Quick Way to Assess Ryan Tannehill Statistically | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Quick Way to Assess Ryan Tannehill Statistically

Here are 2 prominent QBs and their stats from 2002. Early in their careers. Comparable to Tannehill in their development.

RK PLAYER TEAM COMP ATT PCT YDS YDS/A LONG TD INT SACK RATE YDS/G

25 Tom Brady, QB NE 373 601 62.1 3,764 6.26 49 28 14 31 85.7 235
26 Drew Brees, QB SD 320 526 60.8 3,284 6.24 52 17 16 24 76.9 205

Pitiful YPA. If I was Shouwrong in 2002, I'd see those numbers and be pounding my fist about how these QBs are ****. They are below average. They need to be benched and replaced.

Why don't you all click this link and take a look at who was in the upper echelon of the NFL statistics-wise.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/yardsPerPassAttempt/year/2002

Jay Fiedler has almost 3/4 of a yard MORE per completion. Man, good thing we went with him instead of drafting Brady. That would have been a terrible ****ing mistake.

The point is stats tell you some stuff. But nothing in that line of numbers up there would have predicted that Brady would go on to have one of the most prolific careers of any QB. As would Brees, though he would have to change teams first. But anyone watching those guys saw the talent and watched as they learned and bloomed into what they are now in 2013. This is exactly what people are getting on Shouwrong about...

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:18 PM ----------
shouright said:
"If you can't attack the evidence, attack the witness; if you can't attack the witness, bang on the table." ;)
Click to expand...

"If you get called out on your bull****, just post retard quotes in an attempt to look witty."
 
Locke said:
The point is stats tell you some stuff. But nothing in that line of numbers up there would have predicted that Brady would go on to have one of the most prolific careers of any QB. As would Brees, though he would have to change teams first. But anyone watching those guys saw the talent and watched as they learned and bloomed into what they are now in 2013. This is exactly what people are getting on Shouwrong about...
Click to expand...
Funny, because the only two predictive (as opposed to descriptive) analyses I've ever done regarding Tannehill-related variables are the following:

http://www.finheaven.com/showthread...ill-Going-to-Become-a-Franchise-QB&highlight=

http://www.finheaven.com/showthread...g-to-Become-a-Franchise-QB-Part-II&highlight=

...and both were favorable to Tannehill.

Every other analysis I've done regarding Tannehill has been descriptive (i.e., current performance), not predictive (i.e., future performance). :)
 
Locke said:
Here are 2 prominent QBs and their stats from 2002. Early in their careers. Comparable to Tannehill in their development.

RK PLAYER TEAM COMP ATT PCT YDS YDS/A LONG TD INT SACK RATE YDS/G

25 Tom Brady, QB NE 373 601 62.1 3,764 6.26 49 28 14 31 85.7 235
26 Drew Brees, QB SD 320 526 60.8 3,284 6.24 52 17 16 24 76.9 205

Pitiful YPA. If I was Shouwrong in 2002, I'd see those numbers and be pounding my fist about how these QBs are ****. They are below average. They need to be benched and replaced.

Why don't you all click this link and take a look at who was in the upper echelon of the NFL statistics-wise.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/yardsPerPassAttempt/year/2002

Jay Fiedler has almost 3/4 of a yard MORE per completion. Man, good thing we went with him instead of drafting Brady. That would have been a terrible ****ing mistake.

The point is stats tell you some stuff. But nothing in that line of numbers up there would have predicted that Brady would go on to have one of the most prolific careers of any QB. As would Brees, though he would have to change teams first. But anyone watching those guys saw the talent and watched as they learned and bloomed into what they are now in 2013. This is exactly what people are getting on Shouwrong about...

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:18 PM ----------



"If you get called out on your bull****, just post retard quotes in an attempt to look witty."
Click to expand...

thank you for this...everything he does is flawed...
 
shouright said:
That would make some sense if the players we consider to be the best of all time individually didn't also generally have the best stats of all time.
Click to expand...

Your argument is broken. You may have a handle on statistics but you are seriously lacking when it comes to logic. Just because the greats often have the best stats, that doesn't mean lesser stats equals lesser players. The greats have great stats when they are both great AND are in good situations. Of course the greats give a team much more leeway for surrounding talent but even they are not immune to it. How else do you explain this:

2006 Brady - 6.84 Yds/Att & 24 TDs
2007 Brady - 8.31 Yds/Att & 50 TDs

I can explain it easily.

2006:
Reche Caldwell 61 760 12.5 4
Ben Watson 49 643 13.1 3
Troy Brown 43 384 8.9 4


2007:
Wes Welker 112 1175 10.5 8
Randy Moss 98 1493 15.2 23
Kevin Faulk 47 383 8.1 1
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
Your argument is broken. You may have a handle on statistics but you are seriously lacking when it comes to logic. Just because the greats often have the best stats, that doesn't mean lesser stats equals lesser players. The greats have great stats when they are both great AND are in good situations. Of course the greats give a team much more leeway for surrounding talent but even they are not immune to it. How else do you explain this:

2006 Brady - 6.84 Yds/Att & 24 TDs
2007 Brady - 8.31 Yds/Att & 50 TDs

I can explain it easily.

2006:
Reche Caldwell 61 760 12.5 4
Ben Watson 49 643 13.1 3
Troy Brown 43 384 8.9 4


2007:
Wes Welker 112 1175 10.5 8
Randy Moss 98 1493 15.2 23
Kevin Faulk 47 383 8.1 1
Click to expand...
How do you know you're correct?
 
shouright said:
How do you know you're correct?
Click to expand...

I watch football and use an understanding of the game, logic, and common sense. You, OTOH, have shrugged your shoulders over this very question in the past. It is much more likely that the team was better and more condusive to the success via the pass than Brady being wildly inconsistent from one year to the next.

But, please go on being perplexed....
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
I watch football and use an understanding of the game, logic, and common sense. You, OTOH, have shrugged your shoulders over this very question in the past. It is much more likely that the team was better and more condusive to the success via the pass than Brady being wildly inconsistent from one year to the next.
Click to expand...
Well, there's actually a way to analyze that statistically and potentially support your subjective impression. :)
 
hooshoops said:
when you have "yes" to the franchise qb question with guys like christian ponder, josh freeman, and andy dalton absolutely it is flawed...
Click to expand...
Well let's pick the QBs you believe are franchise, and I'll re-do the analysis and see whether the results change. :up:
 
shouright said:
Well, there's actually a way to analyze that statistically and potentially support your subjective impression. :)
Click to expand...

No there isn't. Not in a "numbers bubble" there isn't. Sometimes you have to stop looking at the weather stats and simulations and stick your head out of the window. I'm serious. You would argue that it isn't raining because rain today isn't likely and you would do it while getting drenched in the rain!
 
shouright said:
...is at this link:

http://www.pro-football-reference.c...pos_is_db=Y&draft_pos_is_k=Y&draft_pos_is_p=Y

The columns to the far right under the heading "Advanced Passing" provide standardized measures of Tannehill's play with regard to many of the passing game variables most strongly correlated with winning. 100 is the average value for each of those variables, with a standard deviation of 15, and the columns can be sorted in ascending or descending order by clicking on the column header once or twice.

The explanation for the standardization of the values is on this page:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/about/glossary.htm
Click to expand...

i won't click on that link, does it also say that good players around the QB don't matter...?..still the laughing stock at phins.com.......just go away and don't waste our time....you already did it at phins.com, why not here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom