The Talent Surrounding Ryan Tannehill: Part II

You set the terms of question when you accused a fellow poster of being dense because he did not "understand". Certainly if you can make that claim, there would have to be something you could provide us to help reach the quantification I requested, and we are all seeking.

I'm also not sure what past posts of anyone really have to do with the topic being discussed? Either way, there was absolutely nothing vague the answer you're referencing. In fact, it was more precise than most answers you would receive to that question.

 

The problems lies in that they assume that every td is the result of a perfectly throw ball in the end zone, when in fact Tds passes come from many different scenarios, some which the qb has zero effect over.

 

Well, if its a pass thrown by the QB then he can't have zero effect, but more or less yes you're right.

 

I meant he has zero effect after the ball is throw.

 

And what Fin is saying is that WR performance has a direct effect on QBR. And he is 100% correct.

QBR=(a+b+c+d)/.06

a=(((comp/att)*100)-30)/20
b=((TD/att)*100)/5
c=(9.5-((int/att)*100)/4
d=((yards/att)-3)/4

A-D can't be greater than 2.375 or less than zero

So...

Ryan Tannehill

262-449 3059 12 12

a (((262/449)*100)-30)/20=1.417
b ((12/449)*100)/5=.5345
c ((9.5-(12/449)*100)/4=1.707
d (3059/449)-3)/4= .9532

(1.417+.5345+1.707+.9532)/.06= 76.86

Add 30 completions to that, and see what happens.

(1.751+.5345+1.707+.9532)/.06=82.43

Almost a 6 point swing in QBR by having 2 zero yard completions more per game.

EDIT: formula came from

http://www.primecomputing.com/formula.htm

 

Which is exactly why you should stop telling people who's opinion is that RT would of put up significantly better numbers had he had better talent surrounding him that they are wrong. You cant prove that from your charts. Its your smug little arrogant opinion and nothing more. Your data collection is incomplete. What was the term stringer used earlier (cant recall right now) but its the exact problem you have in that there is too great of a variance for margin of error.

All you hard work that you want everyone to pat you on the back for and stroke your fragile ego praising was a waste of time and effort. Its useless in proving what you are so desperate to convince everyone of. You have not even done enough legwork to get to 1st base in proving your theroy.

 

Yes, actually now that you mention it, this is a topic that can actually likely bring about new insights and understanding.

Sure, but theres a hell of a lot more that goes into yards after the catch than breaking tackles? What about when a player runs wide open? What about when the QB moves a defender before throwing the ball, and leaving the receiver with an easier path? You could make the argument that hitting a WR in stride is the most important factor in YAC. There are certainly good arguments on both sides. Maybe this calls for objective research???

 

By all means, if you can actually find a post where I said that?

Really, can you post a link to a post for us?????? I would hate for anyone to be mis-informed by your statement.

 

Just to be clear, you are making posts that are entirely off-topic and derailing a thread.

 

You do realize I said:

That means I'm not saying the QB has no effect.

As for the rest of your post, well, golly I sure hope a fish doesn't spontaneously grow from your head. i mean we can't know anything at this point without the requisite research and I seriously doubt an independent study has ever been done on the possibility of fish growing out of someone's head.

 

You're right, I forgot to add my summation. Sorry about that. i'll try again.



Since the Dolphins play better in the heat (historically), it behooves us not to get better WRs, but to ensure there are less pirates, thereby increasing the heat and Tannehill's ability to win games and perform better, which will in turn, prove Shou correct in that surrounding talent isn't necessary.

 

well up to this point all qb touchdowns have been largely attributed almost entirely to the qb in order to pursue the theory the the qb rating is a direct indicator of how good a qb is. There is nothing that affects qb rating as much as Tds do.

 

My answer of "enough to make a difference" was quite fine, as there are plenty of receivers who fit into that category. Posters have stated repeatedly how QBR is impacted by what the receiver does after the catch or with the ball in the air. I can show Victor Cruz's 2011 highlight film, add up all the "extra" yards, "extra" receptions, and "extra" TDs he creates, and show how much higher these plays increase passer rating compared to had they not occurred..... but that'd be like spending time conducting a science experiment proving gravity exists when all I'd need to do is let go of an object in my hand in open space.


Would you like to argue this point using the following 99 yard Victor Cruz TD?

[video=youtube;Ek5Zyzn3Avw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek5Zyzn3Avw[/video]

First listen to what the announcer says on this 3rd & 10 play? "You gotta get some positive yards here just so you can punt the ball from a normal distance".

Not only does Cruz get open to convert the first but he breaks it an extra 89 yards for a game-changing TD to give NYG a 10-7 lead just before halftime.
Without Cruz's play, Eli's QBR is 28 points lower for the game despite Eli not doing anything differently. That's just one of many Cruz examples. Now, conversely, how many 28 points bumps in QBR has Tannehill NOT seen due to Bess & Hartline NOT making those types of plays? If you compare Cruz to Hartline & Bess combined, you come up with my original "enough to make a difference" answer.

 

That would be all well and good if this was an unbiased study. But you literally cobbled together unrelated stats to prove an unrelated point that you already held.

 

When did I said otherwise? At this point, all we know is that you feel YAC is based "mostly" on WRs ability. I certainly think thats a valid theory. I went as far as to suggest it to be a worthy topic of additional research. Maybe one day you won't have to say "mostly", and instead you could quantify it? Learning can be fun.


You are in a football forum arguing against a theory in the OP. To support your argument, you suggest that passer rating is significantly influenced by players other than the QB. After you are questioned as to how you came to the conclusion that YAC are influenced by the receiver more than the QB, you resort to this:

 

LOL. Paraphrasing: "Miami Dolphins surrounding cast is no different than New England & Atlanta's b/c when each team's offensive passer rating increases they all similarly score more points." yeah, no shoot Sherlock. What do you expect to happen when a passing offense has a better than normal game, that they're more likely to score equal or less points?

Why don't you tell us something useful and show us how many times we directly scored MORE points due to Bess & Hartline making a great play and then compare that to how many times the same happened in Atlanta with Julio & Roddy. Thanks in advance.

 

This is ridiculous.

The QB has already thrown the ball. His job is done. Not everything needs a statistical analysis, Stringer and it is borderline trolling for you to act as such.

 

Right, and everything done before he threw the ball has an affect on what happens after the ball is caught?

 

I already explained that with this:
Any wr stat is effected by the qb and vice versus. Just as you have stated. He's using one stat, one particular view via rate, where the wr would have an effect. Then using that same view to compare to others. Is it all telling, no. But again, I don't think that's been stated here.

Really not sure anymore what it is you are arguing.

 

.... said the guy trying to convince everyone Miami's surrounding cast is as good as Atlanta & New England's.

 

I think that its clear based ion the last two posts by you and Stringer (a mod) that there is a clear attempt to turn this place into Finheaven.

I mean when a mod says how can we know a WR does most of the work in your average YAC situation, because someone here didn't do a statistical analysis, and you, the king of the bass ackwards statistical analysis are accusing me of nonsense, there is simply no other conclusion to come to.

Your thesis has been ripped apart on every level. Yet you still act like no one has given you a single fact to counter facts you literally made up. Its ridiculous.

 

Sure, who argued that? No one.

That doesn't mean the WR doesn't do most of the work after the ball is thrown in that situation. And we don't need an effing chart to prove that.

 

I'm not sure what you are arguing.

He used those stats to say WR talent is essentially meaningless. If you want to argue that he's right, then make sense, because his stats and correlations don't.

 

Argue what point? I believe my point is that you can't actually quantify how much of an affect Victor Cruz has as a football player? If you want to argue that, there is a very easy way to do so?

This is exactly what we're trying to find out, and surely would be able to do so much sooner if we actually focused on the discussion at hand instead of videos of Victor Cruz?

 

Rob Gronkowski's HOF acceptance speech: "I'd like to thank Tom Brady for giving me the ability and opportunity to make my career possible, b/c without him I'd be just another guy."

 

He understands it just fine, because your exact words in the damn OP were:

 

Because I want some answers.

 

Clearly.

 

I certainly am not sure that a WR is responsible for 51%-99% of YAC. You very well could be right though.