QB performance based on specific variables

[EvilDylan]

It isn't just the Carolina game. That was just one game where it was a GLARING issue.

I remember that game, I remember him setting up protection at the line, protection that failed.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

 

[nick1]

You must of missed his rookie year if you think he's bad against blitz. He tore Arizona up among other teams. I think you are mistaken. His biggest issue is accuracy on that deep ball. If his line holds up this season he will explode

 

[Digital]

Let's consider Tannehill's situation for a minute. His rookie season he was inexperienced and had a ton of things going against him yet he threw for a Dolphin rookie record yardage and finished with few INT's over the final third of the season. Not bad.

His sophomore season he improved in almost every metric and corrected many of the mistakes he made as a rookie. Most importantly, the team success in the red zone and on 3rd down jumped up dramatically. He did this all while having a bunch of things working against him, including:

Opponents knowing the snap count (Jerry arm tap and Pouncey head bob).

Opponents knowing whether it was a run or pass (go/go-go).

One dimensional personnel (TE's and RB's that couldn't run block or pick up the blitz)

An OL that posted one of the 10 most sacks allowed seasons since the NFL started recording the stat.

An unproductive run game.

No ability to run on goal line or 3rd and short situations.

Loss of leading TD scorer (Reggie Bush) and second leading TD scorer (Tony Fasano).

Loss of best blocking OL (Jake Long) and TE (Tony Fasano).

Loss of new TE for season in preseason (Dustin Keller).

Loss for the season of new slot receiver (Gibson) around the one third mark of the season when we were winning.

Admitted inability of primary deep threat and third new receiving target (Mike Wallace) to ever fully get Sherman's offense, and general lack of chemistry between the WR and QB.

Yet Tannehill improved. He almost had 2 thousand yard receivers and helped our backup TE have an impressive year.

Locker room controversy among the OL.

I can't think of another young QB with that much working against him last year.

So, it is difficult to really do an apples to apples comparison. I would definitely take Tannehill over Nick Foles ... but in Chip Kelly, Philly's dominant OL, and Shady McCoy, it's not going to be a level playing field to compare them. Hopefully, with Lazor and Benton though, we can close the gap.


Sent from my phone, so please forgive any typos.

 

[roy_miami]

If you look further, there is a breakdown of vs blitz, and vs pressure, which are two different things. RT vs pressure was #19 but. was #5 vs a blitz, and had 10 drops.

Vs Blitz, no pressure
Average passer rating 95.3
Ryan Tannehill 90.3
Russel Wilson 96.6

vs Blitz
Average passer rating 85.7
Ryan Tannehill 83.8
Russel Wilson 96.0

So he's a little below average vs the blitz and vs the blitz with no pressure and he's way below average when he's pressured. He certainly hasn't been good vs the blitz or vs pressure. Compare Tannehill who is above and below average in a lot of situations vs Russell Wilson who is above average in almost every situation and it really puts knots your stomach.

 

[futurescout]

the drop depth stuff is stupid. No QB coach or OC says "get to 7 yards on a 5 step drop" it's not about how many yards. it's about steps. 1 big 2 quick for 3 step, 3 big 2 quick for 5 step, 3 big 4 quick for 7 step. Stupid article. But the pressure one was good. Sometimes PFF just gets too far into random stats. They should stick to the basics.

 

[NY8123]

I love seeing a QB from Miami even being relevant to team discussions again. Tannehill has shown he can be a fine QB, now he has to do it consistently for 16 weeks. Every QB has bad games but great QB's don't have them often and even more so not down the stretch.

PFF is a good tool to help round out player evals based on all the categories and where Tannehill is ranked, I believe in the kid. If he doesn't respond this season with more improvement then my assessment will change but going into this year I'm still high on Mr. Tannehill.

 

[roy_miami]

Some more numbers up--Pass Depth.

The only important note when charting depth of pass is that it is taken from the line of scrimmage to the point where the ball is caught. This may seem obvious, but it’s not the actual yards the ball traveled in the air.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/06/13/qbs-in-focus-pass-depth/

I don't put any stock into their subjective PFF grade so I prefer to look at passer rating.

1-10 yards
Average: 90.0
Tannehill: 93.9
Wilson: 102.3
Dalton: 84.1

5-10 yards
Average: 88.1
Tannehill: 93.9
Wilson: 104.8
Dalton: 70.1

11-20 yards
Average: 91.1
Tannehill: 79.6
Wilson: 127.3
Dalton: 96.6

21-30 yards
Average: 75.8
Tannehill: 39.0
Wilson: 116.9
Dalton: 88.4

20+ yards
Average: 84.1
Tannehill: 40.1
Wilson: 96.5
Dalton: 97.3

30+ yards
Average: 91.3
Tannehill: 52.7
Wilson: 79.2
Dalton: 107.6

31-40 yards
Average: 88.3
Tannehill: 56.8
Wilson: 86.2
Dalton: 94.9

40+ yards
Average: 86.7
Tannehill: 57.4
Wilson: 69.8
Dalton: 104.2

No real reason for comparing him to Wilson and Dalton other than my own curiosity. It is a little concerning that Tannehill didn't win a single category. Wilson was a beast at the short stuff but dropped off on the longer throws and Dalton wasn't good at short throws but killed it with the long ball. Tannehill was barely above average on the short balls and terrible on the long balls. All I can say is Lazor better be the savior and QB whisperer that many of us are hoping for...

 

[hoops]

ehhh pressure plays into those yardage percentage numbers...if tannehill was protected like dalton and put up the same numbers down the field i'd be more worried about it...

the more pressure you face the less efficient you should be down the field...the less time you have to go thru your progressions down the field and let plays develop the quicker you come off things etc...and the more likely you are gonna be to let the ball go early and miss...overthrows missed timing etc

i do think that there's some footwork issues than i'd like to see lazor clean up a bit...i see at times tannehill finish his drop and for whatever reason he still will take 2 more steps back making him more susceptible to the wide speed rush off the edge where the tackle wants to run the defender wide by the qb but the qb is too deep...finish your drop and step forward...then again i saw so much pressure on the qb from the outside in in 2013 i guess it becomes a little bit of a habit to naturally want to step further away than shorten the distance to the pressure and the contact

 

[Awsi Dooger]

Pro Football Focus inherits players once they enter the league, and does exhaustive statistical analysis. That's fine. Their numbers are impressive. In their related articles and analysis I think they miss the big picture quite often. For example, for Tannehill to boom into a great player he's going to have to overcome his atypical background. IMO, it's very foolish to project a severe upward tilt to a player who didn't start a season opener at quarterback in college until beyond his 23rd birthday, and who has never been great at any level. His yards per attempt the past 4 seasons are 7.0, 7.1, 6.8, 6.7. It's a significant sample size with no hint of brilliance. At some point that's difficult to ignore, or to happily adjust.

I would have far less problem projecting Tannehill to special status if he were terrific in college, let's say 8.0 or nearby. That's hardly an impossible hurdle. Every year in college football roughly 25 teams manage 8 yards per attempt or above.

I did great with California Chrome in the Derby and Preakness. There was no way I would have backed him in the Belmont. His pedigree didn't suggest a mile and a half, and the fact that he wasn't special as a 2 year old hinted that he wasn't Triple Crown caliber. All the legends like Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed were dominant at 2. The folks at Pro Football Focus would likely ignore those type of variables and strictly look at basic stuff like caliber of opponents.

Of course, I could be way off on Tannehill. Let's hope so. I always try to locate the path that will be correct more often than not, with as few variables and required research as possible. It's never designed to connect at 100%.

 

[KTOWNFINFAN]

Pro Football Focus inherits players once they enter the league, and does exhaustive statistical analysis. That's fine. Their numbers are impressive. In their related articles and analysis I think they miss the big picture quite often. For example, for Tannehill to boom into a great player he's going to have to overcome his atypical background. IMO, it's very foolish to project a severe upward tilt to a player who didn't start a season opener at quarterback in college until beyond his 23rd birthday, and who has never been great at any level. His yards per attempt the past 4 seasons are 7.0, 7.1, 6.8, 6.7. It's a significant sample size with no hint of brilliance. At some point that's difficult to ignore, or to happily adjust.

I would have far less problem projecting Tannehill to special status if he were terrific in college, let's say 8.0 or nearby. That's hardly an impossible hurdle. Every year in college football roughly 25 teams manage 8 yards per attempt or above.

I did great with California Chrome in the Derby and Preakness. There was no way I would have backed him in the Belmont. His pedigree didn't suggest a mile and a half, and the fact that he wasn't special as a 2 year old hinted that he wasn't Triple Crown caliber. All the legends like Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed were dominant at 2. The folks at Pro Football Focus would likely ignore those type of variables and strictly look at basic stuff like caliber of opponents.

Of course, I could be way off on Tannehill. Let's hope so. I always try to locate the path that will be correct more often than not, with as few variables and required research as possible. It's never designed to connect at 100%.

That is an interesting take. Never really thought of it on those terms, I can't think of a QB that wasn't a star at college, nor in his first 2 years in the pros that turned into a superstar. But I can think of a few off the top of my head that WERE stars in college, and had great rookie years and then turned out to be nothing, Vince Young, RG3 ?? So I'm not sure those variables are relevant. We do know there are many QBs that are not ready the first couple years that turn out to be great, and there are a few that had very average college careers and didn't blossom until they got into the pros, like Kurt Warner.

You are right that it would be rare for this to happen but Ryan comes from a rare situation. Not many QBs were forced to play WR for their first couple of years. We know Ryan was going to be raw with a lot to learn and a fairly high ceiling. He has learned faster than I thought he would and his ceiling for the most part is still intact. But I do think this is a make or break year for him. That is why I think it is so important to bring in another OG or two, to upgrade the OL enough to really see what we have in him with no excuses. If he comes out and turns into the player we all think/hope he can then we have our franchise QB, if not can the whole staff and plan on starting over once again.

 

[twistedjay]

That is an interesting take. Never really thought of it on those terms, I can't think of a QB that wasn't a star at college, nor in his first 2 years in the pros that turned into a superstar.

That Brady guy turned put alright. I believe you already mentioned Kurt Warner. Tony Romo. That's the first three names to come to mind.

Edit: not sure he was ever a superstar, but Rich Gannon had a few terrific years in Oakland late in his career.

 

[roy_miami]

That is an interesting take. Never really thought of it on those terms, I can't think of a QB that wasn't a star at college, nor in his first 2 years in the pros that turned into a superstar. But I can think of a few off the top of my head that WERE stars in college, and had great rookie years and then turned out to be nothing, Vince Young, RG3 ?? So I'm not sure those variables are relevant.
.

I don't follow college ball so I don't really know who wins what but RGIII had some very good passer rating stats, just below Luck for an average and just below Russell Wilson their senior seasons. In fact they both put up two of the highest single season passer ratings of all time their senior seasons and followed that up with the two best rookie seasons in the history of the NFL, is that a coincidence?

Tannehill's average passer rating his final 2 seasons is lower than almost everybody that came out the last 3 years, in fact, from the QBs I've looked at, and I think I've looked at most of them, Tannehill is second lowest only to Logan Thomas.

I'm sure there is plenty of precedence for QBs turning that around and becoming great in the NFL so no need to look that up, I know Matt Ryan had a pathetic college passer rating for example, but like Awsi says, a betting man wouldn't like those numbers.

You are right that it would be rare for this to happen but Ryan comes from a rare situation. Not many QBs were forced to play WR for their first couple of years. We know Ryan was going to be raw with a lot to learn and a fairly high ceiling. He has learned faster than I thought he would and his ceiling for the most part is still intact. But I do think this is a make or break year for him. That is why I think it is so important to bring in another OG or two, to upgrade the OL enough to really see what we have in him with no excuses. If he comes out and turns into the player we all think/hope he can then we have our franchise QB, if not can the whole staff and plan on starting over once again

If you are admitting he's learned faster than you expected and admit the o-line is terrible then why do you have such a hate on for Joe Philbin? One of Philbin's major responsibilities is getting Tannehill up to speed, which would have probably been even further along with even a decent o-line.