college season opener at quarterback until beyond his 23rd birthday. That's not a positive. It's a negative. Anyone who uses it as a positive is a 40 percenter. Tannehill was a wide receiver. That's not a positive. It's a negative. Anyone who uses it as a positive is a 40 percenter.

I don't try to be correct on every call. Where's the easy route to 60%? A sports franchise on this level should have an owner who floods the key positions with ultra sharp people. We try to catch the Patriots but they are simply smarter than we are. It's hardly Brady alone. Patriot Place compared to Miami Gardens. Jamie Collins instead of Dion Jordan. Tannehill may pan out but let's not kid ourselves that it's certain to happen or even likely to happen. It's always been uphill, long before the numbers started to accumulate. That type of background should equate to a value grab in the second or third round, not 8th off the top. The idea is to steal a vital few percent here and there, not forfeit that same few percent.

BTW, what the heck is that ridiculous stat thing flashing underneath my details at left? Don't tell me some moderator or administrator tried to be cute. That is not my doing and I'd like it to be removed. It looks like I placed it there. Until recently I've had to view this site on Printable View only and had no idea there was a moronic flashing gizmo in that spot. A sig or similar should be voluntary, not forced.

Wow....it's really going to ruin you and few others whole year if Tannehill continues his progression and leads this team to the playoffs...won't it?

Are you even a fan of this team?.....or is there another agenda?

 

[TarHeelFinFan]

That is a lie. Every fan base has fans that hate on a player for no apparent reason. I've heard more than one Green Bay Packer fan complain about Aaron Rodgers and wish the Packers would trade him. You must be one of the Tannehill haters that's led by WVDolphins on here. You better hope Tannehill falls flat on his face this season cause I plan on calling everyone of you clowns out this year. Infractions be damned...I promise you if Tannehill has the season I think he will, you're going to get ripped.

Of course. There were knuckleheads that wanted to replace Dan Marino with Scott Mitchell.

---------- Post added at 07:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:16 AM ----------

Wow....it's really going to ruin you and few others whole year if Tannehill continues his progression and leads this team to the playoffs...won't it?

Are you even a fan of this team?.....or is there another agenda?

They're like the obnoxious hecklers from the Major League Movies. When things are less than awesome they are the first to cry about sucking, then when the team wins they pretend like they were awesome fans all along.

 

[j-off-her-doll]

Wow....it's really going to ruin you and few others whole year if Tannehill continues his progression and leads this team to the playoffs...won't it?

Are you even a fan of this team?.....or is there another agenda?

Did you read that post? Hypothetical situation. Say a QB has a 10% chance of success - based on his physical tools, collegiate performance, and early play in the NFL. That means that if 10 QB's like him come around, 1 of those 10 will be a success. That is to say, IT WILL HAPPEN eventually. Tannehill has a much better chance that 10%, and Awsi has acknowledged as much. But back to that 10% QB. If a GM hits one a guy with those odds, should that GM be applauded? NO. It's no different than a Texas Hold 'Em player going all in after the Turn when he's dominated only to spike the one card he needs on the River. You can win a few hands this way, but you'll be broke sooner than later. It's not a difficult concept.

Just to reiterate, Tannehill has better odds than a 1/10 QB.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Did you read that post? Hypothetical situation. Say a QB has a 10% chance of success - based on his physical tools, collegiate performance, and early play in the NFL. That means that if 10 QB's like him come around, 1 of those 10 will be a success. That is to say, IT WILL HAPPEN eventually. Tannehill has a much better chance that 10%, and Awsi has acknowledged as much. But back to that 10% QB. If a GM hits one a guy with those odds, should that GM be applauded? NO. It's no different than a Texas Hold 'Em player going all in after the Turn when he's dominated only to spike the one card he needs on the River. You can win a few hands this way, but you'll be broke sooner than later. It's not a difficult concept.

Just to reiterate, Tannehill has better odds than a 1/10 QB.

Yes, if he drafted just the correct 1 of the 10. Picking talent is not like playing the odds in a game of chance. If it were, ANYONE could be an effective GM, simply read the numbers and play the odds.

What would you rather have, a GM that blindly follows historical trends or a GM that analyzes the actual players and selects those that are the best for his team where HE thinks they should be picked, trends and "expert opinions" be damned? No one ever talks about the number of players that a GM loses because they don't want to draft them "too early". Pretend you are the GM of the Redskins in 2000. Pretend you like Tom Brady but, according the the odds, a 5th round pick is "too high", so you wait until the 6th. You take the much more highly touted CB, Quincy Sanders, in the 5th round instead. Unfortunately, NE takes Brady 3 picks before you in the 6th. No problem, you go with your next choice, Todd Husak. How about Russell Wilson in 2012? Don't you think the Bills and Browns wished they had "reached"?

This is why I hate the crap about "reaching" in the draft. It is a one sided view that does nothing but protect the draft analysts and their crappy track records. When a highly ranked pick fails, that's no problem because, after all, everyone had them ranked high. When a "reach" (in their eyes) succeeds, well the GM got lucky, he was still a "reach".

 

[where's th'fish]

the author lost all credibility for me when he had to actually debate whether or not the jags should give up on blaine gabbert after his rookie season...

He's looking at it from a statistical angle, and Chase Stuart is one of the best numbers guys at it. Usual caveats apply. I repeat: usual caveats apply. I think it's a great article.

Stuart's biggest flaw is that he's a Jet fan

 

[hoops]

He's looking at it from a statistical angle, and Chase Stuart is one of the best numbers guys at it. Usual caveats apply. I repeat: usual caveats apply. I think it's a great article.

Stuart's biggest flaw is that he's a Jet fan

i get it but it shouldn't take stats to tell you after his rookie year that gabbert was a bust and a disaster...

anyways good on espns mike sando for predicting ryan tannehill as the #2 rated player to break out this year...this scheme and that qb are gonna do serious damage this year...and i'll be laughing all the way to the damn bank for the last 2 years crap i have taken over backing the kid from the get go...

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

i get it but it shouldn't take stats to tell you after his rookie year that gabbert was a bust and a disaster...

anyways good on espns mike sando for predicting ryan tannehill as the #2 rated player to break out this year...this scheme and that qb are gonna do serious damage this year...and i'll be laughing all the way to the damn bank for the last 2 years crap i have taken over backing the kid from the get go...

I saw a clip last week on ESPN where Jaworski picked Tannehill as the QB to watch this year.

 

[NBP81]

Did you read that post? Hypothetical situation. Say a QB has a 10% chance of success - based on his physical tools, collegiate performance, and early play in the NFL. That means that if 10 QB's like him come around, 1 of those 10 will be a success. That is to say, IT WILL HAPPEN eventually. Tannehill has a much better chance that 10%, and Awsi has acknowledged as much. But back to that 10% QB. If a GM hits one a guy with those odds, should that GM be applauded? NO. It's no different than a Texas Hold 'Em player going all in after the Turn when he's dominated only to spike the one card he needs on the River. You can win a few hands this way, but you'll be broke sooner than later. It's not a difficult concept.

Just to reiterate, Tannehill has better odds than a 1/10 QB.

I don't think you can apply the notion of EV(expected value) properly as a GM. Sports bettors, poker players and traders to some extent(mostly those who rely on technical analysis) use volume to achieve whatever equity they have in a proposition. They calculate risk, reward and evaluate the expected value long term.... Sometimes they will invest in what seems like a coin flip to someone who isn't looking close enough or thinks that its not profitable enough to even consider, but over the long will certainly add to their win rate. Most GMs don't benefit from volume, there is absolutely no telling what amount of tries, or time they have to work with which makes it a lot more complicated than just running % and go with the odds.... Its like comparing poker cash games to tournament, its still poker but the whole strategy is completely different...

 

[hoops]

I saw a clip last week on ESPN where Jaworski picked Tannehill as the QB to watch this year.

he still ranked him 23rd...which was absurd...

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

I don't think you can apply the notion of EV(expected value) properly as a GM. Sports bettors, poker players and traders to some extent(mostly those who rely on technical analysis) use volume to achieve whatever equity they have in a proposition. They calculate risk, reward and evaluate the expected value long term.... Sometimes they will invest in what seems like a coin flip to someone who isn't looking close enough or thinks that its not profitable enough to even consider, but over the long will certainly add to their win rate. Most GMs don't benefit from volume, there is absolutely no telling what amount of tries, or time they have to work with which makes it a lot more complicated than just running % and go with the odds.... Its like comparing poker cash games to tournament, its still poker but the whole strategy is completely different...

Totally agree. I'll add that the Dolphins were criticized for taking James. The common theme was that he should have been picked 10 or so spots later. Unfortunately, the Dolphins didn't have the pick 10 spots later and there is no guarantee he would have been available if they did.

---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------

he still ranked him 23rd...which was absurd...

Perhaps a little CYOA?

 

[enigmatics]

BTW, what the heck is that ridiculous stat thing flashing underneath my details at left? Don't tell me some moderator or administrator tried to be cute. That is not my doing and I'd like it to be removed. It looks like I placed it there. Until recently I've had to view this site on Printable View only and had no idea there was a moronic flashing gizmo in that spot. A sig or similar should be voluntary, not forced.

It's the site mods and creators going out of their way to mock you, which in terms gives some of the zoo animals that inhabit this place to an opportunity to take potshots at you no matter what you say.

 

[hoops]

Totally agree. I'll add that the Dolphins were criticized for taking James. The common theme was that he should have been picked 10 or so spots later. Unfortunately, the Dolphins didn't have the pick 10 spots later and there is no guarantee he would have been available if they did.

---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:48 PM ----------



Perhaps a little CYOA?

oh of course...there's more sit on the fence when it comes to this game than anyone taking a stand on something and sticking to it...hell you can barely find that here even

 

[j-off-her-doll]

I don't think you can apply the notion of EV(expected value) properly as a GM. Sports bettors, poker players and traders to some extent(mostly those who rely on technical analysis) use volume to achieve whatever equity they have in a proposition. They calculate risk, reward and evaluate the expected value long term.... Sometimes they will invest in what seems like a coin flip to someone who isn't looking close enough or thinks that its not profitable enough to even consider, but over the long will certainly add to their win rate. Most GMs don't benefit from volume, there is absolutely no telling what amount of tries, or time they have to work with which makes it a lot more complicated than just running % and go with the odds.... Its like comparing poker cash games to tournament, its still poker but the whole strategy is completely different...

Right, but if you're a GM for 5 years, assuming you have 7 picks per draft, you're drafting 35 players. If you consistently go against the odds, they catch you. Miami has literally been up against the odds for years based on the players and coaches they've drafted and hired. If I'm a GM and I'm looking at a guy who has a strong chance to fail - whether it be due to athletic testing, mediocre performance in college, or some other factor - I want to have a good reason for taking that gamble. You want some elite characteristics that make you believe this player will defy the trends. Players with Tannehill's college career and pro career to date more often than not fail to become franchise QB's. You can point to reasons that it's been harder for Tannehill, but a lot of QB's who had similar career paths and failed to meet expectations also had reasons.

Take one of my favorite players from the 2014 draft, Ryan Shazier. I had him ranked as the 3rd best player, and I was generally laughed at for the ranking. A lot of people had question marks about his size and instincts, but I insisted that he's as close to can't miss as it gets. Guys with that combination of athleticism and production at the LB position very rarely fall short of excellence - let alone fail. KNOWINGFINFAN recently pointed out that his closest peer in recent years as a prospect was Patrick Willis, but Willis did not test or produce as well as Shazier. He got laughed at for mentioning it, but I warned that it wasn't to be taken lightly. One preseason half into his career, Shazier has 9 solo tackles, 1 INT, 1 PD, and 2 solo ST's tackles. All of a sudden, people are writing articles about how he moves like a CB at 237 lbs. That's the kind of guy you want to target. The guy that has All Pro written on his forehead. When was the last time Miami landed a true stud like that?

 

[NBP81]

Right, but if you're a GM for 5 years, assuming you have 7 picks per draft, you're drafting 35 players. If you consistently go against the odds, they catch you. Miami has literally been up against the odds for years based on the players and coaches they've drafted and hired. If I'm a GM and I'm looking at a guy who has a strong chance to fail - whether it be due to athletic testing, mediocre performance in college, or some other factor - I want to have a good reason for taking that gamble. You want some elite characteristics that make you believe this player will defy the trends. Players with Tannehill's college career and pro career to date more often than not fail to become franchise QB's. You can point to reasons that it's been harder for Tannehill, but a lot of QB's who had similar career paths and failed to meet expectations also had reasons.

Take one of my favorite players from the 2014 draft, Ryan Shazier. I had him ranked as the 3rd best player, and I was generally laughed at for the ranking. A lot of people had question marks about his size and instincts, but I insisted that he's as close to can't miss as it gets. Guys with that combination of athleticism and production at the LB position very rarely fall short of excellence - let alone fail. KNOWINGFINFAN recently pointed out that his closest peer in recent years as a prospect was Patrick Willis, but Willis did not test or produce as well as Shazier. He got laughed at for mentioning it, but I warned that it wasn't to be taken lightly. One preseason half into his career, Shazier has 9 solo tackles, 1 INT, 1 PD, and 2 solo ST's tackles. All of a sudden, people are writing articles about how he moves like a CB at 237 lbs. That's the kind of guy you want to target. The guy that has All Pro written on his forehead. When was the last time Miami landed a true stud like that?

I ll only answer the first part of your post because I don't follow college football... I literally have no access to it in Canada except couple of games a year... But seriously! No matter how bad/good/terrible a GM Ireland was.... He HAD to pick a QB in the 1st round of that draft.... He just had too... Tannehill wasn't an all in in early position with pocket aces 100BBs deep... He was like 9-10s on the button with 5bbs left... you literally have no choice to go for it... And hope for the best....