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

Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Other NFL' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

Ryan Tannehill is...

  1. A terrible QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. A below average QB

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  3. An average QB

    7 vote(s)
    10.0%
  4. An above average QB

    39 vote(s)
    55.7%
  5. An elite QB

    16 vote(s)
    22.9%
  6. The GOAT.

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  1. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Great point.

    So many more variables when looking at Tannehill before he started in Tennessee... Everything was different. When Henry got Tannehill as his starting Qb only one variable changed.
     
    resnor likes this.
  2. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Well and I think the glaring contextual clue revolves around the usage of both players and how Tannehill performed when the usage centered around him (i.e., high-volume passing games). Tannehill had the second-fewest pass attempts per game in the league, behind only Lamar Jackson, and when was involved in high-volume passing games, his performance plummeted. So the evidence indicates that when the offense revolved around the use of Henry, Tannehill's performance was stellar, whereas when it revolved around Tannehill, it was far worse.

    Now, one obvious explanation for that could be that Tannehill's passing got the team out to signficant leads during games, which then allowed the team to ride Henry the rest of the game and run out the clock more quickly, thus lowering the passing volume for Tannehill after he'd already put together a good performance earlier in the game.

    However, that explanation isn't supported by the data: the Titans were 0.14, 0.44, and 0.05 standard deviations below the league norm in point differential after the first, second, and third quarters of games in 2019, respectively.

    That suggests the Titans were playing neck-and-neck with teams on average in 2019, yet they were choosing to feature Henry as the centerpiece of their offense regardless, again to the tune of Tannehill's having the second fewest pass attempts per game in the league.

    So you have this extremely strong correlation between these two players' performances, far stronger than that for any of their counterparts in the league, and one of the players was the centerpiece of the offense while the other was "along for the ride" so to speak. That makes it pretty open-and-shut in my opinion. And then add to that the significant decrement in Tannehill's performance against non-stacked boxes, when opposing defenses were presumably focused on stopping him and not Henry.
     
  3. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah that's a good point. There's no comparable data point like that with Tannehill, and you actually do get statistical significance with Y/A using 2019 numbers alone: games 1-5 (can't include game 6 because Mariota and Tannehill split attempts) vs. the rest.

    The problem is that you don't see statistical significance once you include 2018 (e.g., with all games where Henry had 10+ rushing attempts) where Vrabel was still coach. And that can't be discounted.

    Anyway, I'm only defending the position that there's evidence the causal relationship goes both ways. Personally, I do think Tannehill benefitted from Henry more (the centerpiece of that offense) but that's opinion, not something I'm suggesting can be inferred from stats.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  4. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not sure how you would even quantify it, but I think the passing game and running game were co-centerpieces. IMO, they fed off of one another. I also think it is clear that the Titans put a bigger emphasis on signing Tannehill over Henry.

    Finally, the offensive turnaround was huge, immediate, and undeniable when Tannehill took over. I couple that with individual stats (accuracy, depth of throws, aggressiveness, etc) that are indicative of extremely high performance by the QB.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Every QB benefits from an effective running game... Tannehill is no exception. The fact that Tannehill played at level of precision few other QB's in the NFL are even capable of... Combine that with Henry gaining almost twice as many yards per carry with Tannehill as the starter... and You cannot in any way shape or form realistically diminish Tannehills importance to that offense.
     
    resnor likes this.
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No, Henry's workload changed significantly in terms of volume. He went from averaging 18.8 carries per game to averaging 22.8 carries per game thereafter (including the playoffs). That may not seem like much, but it's actually more than a standard deviation more carries per game, in the context of the 32 NFL running backs with the most carries on the season in 2019.

    So, it wasn't only Tannehill that changed. There was apparently a decision made by the coaches to feature Henry more, and that again fits with the notion that Tannehill benefited from Henry more than Henry benefited from Tannehill.

    And as I pointed out before, that appears not to have been a function of getting early leads in games and then riding Henry.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2020
  7. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And no, they don't. The 31 correlations between passer rating and yards per rush in post #6348 -- some of them somewhat strongly negative -- are a testament to that.

    The degree to which Tannehill's performance was associated with Henry's was uniquely strong in the NFL in 2019, far greater than that for any of their counterparts.
     
  8. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    In the regular season Henry averaged exactly 19 carries per game in the second half of the season. ( Games 9 through 16 ) He averaged 18.9 carries from games 1 through 8

    So no difference in the regular season for workload for Henry between Tannehill and Mariotta

    But nice try to make it seem like there was by including the playoff games.

    In the regular season the only difference was in terms of yards per carry... Henry in the first half of the season 3.8 yards per carry Henry in the second half of the season 6.3 yards per carry... I wonder what happened half way through the season.... Maybe a change in the starting QB? Hmmm

    What we know for sure is that the Titans became the #2 scoring offense in Football after Tannehill took over for Mariotta... Second only to Baltimore... Even better than teams like San Fransisco and the Chiefs. Again points strongly to Tannehill
     
    Pauly likes this.
  9. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Waiting for the next stat you will try to make work so you can continue to discredit Tannehill.
     
    xphinfanx, Irishman and resnor like this.
  10. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    So Looking at Henry getting the exact same number of carries a game for Mariotta and Tannehill... Here is the difference in play between the 2 QB's

    Tannehill completes 11% more passes.
    Tannehill throws his passes more than 2 yards further per attempt
    Tannehill has a QB rating 25 points higher

    And remember that Henry got the same number of carries per game under Mariotta as he did Tannehill.

    Henry increases his yards per carry by more than 50% with Tannehill with the same workload.

    All pointing to the importance of Tannehill to this offense.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Those figures for the regular season were 18.8 (Mariota) and 21.1 (Tannehill).

    In the playoffs Henry averaged 27.7 carries per game, while Tannehill averaged 16.7 pass attempts per game.

    The fact that the team centered the offense around Henry even more when the stakes were highest -- in the playoffs -- speaks volumes. I have no idea why you'd exclude those games as a measure of the volume of the offense attributed to Henry versus that attributed to Tannehill in 2019.
     
  12. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Did you go game by game and attempt in each and go back through the film to see who was the QB... because there were several times Tannehill came in to relieve Mariotta before being named starter week 7.

    The fact of the matter is that games 1 through 8 he averaged 18.9 carries per game... and in games 9-16 he averaged 19 carries a game

    If you have access to a site that shows in the games where both QB's played how many carries Henry had... Please show this information... I will gladly do the additional calculations and come up with numbers.
     
    resnor likes this.
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If Tannehill was named the starter in week 7, why is your cutoff point game 9 for determining Henry's carries per game with Tannehill as the starter?

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00/gamelog/
     
  14. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Guy

    without specific breakdowns for each game with Tannehill and Mariotta in the games they both appeared I looked at Henry's usage early and late in the season...

    Went to ESPN... Season splits... carries per game 1-8 Carries per game 9-16

    It showed that Henry was not being worked any harder in the second half of the season than he was in the first half.
     
    resnor likes this.
  15. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    And your link does not break down carries per Tannehill as opposed to carries per Mariotta. So unless you broke down every minute of game tape in the games where they both appeared you are pulling your numbers out of your arse.

    please tell me how you calculated the carries per game exactly.
     
    resnor likes this.
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Sure, but it's easy enough to simply determine the carries per game he got with either quarterback as the starter:

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00/gamelog/2019/

    The irony here is that in post #6366 you implied that I was being misleading.
     
  17. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm done here till next year fellas. You all take care.
     
  18. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    There is a long established precedent that you do not mix playoff data with regular season data.
    This goes double for small sample sizes.
    Comparing a blend of data set A (regular season) and data set B (playoffs) against data set A is totally inappropriate.
    Drawing a conclusion that relies on blending regular season and playoff data together when you know that the regular season data alone does not support your hypothesis is beyond dubious. The evidence that you knew the regular season data did not fit your hypothesis is the fact it is kept separate and uncontaminated from playoff data, so you had to do extra work to blend them together to find a result that fitted your hypothesis.
     
    resnor likes this.
  19. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He ran slightly more often in the games Tannehill was QB (21.1 vs 18.8). It is purely a function of playing with the lead more often when Tannehill was the QB. Not hard to understand. On the season, he averaged 16.8 carries per game in losses and 22.4 carries per game in wins.

    How big a difference depends on how you treat the Denver game. Henry had 12 carries with Mariota at QB and only 3 with Tannehill at QB. If you prorate the carries in that game, the carries per game is very close.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  20. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Finfan

    That was my point all along. The numbers are identical in terms of carries per game for the regular season. Furthermore the Titans became the #2 scoring offense in football for the games that Tannehill started as QB and that happened without Henry getting a heavier workload.

    The fact that Guy would not disclose how he was breaking down games like the Denver game told me all I needed to know. Trying to lump the playoffs into it also spoke volumes... He was trying to manufacture numbers to rally behind
     
    resnor likes this.
  21. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    That is his MO. Nevermind that the three playoff games were played on the road in NE, Baltimore, and KC. He also fails to recognize that the first half of all three playoff games featured a balanced run/pass ratio:

    vs NE: 14 Henry runs, 9 Tannehill passes
    vs Balt: 11 Henry runs, 10 Tannehill passes
    vs KC: 16 Henry runs, 17 Tannehill passes

    The first two games got skewed in the 2nd half because of game situation (close game at NE and a lead at Balt). The Patriots defense was guarding the pass and daring the Titans to run the ball. Against Baltimore, the Titans got off to a big lead (throwing the ball) and Baltimore just could not stop the running game after that. No need to keep throwing the ball. Grinding the clock is how you win in that situation.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  22. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    BTW, Henry had 132 carries in the first half of games and 177 in the second half of games. That doesn't look like a team that is running early to setup the pass. That looks like a team that is running the ball to close out wins.
     
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He also misrepresented a chart the showed passing EPA against stacked and non-stacked boxes as solely about Tannehill, when it was for the Titans passing offense. Mariota started just over 6 1/2 games.
     
  24. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    I mentioned closing out games with a running back previously... Like the Patriots did when they had blount... Get up by more than a score in the second half and start using Blount.
     
    resnor likes this.
  25. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Its funny you say that... Mariota has been criticized by not throwing the ball to WRs hand where it needs to be, wich made our WRs look awful than they actually were.

    Ryan is doing the opposite, his throws are giving WRs chances after catch.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  26. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    [​IMG]
     
  27. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I have it on good authority that Tannehill gets to throw to wide open receivers because, you know, Derrick Henry..... stacked boxes..... and stuff....
     
  28. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    If you give me time, I will run numbers until I find something obscure to back up this claim...
     
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I have to ask... What are you basing it on then? Preconceived notions? Lol. Honestly, though, it's hard for me to understand you, of all people, going outside of stats on this.
     
  30. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I believe he was comparing the improvement of Tannehill in Miami to Tenn vs Henry before and after Tannehill. Looking at that comparison, you can make the case that Tannehill improved more and therefor got the bigger benefit. But, IMO, the comparison is invalid since so much was different between Miami and Tenn. Coaching, supporting cast of offense, defense, scheme, healthy of the QB, etc. Literally everything was better. IMO, the better comparison is the 16 or so games that Tannehill had between 2014 and 2016 with his OL in tact. He was healthy, had a decent OL, a running game that was working, and he put up top 10 numbers in terms of efficiency (measured by passer rating).
     
    resnor likes this.
  31. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Right, that's my point. If you thought Tannehill was at best an average QB, then you're going to attribute his success in Tennessee to anybody but him, and cbrad absolutely thought that. But you can't compare Tannehill in Miami to Tannehill in Tennessee. You can compare Tennessee last year without Tannehill to Tennessee last year with Tannehill.
     
  32. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    If that was the case than how come Mariota wasnt successful with Henry under center?
     
  33. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    This passes are amazing. A breath of fresh air to see a QB with good accuracy and arm strength.

    Now go look at Mariotas highlights and look at the way the ball floats in the air...
     
  34. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Part of the issue here is that several people involved in this debate are considering Tannehill's performance in 2019 to indicate validation of their belief that his surroundings in Miami were terribly inadequate.

    Consider however that that could be true, but it isn't necessarily the case.

    It's possible that his surroundings in Miami were no different from average, and that his surroundings in Tennessee in 2019 consisted of a perfect storm of ingredients that vaulted his performance to what it was. In other words, his surroundings in Tennessee were possibly not just adequate, but exceptionally good, in terms of what Tannehill in particular needs to excel.

    If that's the case, then the question in terms of Tannehill's performance becomes, how likely are those surroundings to be replicated, because Tannehill's performance hinges on them.

    Again we've seen this with other QBs in the past -- Andy Dalton and Nick Foles for example, who enjoyed one great season apiece and who have never again performed at that level. Clearly they must've had exceptionally good surroundings for them in those single seasons, and those surroundings, whatever they were, have been impossible to replicate.

    This is why it'll likely take an analysis of next season, and how it differs from 2019, to adjudicate this issue definitively.

    And this is also why any judgment of a QB's individual ability can't involve his performance in just one season -- it has to involve his performance over several seasons. Obviously if a QB is dependent on a set of surroundings that can exist in only one season of a career and can't be replicated (i.e., Dalton and Foles), he has far less individual ability than a QB who can perform well across various levels of quality of his surroundings.

    Consider the following scenario: someone holds a gun to your head and demands that you bet everything you own on whether 1) Ryan Tannhill's performance in Miami represents the true reflection of his individual ability, or 2) his performance in Tennessee in 2019 represents the true reflection of his individual ability.

    The person holding the gun to your head then gives you the option of deciding now and betting everything you own, or waiting until the end of the 2020 season and using that information in deciding on your bet. Do you bet now, or wait until the end of 2020?

    And if you decide to wait until the end of 2020, why would you do that? Why isn't this open-and-shut for you already?
     
  35. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    The Dolphins already proved it is the case. Just look at the turnover on the roster and coaching staff. If you want to name all the players and coaches from the 2014 through 2016 Dolphins that have excelled elsewhere (other than Tannehill, of course) go ahead.

    Take a look at the starting OL in 2015:

    Jason Fox
    Billy Turner
    Mike Pouncey
    Dallas Thomas
    Brandon Albert

    Three would be out of the league in 2 years or less, one is/was injury prone, and the other would take another few years to become a journeyman starter.

    The NFL decided that this was a bad line.

    Surely 2014 was better:

    Ja'Wuan James
    Mike Pouncey
    Samson Satelle
    Daryn Coledge
    Brandon Albert

    Two would never play another down in the NFL, one was a rookie, one was out of position and missed part of the year, and the last missed 7 games.

    Jesus man, give it up.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2020
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018

    Note the following:
    https://theathletic.com/1552465/202...ading-way-kc-boasts-new-improved-run-defense/
     
  37. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Guy?
     
  38. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
  39. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Looks like Guy deleted his post.
     
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Then why, from 2012 to 2016, was Tannehill ranked 14th of the 18 QBs for whom there are data, regarding how he performed under no pressure? Why didn't his performance vault up to the level of his supposed individual ability when the conditions were especially favorable (i.e., no pressure) during that time period?

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016
     

Share This Page