The problem with that finding, however -- and I've alluded to it throughout the thread in different ways -- is that we're looking at Tannehill in isolation with regard to the health of his offensive line, rather than comparing him to the other QBs in the league in terms of the health or quality of their offensive lines.
Seems to me like comparing Tannehill's performance is a short period of time with and without starters on the OL is the most direct way to judge the impact. A meaningful number of games over a relatively short time with a small number of changing variables. I really think you are over thinking this. There is a 15 point increase in his QB rating simply by having a mediocre OL instead of the league's worst. It has happened in three consecutive seasons. Provide adequate protection and he is a 100+ QB rating QB. If that is not good enough for you, we have nothing to discuss. Frankly, I don't care that Aaron Rodgers or Brady or Brees or Manning would have a QB rating of 105 or 110 or 1,000,000 under the same circumstances. They are not the Dolphins QB. We are not likely to find an elite QB hiding under a rock or even in the draft.
The sensible thing to do is to fix the biggest weaknesses on the team and go win games. In recent years, the biggest weaknesses were coaching and OL. It looks like we have fixed the coaching and have a chance at being better on the OL. Next is defense. Or would you prefer to be like the 8-8 Saints for a few seasons?