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

The elephant in the room

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by dirtylandry, Dec 18, 2016.

  1. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    How about Tannehill's elite downfield stats this year? Or do those not count in your mind?
     
    Dolphins Dad, NyPhinfan and resnor like this.
  2. Sloopy

    Sloopy Member

    79
    52
    18
    Dec 16, 2016
    Those are excellent numbers.

    The Patriots have the best win percentage in the league since 2004 (77.5% wins), and during that period their overall passer rating has been 98.5, highest in the league.
     
  3. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,160
    900
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN


    If Matt Moore is Moran does that mean Alonso is Thad Castle? I feel like his tweet at Kaepernick after the 49ers game was something Thad would do....
     
    resnor likes this.
  4. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    Why won't anyone accept my bet on starting QB next year? :confused2:

    All the confidence in Moore until the money needs to go where your mouth is.
     
  5. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sooooo...which former poster is running?

    Yes QBR is awful. A QB can lead a drive to take the lead with 1 min left on the clock, and if the defense gives up a td in that last minute to lose, the QBs QBR will take a massive hit.

    Worst metric of all time. And the one that Tanne haters always point to.
     
    Dolphins Dad likes this.
  6. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    Right, so only stuff like QB rating which doesn't take into his account that he has 0 pocket presence should be used? Or completion percentage when he throws 10 bubble screens a game?
     
  7. Agua

    Agua Reality: Try It!

    5,257
    1,725
    113
    Apr 28, 2008
    Who cares which QB wins? Only way I could see a controversy on the team is if they catch fire and Moore leads them to a SB. If that happens, then I WELCOME a controversy.
     
    NyPhinfan and Brasfin like this.
  8. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,160
    900
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN
    Matt Moore played a good game last night, but do you really think Tannehill wouldn't have shredded the Jets last night too? I didn't see any throw Moore made last night that Tannehill couldn't have made. You were right to be confident in Moore, but I don't see him as a better fit still.
     
    dWreck likes this.
  9. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    How about air yards per attempt?

    [​IMG]

    Yup, there's Tannehill at 12. Ahead of Brees, Brady, Big Ben, Rivers, and Carr.

    Or maybe this you'll like this one better?



    Yup. Number 2 in the NFL in big time throws.

    Perhaps you'll like YPA? He's 8th there.

    [​IMG]
     
    Fame, dWreck and resnor like this.
  10. Sloopy

    Sloopy Member

    79
    52
    18
    Dec 16, 2016
    But again I think that's what people are tuning in to here in having this sort of discussion. What you're asking is "can you really distinguish Tannehill from Moore in that sort of game?"

    And that's the problem. If you can't distinguish Tannehill from Moore, why should the team pay one of them roughly 10% of its salary cap, and the other roughly 1%?

    Again the issue is that we don't have years of memories of Tannehill's doing the sort of thing Aaron Rodgers does, that allow us to immediately put discussions like these to rest. Instead we have years of memories of Tannehill's doing not much different from what Moore did last night, under those sorts of circumstances.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2016
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, ok. I'm nearing the end of posting with you. The hyperbole is ridiculous and unfounded.
     
    Dolphins Dad likes this.
  12. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    Are you going to factor in the unnecessary sacks that he takes?

    And none of those stats take into his weak competition that he had been facing.
     
  13. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    Not Matt Moore:

    [​IMG]
     
  14. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,160
    900
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN
    I'm not asking can I distinguish the difference between Tannehill and Moore. I can, Tannehill is far more athletic, has a much better arm and is more accurate. I was saying there was nothing Moore did last night that Tannehill couldn't have done.
     
    resnor likes this.
  15. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    Yeah. He did it last year.
     
  16. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    So you can find one game in the last five years where he was as good as one game from Moore? The running game was pretty good last year for that game.
     
  17. Sloopy

    Sloopy Member

    79
    52
    18
    Dec 16, 2016
    I don't think so either, and I agree that Tannehill has capabilities Moore does not. My point is only that when one guy is absorbing 10% of the cap and the other guy 1%, our focus needs to be on what the much higher-paid guy would've done better, not on the fact that he could've done the same thing.

    When we watch a game like that and struggle to find what the higher-paid guy could've done better, it gives rise to these sorts of discussions. Again we're not comparing Matt Moore to Aaron Rodgers.
     
  18. NyPhinfan

    NyPhinfan Season Ticket Holder

    2,368
    1,072
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    Pretty funny as you are ready to hand the reins over to Matt Moore based on one game in 5 years! .Enough of this nonsense. Time to watch football and bask in the glow of the game last night. Let the haters hate and push agendas. I have waited far too long for this team to be relevant again for some to ruin any single second of it for me. Enjoy the games
     
  19. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    1) did we or did we not play the jets?

    2) did moore have a ton of help this game from the rest of the team?

    I'd really like to know the answer to these questions. Without 2 phenominal plays by Sims and Landry and a huge outing by our Defense, if we had been against a semi-competent team and he was chucking them up like that, We aren't having this conversation because you wouldn't even have registered this account.
     
    resnor likes this.
  20. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    If you're talking arm mechanics then no, Tannehill easily could have made every single toss far better than Moore. That's unquestionable in my opinion.

    But would Tannehill have made those same decisions? Heck no. He wouldn't have taken that shot at Parker (that got intercepted) down the sidelines. He wouldn't have seen the TE on that beautiful floater. He probably wouldn't have seen the TE adjusting his route in the end zone either.

    The Stills pass....maybe he sees it, maybe he doesn't. I've been saying all year that Stills is open like that every single time in 1:1 coverage- Tannehill just doesn't see it. But Moore recognized it pre-snap when the safety crept up...he knew where he was going the whole time. And that's just the experience that Tannehill doesn't have- it's not a knock on anybody.

    Additionally, that slant pass to Landry was EXACTLY THE SAME as the bomb to Stills. The safety crept up, the D showed blitz and Moore knew that the middle of the field was wide open. When I said the other day that Moore sees the field at times like Manning, that's what I meant...he's great at identifying these types of opportunities and getting the ball where people can make big plays. Tannehill doesn't have that YET, at least not to the level Moore has it....and that's fine. Most QB's don't.

    That's why I've always loved Moore. He does not have even a quarter of Tannehill's physical gifts, but he makes up for it by having great vision, great poise and an "attack the field" mentality. That's not a knock on RT at all though- they're two completely different quarterbacks. It's really a shame we can't combine them...you'd probably have the best QB in the league by a wide margin.
     
    Agua and Runnincm like this.
  21. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    I agree the game last night was fun. It was the most fun I have had watching a game since the Texans game last year that tannehills stats were posted.

    I am excited for next week to see if Moore can back it up.
     
    NyPhinfan likes this.
  22. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,983
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Isn't the Jets forum missing you? Look at all the hate this guy has for RT... haha...he should be banned from here for the posts he made on the Jets forum....


    upload_2016-12-18_11-38-20.png
     
  23. Sloopy

    Sloopy Member

    79
    52
    18
    Dec 16, 2016
    I think those are good points. With Moore I think you leave fewer plays on the field, because he's thinking more aggressively and willing to take the risk when he identifies the availability of those sorts of plays. The flipside of that is that you end up with more interceptions.

    Moore is the kind of QB a team can thrive with if he has very good passing targets and a very good defense. The players around him need to be able to capitalize on his aggressiveness, while also being able to mitigate his mistakes (defensive stops).
     
  24. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    Yea. Not a jets forum but two plus two forums which is a poker book publisher and a huge forum.
     
  25. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,983
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    You're not even smart enough to understand why I wrote that...hahah...No wonder you think Moore is a good QB. Tell me...how many teams have come after Moore to be their starter?
     
    Dolphins Dad likes this.
  26. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,983
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    If Moore came out and threw for 500 yards, 7 TD's and went 30 for 30 he'd still be a back-up compared to RT...
     
    Dolphins Dad and dWreck like this.
  27. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    How many teams would switch their starting qb w tannehill including his cap hit?
     
  28. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    First of all, I would like to state that I believe Tannehill, not Moore is the future at QB for this team. I don't know if Tannehill is the QB who can eventually lead this team to the SB, but he is certainly good enough to lead this team into the playoffs.

    That being stated, I also believe that there were some Tannehill fans who were just sitting back and waiting for Moore to fail last night. Because they then could come on here and tell us how Moore isn't even close to Tannehill as an NFL QB.

    What we saw last night was one of the best backup QB's in the NFL doing exactly what he is paid to do. He might not have Tannehill's arm or legs, (prior to Tannehill's injury), but Moore showed that he is still able to make the plays needed in a game the Dolphins had to win, if they expect to make the playoffs.

    I have no idea if the Dolphins can go into Buffalo next week and beat the Bills or beat the Patriots in two weeks at home. Yet I feel with Moore at QB, they have just as good a chance of winning these games as they would have if Tannehill was the starter for these next two games.
     
    Agua and Runnincm like this.
  29. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Sheesh, some of you people would be clamoring for Matt Flynn to take over for Aaron Rodgers after one good game.
     
    Dolphins Dad, Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  30. Runnincm

    Runnincm Active Member

    162
    63
    28
    Dec 18, 2016
    Hmmmm. Might be a little stretch comparing tannehill to Rodgers lol
     
    Finster likes this.
  31. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Name one Tannehill fan who hasn't been saying for the past week that they hoped Moore would go out and play well and lead the Dolphins to a win?
     
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Not at all what he was doing.
     
    Dol-Fan Dupree likes this.
  33. TotoreMexico

    TotoreMexico Your retarded

    1,976
    1,613
    113
    Jan 4, 2008
    Mexico
    Trololololololololol

    And he just registered TODAY here! LMAO!
     
  34. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,160
    900
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN
    I've seen Tannehill take plenty of shot's downfield all season and he has done so with success, I'm not understanding criticizing Tannehill for not attacking the field. Moore played very well I'm glad we have him.
     
  35. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Because for every play Tannehill attacks the field, we can count on three screen passes and five throws within three yards of the LOS. And that's not criticizing Tannehill- that's giving credit to Moore for doing something well.
     
    dolphin25 and Runnincm like this.
  36. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    There have been a lot of posts in the past on why ESPN's QBR shouldn't be respected, but since you're new here's a short summary:

    1) ESPN is not transparent about what precisely goes into QBR, and that alone is really sufficient to trash it because if you're not willing to show your methodology then how can others know you're not just manually tweaking things so that the correlation to wins is higher?

    2) The descriptions that ESPN has been willing to give, including at conferences:
    http://www.sloansportsconference.com/content/total-qbr-what-espn-analytics-learned/

    basically shows you why they aren't transparent about QBR. The first step in QBR is actually a solid one. They look at the change in what's called "team expected points added", which basically looks at the average net points your team will gain for next points scored (by either team) given down, distance and game situation. What that means is that if you are for example on the opponent's 20 yard line and it's 3rd and 7, then based on historical play they can tell you the average number of net points you'll get for the next scoring play, whether that next score comes from your team or from the opponent. In some cases the net points are negative, like for 4th and 1 on your own 1 yard line because on average the opponent is likely to score more points next than your team will.

    So the first step for QBR is looking at the change in team expected points added given whatever play occurred. This is a perfectly fine starting point because it basically measures how the play that just occurred changes the net points you'd expect your team will get on the next scoring play.

    The problem with QBR comes in the second step. ESPN wants to do something called "division of credit". So if all the QB did was hand off the ball to the running back he obviously shouldn't get as much credit as if he threw the ball. Conceptually that's totally correct, but you'll notice in that conference video that for each separate situation they have a separate and often ad-hoc methodology, each of which depends on the particular data set they chose to base their analysis on as well as their particular method of analysis, each of which can be easily criticized by others trying to do the same analysis. In other words, they're basically cherry picking data sets and methods of analysis to do the hard part of "division of credit" among players.

    In summary, their method is essentially subjective. They also try to do the same thing with assigning the degree of "clutch" to a play. In principle it would be great if you could do that, but there's no good way of doing it right now. So that's the problem with QBR.. it's not really a stat (it's not inferred from the data) because it contains subjective elements to it. And the same is true with DVOA and all these other approaches for trying assign different amounts of credit to different players. For now, this is too difficult to do with the data we have.


    As far as passer rating is concerned, yeah it only cares about 4 things (COMP%, Y/A, TD% and INT%), but it's simple, transparent and has a high correlation with wins. The one objection to passer rating from a pure mathematical point of view is that the weights on those 4 components are chosen arbitrarily. That can in principle be easily fixed by using a computer to find the best set of weights to maximize correlation to win% (something called maximum likelihood estimation or MLE). People have just stuck with the traditional weights because of cultural inertia I guess. But with ESPN's QBR you can't do an MLE to fix the problem because the choice of data set and the choice of methodology itself is in question.

    Hope that better explains why you shouldn't respect QBR or DVOA as stats.

    The one way in which you CAN respect them is if you just want a way to predict things. Then it really doesn't matter if they're subjective or not.. you just care about correlation to wins or how well it helps you accomplish whatever task you want. But that's a different story.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2016
  37. Muck

    Muck Throwback Uniform Crusader Retired Administrator

    14,523
    22,246
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Sunny Florida
    At a minimum, Tannehill hits that throw to Parker for a TD rather than the INT. 41 points.

    I'm that guy. lol

    I do like that they didn't saddle Moore with those bubble screens and whatnot that this group just doesn't excel at.
     
    Sloopy, btfu149 and Dol-Fan Dupree like this.
  38. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    A good amount of teams in the NFL would give their left nut for Tannehill. You'd be delusional to think otherwise.
     
  39. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    No one understand my post


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  40. Finatik

    Finatik Season Ticket Holder Staff Member Club Member

    4,323
    4,012
    113
    May 2, 2014
    SO Cal
    This string is comical. It's like non one saw the wounded ducks that Moore was just throwing up for grabs. A decent secondary and he has 3 or 4 picks on those throws. Sometimes I'm not sure why I even open these threads.
     
    Dolphins Dad and resnor like this.

Share This Page