Quick Way to Assess Ryan Tannehill Statistically
- Thread starter Shouright
- Start date
nyashfan
For Earth Below
Shouright,
I agreed with you that some of the sacks are on Tannehill and that Russell Wilson is ahead of Tannehill in his development.
The reason I suggested substituting league averages for the sack components that determine Tannehill's ranking was to assess where Tannehill would be if he were the beneficiary of better OL play and play calling. These traits will improve as part of his natural development and experience and hopefully a new OC. Normalizing his sack statistics would better isolate his skill as a passer, which is more a function of his innate talent as opposed to his development.
Put another way, if his current ranking reflected the fact that he was among the least pressured and least sacked QB's in the league, I'd be crapping in my pants.
I agreed with you that some of the sacks are on Tannehill and that Russell Wilson is ahead of Tannehill in his development.
The reason I suggested substituting league averages for the sack components that determine Tannehill's ranking was to assess where Tannehill would be if he were the beneficiary of better OL play and play calling. These traits will improve as part of his natural development and experience and hopefully a new OC. Normalizing his sack statistics would better isolate his skill as a passer, which is more a function of his innate talent as opposed to his development.
Put another way, if his current ranking reflected the fact that he was among the least pressured and least sacked QB's in the league, I'd be crapping in my pants.
For that I would just use YPA or adjusted YPA, since those stats don't incorporate sacks or sack yards.
I admittedly didn't read through the thread, just clicked straight through to the link... in it, it shows Kaepernick and Bradford among the top at that statistic and it has Brady listed as 12th best.
So tell me how this is supposed to tell us anything? Took me less than 10 seconds to realize this is not a good measurement. You have made some good points about Tannehill - this wasn't one of them.
So tell me how this is supposed to tell us anything? Took me less than 10 seconds to realize this is not a good measurement. You have made some good points about Tannehill - this wasn't one of them.
What point was I making?
In your first post you were insinuating where Tannehill falls among quarterbacks based on that statistic you had aligned the quarterbacks in. That statistic sucked for reasons I mentioned above.
I really agree with some of your points that the guy definitely needs to improve and definitely needs to throw the ball less, but I'm pretty shocked that you cannot admit that part of the problem is coaching, an ineffective running game, and piss poor play selection. Tannehill is being asked to carry this team and he is not there yet, but to me, you seem to insinuate he has done nothing to show you that he even has the potential to grow and that really makes me think twice about how much to value your opinion.
Some posters are clueless to what they see on the field, just babbling about what problems that aren't really there. I think you understand the game, but you mostly just post about stats... yes, stats are excellent, and a good way to research what you're seeing, but you seemingly don't take into account little things about the game to SUPPLEMENT your statistics (one tiny example - the effectiveness of using receivers in motion and how we never do it). I kind of get the feeling that you're a bit a biased toward the "Tannehill haters"... wish we had more people who sat in the middle and could just call it like it is - and what it is, is poor coaching from Philbin and Sherman and everything else stems from this.
I really agree with some of your points that the guy definitely needs to improve and definitely needs to throw the ball less, but I'm pretty shocked that you cannot admit that part of the problem is coaching, an ineffective running game, and piss poor play selection. Tannehill is being asked to carry this team and he is not there yet, but to me, you seem to insinuate he has done nothing to show you that he even has the potential to grow and that really makes me think twice about how much to value your opinion.
Some posters are clueless to what they see on the field, just babbling about what problems that aren't really there. I think you understand the game, but you mostly just post about stats... yes, stats are excellent, and a good way to research what you're seeing, but you seemingly don't take into account little things about the game to SUPPLEMENT your statistics (one tiny example - the effectiveness of using receivers in motion and how we never do it). I kind of get the feeling that you're a bit a biased toward the "Tannehill haters"... wish we had more people who sat in the middle and could just call it like it is - and what it is, is poor coaching from Philbin and Sherman and everything else stems from this.
The offensive and defensive differential with regard to that statistic (adjusted net yards per pass attempt) is very strongly correlated with winning and with very high-level achievement in the NFL:
http://nflminds.blogspot.com/2011/06/adjusted-net-yards-per-passing-attempt_20.html
I operate on the basis of what I can support with objective evidence. While I agree that the team would likely be winning more if it was running the ball more, there is no objective evidence that I'm aware of to support the notion that Tannehill would be playing significantly better, individually, if the team was running the ball more. If that's your personal opinion, however, we can sure agree to disagree about that. :up:
vt_dolfan
E tū iho nei, tū iho nei, hī!
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2004
- Messages
- 2,109
- Reaction score
- 4
- Age
- 53
Shou..where I believe you error..is that you rely solely on statistics and numbers to draw your conclusions. I don't believe football is a sport in which you can do this. I believe stats do have a place , however using just stats is far from objective. For one...what if you were to overlay offensive line statistics..with Qb statistics. Is there any corelation? One statistic you never use...is..what kind of impact having a 100 yard rusher does for a Qbs stats game to game. See what I mean? Football is much more a game where there are multiple influences on any given play. Look back at Archie Manning's statistics...and try to use that to paint an accurate picture. Baseball you can use stats to make the arguments you do. I think most people appreciate your threads...but...you rely on just stats...and that is where you loose your audience.
For example...does the statistic that you have one of the highest number of "no thanks" awards...mean you are a horrible poster?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
For example...does the statistic that you have one of the highest number of "no thanks" awards...mean you are a horrible poster?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
It is supposed to tell you something about the efficiency of the passing offense they are running. Nothing more. There are many ways to run an efficient passing offense. Some rely on greatness at the QB position, some do not. It cannot be denied that the actions of the QB are only a part of the equation. That is why no stat can be the be all, end all measure of an individual, especially over a relatively short time frame. NOBODY should think that Brady is the 12th best QB. But, the Pats have had the 12th most efficient passing offense. Every analyst that has addressed the Patriots this year has said the same thing. They have been hampered by the loss of Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez and by the rookie WRs getting used to the game. But guess what? They are improving as an offense and will likely continue to do so.
The Fins have struggled with consistency this year and have not looked smooth or efficient on offense at times. Part of that is negative runs. Part is sacks. Part is ineffective play calling. Part is receivers not getting open or not adjusting properly. Part is dropped passes. And part is poor plays by the QB. I HAVE NEVER SEEN A STAT THAT CAN SHOW HOW MUCH CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO EACH OF THE PARTS.
And I've never seen the forum reach a consensus regarding that, either, and sometimes the forum is wrong even when it does reach a consensus, and so in the presence of stats that are strongly correlated with consensus perceptions of individual ability, I'll go with the stats until it's proven otherwise. They may be wrong at times, but they have the least chance of being wrong overall.
What we're debating here is an epistemology of the Miami Dolphins. How do we know what we know about the team? I don't think there is any reliable way of knowing anything about the Miami Dolphins that rests on the subjective perceptions of people who are deeply emotionally invested in the team, myself included. This is why it's important to check and balance our perceptions with objective evidence, and be ready to relinquish them if they aren't supported.
I do this all the time. For example, I sure as hell thought Tannehill would play better individually if more of the offense was devoted to the running game, but that isn't supported by a correlation between Tannehill's performance and running game variables week to week this season, and so I relinquished that (tentative) belief just as soon as I observed the weakness of the correlation.
Those sorts of statistical analyses can be easily done, and I've done them aplenty.
There is a whole world out there on this, folks. Take a look here:
http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jqas
And that's just one example.
vt_dolfan
E tū iho nei, tū iho nei, hī!
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2004
- Messages
- 2,109
- Reaction score
- 4
- Age
- 53
Right...
But again....personally, I find your posts when you dont use statistical analysis good reads. Maybe just use some....statistical and some analytical thoughts.
Or at the very least...try and explain what your talking about in real world words. Like..you can use your statistics.....but then explain them in a non mathamatical way after words...as to why you believe they are important.
But again....personally, I find your posts when you dont use statistical analysis good reads. Maybe just use some....statistical and some analytical thoughts.
Or at the very least...try and explain what your talking about in real world words. Like..you can use your statistics.....but then explain them in a non mathamatical way after words...as to why you believe they are important.
I'm happy to answer questions about those things as they arise. :up:
Phinatic8u
Club Member
The only reason Shouright isn't liked is that WPA thread for Bess, and the fact that stats back up that Tannehill, at his current state, is about average.
People also think he hates Tannehill, but he's said numerous times he has high hopes for him BECAUSE he's average right now.
If people took the time to read and stop getting defensive you'd realize what he's talking about.
People also think he hates Tannehill, but he's said numerous times he has high hopes for him BECAUSE he's average right now.
If people took the time to read and stop getting defensive you'd realize what he's talking about.
And that was dramatically misunderstood. The point was simply that Davone Bess made clutch plays as measured by WPA, nothing more, and I said as much repeatedly throughout the thread. :up: