1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why Tannehill should be a better QB now Lazor is gone

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, Mar 27, 2016.

  1. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Is that a prediction or hope?
     
  2. dgfred

    dgfred Free Agent pickup

    642
    259
    0
    Dec 17, 2015
    N.C., USA
    Certain prediction as long as the OL is addressed, the play calling is better, and the D can stop a Midget league team occaisionally.

    Do you care to make one or just keep bashing because of past limitations?
     
  3. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    we had a new play caller a few years ago and I commented on how I didn't think it would help RT do this , this , or this better, and I was again correct. I hope I am wrong with Gase, but...
     
  4. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Uh, actually, Tannehill got better each and every year, except last year, when Lazor **** the bed, and we had massive coaching changes, and incredible amounts of dysfunction.

    But continue with the irrational hate of the guy.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  5. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Every prediction that wasn't negative in the past 11 years has mostly been wrong. I stopped making predictions after Cam Cameron. Now I just wait to see what unfolds. The way I screamed like a little girl when Camarillo caught that touchdown ... put me in a dark place after ;)

    This? This is what we've become? Cheering one win? It was our Super Bowl that year. Never again!

    After our owner's refusal to fire Ireland and then Philbin, I turn to Fantasy Football for my outlet. Still a fan who pays $1,800 a year to Directv just to watch 14 or so games (depending on national tv schedule) and visit this forum every single day ... I've become more realist than cheerleader. I question everything until they show me otherwise. I'm optimistic, but I'll temper my optimism. It has served me well. I do have a soft spot for our draft picks when it comes to filling out my fantasy rosters.
     
    Pauly, Finster and resnor like this.
  6. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Lazor is responsible for two of his best years, you are arguing, right? ;)
     
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Lazor was definitely part of 2014. However, Lazor was a huge problem last season. Of course, given that Tannehill has played four seasons, and he came out raw, no one should be surprised that years 3 and 4 were better than years 1 and 2, no matter who the offensive coordinators were.
     
  8. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You forgot Phins Law #12-A, which clearly states any progression made by a coach or player is constant, unless its Thill. For example, Lazor had one good year therefore he'll always perform well, whereas Thill always improves but he will regress. Also known as "JD's Law".
     
    resnor likes this.
  9. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    How could I forget the most important law??
     
    Fin D likes this.
  10. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    I told people Lazor was a problem before it became a hot topic. You simply can not decide to handcuff your qb with the inability to audible when you have a bad OL. Idc what his reasons were to not trust him, you can not have a productive offense that way.

    For some reason despite being jaded and made to look stupid the past 15yrs, I believe in Gase


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    cuchulainn and Pauly like this.
  11. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    It isn't necessarily and either/or situation.It could be both to some degree, I've said my reasons why I think it's more on Lazor.
     
    resnor likes this.
  12. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I have to say I tend to agree more with cbrad on this point.

    The O'line, inability to audible, etc. are staying constant whether it's a high pressure situation or not. Yes the issues you refer to make it harder for RT, but they make it harder for him all the time.

    In my mind the likely culprit for consistent lowered performance in high pressure situations is one vital cog (OC or QB) responding negatively to pressure.
     
    Finster and jdang307 like this.
  13. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Lazor had Tannehill performing better than Sherman, and better I believe than Sherman could ever had Thill perform.

    I remember about 2 years ago a poster (CK from memory) diagramming plays from Sherman's offense and demonstrating how they'd be almost impossible to successfully complete against traffic cones, let alone a real live NFL defense.

    I believe that Lazor's big failing was that other teams worked out his playcalling tendencies when he was behind, which was compounded by a bad defense that allowed other teams to jumpout to early leads.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  14. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sure, BUT, for a guy riding the "clutch" train, he'd have to agree that, if you believed in "clutch," that our oline players are not "clutch." Thereby, one should conclude, if one believes in "clutch," that they are not equally as bad in those situations.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  15. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Philosophically, if we can't define what 'high pressure' is accurately how can we use statistics to discuss it?

    The danger is that we find one stat that we like and then use that to fit our preconceived ideas and place less weight on the others. I freely admit I started my data dive because I wanted to find out if there was data that could tease out Lazor's influence in game situations. It's there in the first sentence of my first post.

    That's why I think for a concept like 'high pressure' we're better off taking a variety of different measures. Some of the later data we have discussed puts different light on things some supportive of the initial proposition, some supporting a different case and some that can be interpreted either way.
     
  16. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    They don't though.

    They are problem that is constant, that is true, but the defense they are playing against is not a constant. The defense has a different approach/gameplan when playing with a lead. They can rush fewer guys to have better coverage. Since our line is consistently bad, those fewer guys can still collapse the pocket and then the receivers are better covered making it a **** show when you factor in, the defense also knows we aren't going to run the ball.

    This is the problem with cbrad's stance. He consistently acts as if since we can't know everything we have to settle for generalities that often don't even match up with the discussion. I say the problem is X, Y, Z and he tells me I'm wrong with stats that don't factor in X, Y or Z. Then on top of that, he's making false assumptions like pass pressure is applied equally for each situation. I mean its not like the data needed is impossible to get even, its just intensive to collect, but he's acting like since we don't have it, X, Y, Z can't be the problems.

    The post you're responding too above this one is a perfect example of the overall flawed attempt at logic. Here's the nutshell version of his stance on clutch:

    Clutch exists, because people perform better in high pressure situations, yet we can't define high pressure situations because where do you draw the line between different pressure situations.
     
  17. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    You have? In that case, that word doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Maybe JD can explain it. JK... :tongue2:

    I think you misunderstood Pauly's intent. This wasn't a typical "Tannehill" thread, nor even like "95%" of the other Tannehill threads. And I recall you being openly critical of Lazor and his playcalling yourself.
     
    resnor likes this.
  18. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Leadership/confidence is a funny thing. Different people show it in different ways. A quick example is that on the sidelines Dan Campbell looks like and acts like a great leader, Bill Belichek looks and acts like an accountant with a bad ulcer. Studies have shown cops with years of experience and full confidence in their abilities to spot a liar are actually worse at finding out liars than rookie cops who know they know nothing. My experience has been you can't rely on outward shows from people you don't know very well, because everybody's different.

    But specifically for RT17 there must be something about him that doesn't fit the standard football QB way of doing things. He was the best QB at Texas A+M yet he was made to platy WR, Lazor didn't trust him to audible, plus a bunch of other little things that generally indicate that throughout his career his coaches haven't trusted him fully. Yet when given a fair opportunity* to produce on the field he's done so.

    * By fair opportunity the short version is his performance under Lazor when not trailing.
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    There are two problems here: 1) how to define "pressure" in an objective way that's relevant to the NFL, and 2) how to get around having to set a threshold for "high" pressure.

    The second problem is easy to solve if you solved part 1: you simply show data as a function of pressure, circumventing the need to define "high" or "low". There are tons of analysis methods you can use once you do that.

    The first problem can be solved but I haven't seen anyone doing football analytics do this yet (even though it's fairly easy to do once you have the data). Since ultimately the goal of a game is to win, you look at all possible sequences of plays that could lead to a win vs. a loss from the current game state (you can do this using win probabilities). The proportion that leads to a LOSS is a natural definition of "pressure", normalized to a range of 0 to 1. So if there are very few sequences from the current game state that lead to a win, the pressure is higher than if there are many ways to win.

    This would naturally give you a much higher number for "pressure" for the last 2 minutes of the game while trailing than the average 3rd down play. If I were serious about analyzing the NFL through stats it's certainly one thing I'd do, and those people that calculate all those win probabilities really should take the next step and do this (as well as a bunch of other stuff that's low hanging fruit).
     
    Pauly likes this.
  20. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Thanks,

    I see we also have two different problems that need to be looked at through 2 different data sets for this thread.
    Set 1 - pressure/high pressure.
    Set 2 - playcalling tendencies being exploited by the opposition.

    And of course set 1 affects set 2 and vice versa.
     
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The only way I can think of that would give you statistical evidence for the effectiveness or lack thereof of play-calling is to define a set of plays for each different game situation and determine the change in win probability for each. An obvious example is going for it (or not) on 4th down.

    That approach is sound.. until people start changing the play-calling based on it haha! Once a coach decides to use the results of a stat that tells you which type of play is better in a specific situation, then the situation has begun to change (e.g. the opposing coach may notice there are more 4th down attempts and start changing the defensive game plan as a result). This is the only (but BIG) problem with blindly using stats about play-calling in real life.

    Nevertheless, one can test whether the effectiveness of a play in a given situation has changed over time, so you can address that issue too.

    Back to the discussion you started in your thread. I don't think this approach is possible for the broad set of situations you're talking about. It's possible in principle but not in practice. You're talking about the effect of a coach, not of a specific play, and we just don't have enough data to really get at the changes in win probabilities for different coaches (you'd have to look at every play called and sum up the win probabilities for each and compare to all other coaches.. not sure we have the data for that).
     
  22. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I know. I'm trying not to get sucked in. Because Gase has a good history, but he's now a head coach, and he doesn't have a head coach above him. Anything can happen. Internally, I'm hopeful and optimistic. I think losing Miller and Matthews is going to be something we have to make up. But individually, Parker excites me and I picked him off of waivers in a dynasty league. I have AJ Green and Allen Robinson in front of him. But if he becomes a poor man's AJ Green or Alshon I'll be very happy.

    The Tanny to Matthews connection last year was the best connection on the team so Parker will have to step up. I hope we figure something out on the RB front. I like Ajayi, his knees scares me but he looked good.

    I'm cautiously optimistic but I wish well on my favorite football team, and my fantasy teams :D

    But Gase, he's really growing on to me. Don't Cam Cameron me bro!
     
    Fin-O, Pauly and cuchulainn like this.
  23. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    CBrad, As a general rule I think in most situations you're right. Most NFL teams data mine (to greater or lesser extent) to try and find opponent's playcalling tendencies, and adjust their calling accordingly. The Patriots being the gold standard of how it should be done because they look at their own tendencies as well as that of the opposition.

    However if Coach X in situation Y constantly does Z then his opponents can adapt and gameplan, and that should come out in the data.
     
  24. 2socks

    2socks Rebuilding Since 1973

    8,141
    2,103
    113
    Nov 27, 2008
    Atlanta
    Wait - weren't most of the guys on this board talking about how much of a QB whisperer Lazor was? Hmm.....
     
  25. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Also, when people are doing something physical, if they are being negatively affected by the pressure, they don't perform as well as they do in non pressure situations, and one of the things you see is people being off badly sometimes, as I have seen QB17 do, missing on the easiest of passes in these situations.

    In 2014 Clay in Det, Wallace vs Ravens and the worst of them, missing Gibson in the back of the EZ vs the Jets, straight in front of him, only 10 yards from each other and QB17 missed so bad Gibson couldn't even get a hand on it, how do you miss at that range? Nerves, when you get to jangling you can't perform because your muscles aren't listening to your brain.

    Many hunters experience this, in hunting it's called "buck fever", you get a deer in your sights and start shaking and often times miss badly, because you're shaking, lol, but it's a similar thing, it is much worse when people are watching though, and cheering or booing, and other team mates are counting on you, just adding to the pressure, and from what I've seen I think QB17 has a case of the nerves in big spots.

    I'd be happy to be proved wrong though.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  26. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Pauly, Rocky Raccoon, Fin D and 2 others like this.
  27. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Not disagreeing with you.

    But to get into the NFL you have to be at the extreme end of the bell curve, and people who tense up and go stiff under pressure have been weeded out through highschool and college competition.

    The way to do it is film analysis of all his opportunities, and I know enough to know I'm not qualified to do that job.
     
    cuchulainn and resnor like this.
  28. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
  29. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That has been the point.

    A bad oline is the biggest obstacle for a QB. A monster pass rush is difficult for even the greats to play great through.

    The tools that QBs have to deal with a bad oline are few and simple:

    - a running game to keep the defense honest
    - the ability to audible based on the look the defense gives
    - short & quick passes that rely on the WRs YAC ability
    - Marino like pocket dancing ability OR Wilson/Tarkenton like scrambling ability


    So how does Thill use those tools?

    Tool: - a running game to keep the defense honest
    Usage: Lazor abandoned the run. We rushed the ball the fewest times in the league last year. #32.
    Verdict: So that tool was taken from him.

    Tool: - the ability to audible based on the look the defense gives
    Usage:Its been widely reported Lazor did not let Thill audible out the given play. That means they'd line up and the defense could set up the perfect defense and Thill could do nothing about it.
    Verdict: So that tool was taken from him.

    Tool: - short & quick passes that rely on the WRs YAC ability
    Usage:His first 2 years he had no one with YAC ability. Hartline was one of, if not THE worst in the league for #1 or #2 WRs in YAC yards. Wallace was not used like that his first year here, he had to be converted. Landry is an excellent YAC guy. The problem however, is that our line is so bad teams could rush with less and have more people to defeat the YAC, which is why so many of our passes were short of the sticks.
    Verdict: He didn't have that tool for awhile, but its not that effect considering how bad the line is.

    Tool: - Marino like pocket dancing ability OR Wilson/Tarkenton like scrambling ability
    Usage:This is the area Thill could work to improve the most. He is an athletic ex-WR though, so its not crazy to think he'd be able to evade a single rusher or two as opposed to the jailbreak that generally happens up the middle.
    Verdict:So that tool he doesn't have.

    So of the four tools to counter a horrid oline he has one, but our line is so bad that a defense can get extreme pressure with a minimal rush so they have the second level numbers to defeat throws short of the sticks.

    These are facts. Stats don't account for these lack of tools. If you can't find a QB who has those tools taken from him and still succeeds AND if you can't find stats that account for these things, then you cannot in any rational or meaningful way gauge Thill's ability. What people are looking for (Thill to succeed regardless of his surroundings) has never happened in the modern era that I can think of anyway (Maybe there was and I just don't know, which is why I ask for examples all the time).
     
    resnor likes this.
  30. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    You left off a second mic in the helmet... :shifty:
     
    resnor and Fin D like this.
  31. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Well those are the people who succumbed to the pressure in high school and college, but the higher you go, the higher the pressure, it's not static, pressure affects different people at different levels, and every year it happens on nearly, or every team, guys who play well in TC but dry up in the preseason, or the next level, playing well in preseason but drying up in the regular season, and then the next level, playing well in the regular season and struggling in the playoffs.

    Everyone is affected at some point, I get it at the beginning of the Vegas tournament games, I always settle down though, but it has cost me racks, even games, because one bad miss in a close game can be the difference.

    The one stat that I think is very telling on this is 4th quarter performance, because prior to '15, we were in nearly every single game QB17 played, a ton of close 4th quarters in his first 3 years, and he has a career 78 rating in the 4th, and '15 is his best year, but also the only year he's seen substantial garbage time, iow, the pressure is off, and he performed better, even with a worse team, but my basis is on the eye test, I see him getting tight in those situations.
     
    Pauly and dolphin25 like this.
  32. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Minor quibble. He did have that tool, and the numbers show RT17 was a much better QB when the tool was actually used.

    The problem was that Lazor chose to abandon the run whenever he was behind,and because of our D in 2015 we were behind more often in 2015 than in 2014. The numbers show hat when Lazor kept the running game going that even behind our O-line RT17 is a credible QB.
     
  33. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I don't see how we're saying anything different. I say he can handle the pass rush and play better with a running game, then I point out that Lazor called the fewest rushing attempts in the league which caused Thill's performance to drop.
     
  34. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I absolutely agree this could be true. I also don't think I'm qualified to offer a meaningful opinion.

    There are three things to be careful about eyeball MkI evaluations about pressure situations.
    1) Everybody reacts differently and has different outward tells.
    2) Confirmation bias. People usually look for information to confirm what they already believe and don't place much importance on information that contradicts their existing belief. This is important for a QB labeled a 'project' and 'reach' coming out of the draft and who has received a lot of media criticism for his performance generally and in the 4th quarter especially.
    3) Playcall -v- execution. Did the receiver run the right route? If the receiver is wide open but 15 yards away from where he should be it's a tough throw. Was the receiver a decoy/3rd or 4th read in the play design?

    I trust my familiarity with stats enough to be able to make arguments based on them, film evaluation is something that I know experts are always pointing out things I'd miss on my own.
     
    Finster likes this.
  35. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I was just saying it wasn't always taken away from him. It was taken away when the team was behind. A difference in nuance not substance.
     
  36. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right but I'm defending the times when Thill's numbers were poor. I don't think I need defend his numbers when they are in the Top 5-10 range....no?
     
    Pauly likes this.
  37. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Well it goes some of the way to defending against accusations of inconsistency.

    A lot of the things we're discussing show that when RT17 is given a fair opportunity to produce he does, It's been when the the deck is strongly stacked against him (Oline, playcalling tendencies, inability to audible etc.) that his production has fallen off.

    What I've come to believe the more I look at the data is that he's actually a reasonably consistent QB, it's the situations he's been put in that have been wildly fluctuating. A better Oline is probably the most important thing to even out the effect of the different situations, although better playcalling is also very important too.
     
    resnor, dgfred and Fin D like this.
  38. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    NB I'm not saying RT doesn't perform inconsistently, or doesn't get negatively affected by pressure. Some stats definitely indicate that it may be true.

    What I'm saying is that the negative situation is a much bigger factor in his measurable performance and variation in performance according to the situation than RT's individual variance.
     

Share This Page