Tyreek: "People Are Going To Take Their Words Back On Tua"

[The Beatles]

⁷

Serious question.

QB A drops back 40 times to pass. He is sacked 10 times, and given 30 "clean pockets"

QB B drops back 40 times. Gets sacked 1 time, pressured 19 with only 20 "Clean pockets"

Which line performed better? Would a QB rather have more clean pockets and less pressures or less clean pockets, more pressures but less sacks?

A side step can be the diferrence between a sack or no sack.

A step up can be the diferrence between a sack and no sack.

A side step or step up is NOT the diferrence between a pressure or no pressure.

Your focus on solely sacks makes your comparisons of O line play or success truly flawed.

You must have missed my previous post where I listed numerous other stats such as pass blocking win rate, time to throw, etc.

 

[Kamelion4291]

Just a reminder. The Bengals O-line tied an NFL RECORD for most amount of sacks given up in a playoff game.

And they won the game.

They gave up more sacks in that 1 game than Miami's o-line had given up in any 2 games COMBINED to any one quarterback last season. That's pretty wild.

Not sure how we can say that you arent going to get within one game of a championship with a line as bad as the Dolphins, when the Bengals went to the Super Bowl with a line that gave up more sacks in 1 game than the Dolphins did in any 2 games combined.

Joe Burrow ties NFL record for most times sacked in playoff game, and rewrites history book with Bengals win

Burrow tied Warren Moon for most times sacked in a playoff game

www.cbssports.com

Sacks aren't pressures and they're not equal. If you have the best offensive line in the NFL and your QB holds the ball for 7 seconds every snap, you're going to give up a lot of sacks.

The Bengals would routinely send all of their players out on routes aside from maybe the RB staying in sometimes and Burrow would also hold the ball too long on occasion. It's why they would have a ton of big plays because when the line DID hold up, someone was open down the field because their pass catchers as a collective were the best in the entire league.

The Dolphins didn't give up a ton of sacks because their ENTIRE offense was designed to get the ball out of the QB's hands as quick as possible to literally avoid the inevitable sack and Tua was really good at avoiding them anyway. But like I said, we gave up ~25% MORE pressures than the 2nd worst team in the NFL... which by the way wasn't the Bengals.

 

[Kamelion4291]

Is that any different than you saying; "They made the Super Bowl and therefore their line MUST be better" (which is the definition of a logical fallacy by the way)



Yes, 0.8 seconds is enough of a difference to matter.

But what about the fact that Brady had the exact same time to throw (2.5 seconds) as Tua, and the Bucs won the SB last year and playoffs this past year? Rodgers too.

I get that fans want to defend defend defend - Trust me, I did it plenty with Losman, Edwards, Manuel, Fitzpatrick, etc ... but there are plenty of teams who make noise with bad o-lines. And the Bengals were as close to horrible as you can get and they still went to the SB.

Maybe they weren't as bad as Miami's, but they were not far off. The fact that they tied a 60 year old NFL RECORD for sacks given up in a playoff game should tell you something. Or it wont, because youre a fan. Which is fine too because I have been there and done that and understand it.

Ok, bear with me here...

Since Burrow got sacked a million times and won a playoff game, and Mahomes without his tackles in the Super Bowl ran for his life constantly and couldn't do anything at all, would you say then that Burrow is a better QB than Mahomes?

 

[The Beatles]

Ok, bear with me here...

Since Burrow got sacked a million times and won a playoff game, and Mahomes without his tackles in the Super Bowl ran for his life constantly and couldn't do anything at all, would you say then that Burrow is a better QB than Mahomes?

No I would say those are 2 excellent examples of teams going very very very far with bad o-lines.

Thank you for reminding me of how bad KC’s line was in the 2020 SB.

 

[The Beatles]

Sacks aren't pressures and they're not equal. If you have the best offensive line in the NFL and your QB holds the ball for 7 seconds every snap, you're going to give up a lot of sacks.

In that scenario you made up, sure.

But in real life, Tua had 2.5 seconds to throw last year and Burrow had 2.6 seconds.

 

[Kamelion4291]

In that scenario you made up, sure.

But in real life, Tua had 2.5 seconds to throw last year and Burrow had 2.6 seconds.

And again... I feel like you're ignoring this point and it's a rather large one... the Bengals would send everybody out on routes. There were many, many times they were blocking with just 5 offensive lineman and that's it. The Dolphins on the other hand routinely had to hold in 6 or sometimes 7 to block. Feel free to watch the tape.

I hope you realize how big of a deal that is for the effectiveness of an offense and how saying "well Tua had 2.5 seconds to throw and Burrow had 2.68" as if they were blocking using the same number of people on every snap.

 

[Kamelion4291]

No I would say those are 2 excellent examples of teams going very very very far with bad o-lines.

Thank you for reminding me of how bad KC’s line was in the 2020 SB.

You mean the line that had Pro Bowl tackles on it where both got injured for the Super Bowl? That bad line?

I'm wondering if you even watch other teams than the Bills play football at this point.

 

[The Beatles]

And again... I feel like you're ignoring this point and it's a rather large one... the Bengals would send everybody out on routes. There were many, many times they were blocking with just 5 offensive lineman and that's it. The Dolphins on the other hand routinely had to hold in 6 or sometimes 7 to block. Feel free to watch the tape.

I hope you realize how big of a deal that is for the effectiveness of an offense and how saying "well Tua had 2.5 seconds to throw and Burrow had 2.68" as if they were blocking using the same number of people on every snap.

Sigh.

 

[NBP81]

The only real meaningful categories when it comes right down to it is yards per, and TDs per. Take a look at SB winning QBs over the last decade or two. You will see that a very high percentage of them were in the top tier for those two items. The other stats like comp %, QB rating, etc are good indicators/barometers, but points on the board is really what ultimately matters.

YPA is by far the most useful one simply because of sample size, you get a data point every single pass attempt... TD% you'll expect a data point every 15-25 pass attempts and INT% 30-100 pass attempts... And every single one of them have some sets of contexts that need to be accounted for... Once you start combining them for stats like rating or QBR, the sample size needed for them to be reliable goes up a big notch.

QBR after they've changed how it is made up, has greatly improved, but accounts for so many variables that I wouldnt even use it for comparisons under 4-5 seasons of data.

 

[utahphinsfan]

NFL Live host just said she’s friends with Tua and has known him for years and she knows for a fact that Tua is uncomfortable with the attention that Tyreek is putting on him. She says Tua is quiet and humble and doesn’t like all these comments from Tyreek.

This is probably 621% true

 

[utahphinsfan]

Just count the eggs, then sell the babies that hatch - LOL

To KFC? /s

 

[fin007]

⁷

Serious question.

QB A drops back 40 times to pass. He is sacked 10 times, and given 30 "clean pockets"

QB B drops back 40 times. Gets sacked 1 time, pressured 19 with only 20 "Clean pockets"

Which line performed better? Would a QB rather have more clean pockets and less pressures or less clean pockets, more pressures but less sacks?

A side step can be the diferrence between a sack or no sack.

A step up can be the diferrence between a sack and no sack.

A side step or step up is NOT the diferrence between a pressure or no pressure.

Your focus on solely sacks makes your comparisons of O line play or success truly flawed.

And infantile.

 

[GRYPHONK]

You must have missed my previous post where I listed numerous other stats such as pass blocking win rate, time to throw, etc.

No.. GRYPHONK didn't miss iI. It just doesn't help your case.

Context is important.

For instance.

2.6 secs to throw
2.5 secs to throw

However, the Bengals did not utilize 6 or 7 blockers as much as Miami needed to. When you take into account the glaring diferrence of 6 or 7 blockers needed for Tua to get 2.5 ecs. Than compare it to the 5 standard blockers Burrow needed to get 2.6 secs.

Simply put, on average, it took 6 blockers to afford .1 second less for Tua than 5 blockers for Burrow.



So again....context.... is it still clear to claim the O lines were similar or the Bengals were equal to Miamis when you add context.

Additionally..... people like to use PFF for stats.

Out of 83 tackles
Liam-80th
Davis- 81st
Put in perspective, they didn't rank in the top 64 meaning Miami did not deploy a starting quality tackle all season. As a matter of fact, 18 backup or rotational tackles were better than Miamis starters.

Out of 83 guards, Jackson rated 76th. Again not even starter quality. 13 backups rated better.

3 out of our 5 starters didn't rate at starter quality. None even ranked top 10 of the backups.

Dieter? 29th put of 40. Dieter atleast rated starter quality, but he also ranked as the 4th worst starter.

Hunt? 37 out of 64
Finally we have a starter quality
But not even top tier. He was second level, didn't rank top 32.

GRYPHONK is curious.... where do you think the Bengals starters ranked? GRYPHONK doesn't know. Maybe GRYPHONK would be surprised.

But any rational, common sense observer would understand not 1 team came close to having as bad a line as the Phins.

See GRYPHONK can use stats too. Only diferrence is GRYPHONK'S stats actually supports GRYPHONK'S stance.

Also... all those cute stats you used were calculated into the overall values that GRYPHONK presented.

As a whole... you stats mean little

Carry on though

 

[Mach2]

YPA is by far the most useful one simply because of sample size, you get a data point every single pass attempt... TD% you'll expect a data point every 15-25 pass attempts and INT% 30-100 pass attempts... And every single one of them have some sets of contexts that need to be accounted for... Once you start combining them for stats like rating or QBR, the sample size needed for them to be reliable goes up a big notch.

QBR after they've changed how it is made up, has greatly improved, but accounts for so many variables that I wouldnt even use it for comparisons under 4-5 seasons of data.

Maybe, if you ignore one's ability to succeed in high pressure situation. To my knowledge that is not statistically measurable. I know you are primarily a data driven guy but whenever humans are involved there are unquantifiable, and unmeasurable aspects.

A couple examples. MJ never led the league in shooting percentage, even if you disallow centers for obvious reasons, but with the game on the line he was money at a high rate.

Joe Montana never (as far as I remember) won a passing title, and was not the highest QBR rated QB, but if you needed a score late in a pivotal game, not sure who I would take ahead of him.

My point is that there are times where intangibles trump raw statistics. I'm not even going to get into how context also matters when doing statistical analysis.

Not arguing at all, just pointing out that YPA is fine as a barometer, but a QB can have a great YPA stat, and still not get it done when it matters most. I would also offer that YPA is affected by scheme, philosophy, and circumstances. Those things are not always equal. I know you already know all of these things. Just wanted to throw it out there.

 

[Mach2]

And again... I feel like you're ignoring this point and it's a rather large one... the Bengals would send everybody out on routes. There were many, many times they were blocking with just 5 offensive lineman and that's it. The Dolphins on the other hand routinely had to hold in 6 or sometimes 7 to block. Feel free to watch the tape.

I hope you realize how big of a deal that is for the effectiveness of an offense and how saying "well Tua had 2.5 seconds to throw and Burrow had 2.68" as if they were blocking using the same number of people on every snap.

You might as well talk to a wall. The guy has no concept of how context matters in an analysis.