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. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    He absolutely blocked Etrius. He pretty much blocks anyone who disputes his ridiculous theories. He wants to post in an echo chamber.
     
    Hiruma78 likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Maybe it's worth asking The Guy the question: why the tremendous fixation on Tannehill?

    There's clearly more to this than just QB evaluation per se because you (The Guy) don't focus on any other QB where you might have similar arguments (you said Jackson for example) like you do Tannehill. And this doesn't feel to me like someone just "trying to be right" either. I've seen that before and it looks (feels) different. There's something else going on here that's causing the tremendous focus on Tannehill and I would really be interested in knowing what that is.
     
    Hiruma78, resnor and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  3. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I tend to get overinvolved in things in which I'm a "voice in the wilderness" by calling people's attention to confirmation bias.

    I went through this when Nick Saban was the coach of the Dolphins. I saw some things in his personality I wasn't too fond of, and early in his tenure with the team I went round and round with folks about how those things would interfere with his successful coaching of the team. Boy was I unpopular.

    Then later on Saban became totally unpopular with about the entire fan base in one fell swoop, due to what I thought were many of the things I'd been perceiving about him all along. All of the sudden the same opinion about him that had gotten me in endless wrangles with people had shifted to being the prevailing one.

    Tannehill, same deal. Like Saban, he was at one time viewed as the savior of the franchise, and so I think he got a benefit of the doubt that was wholly undeserved. The confirmation bias with regard to him was at an extreme in my view. And again I'm not a big fan of confirmation bias.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  4. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    CBrad,

    I guess for me it is looking at Tannehill for years and seeing him grow as a player.... To see him trust his legs more and to know when to use them... To see him throw on the run... to bootleg to extend plays.... To see him get deadly accurate on deeper throws to the point where he was one of the best in football at it.

    So we see the growth... He is in his mid 20's and we have reason to be excited. He gets hurt we get Adam Gase and the next couple of seasons are flushed down the toilet to his terrible coaching ( And the roster was threadbare. )

    So Tannehill gets shipped away... and the first chance he gets to play he is playing close to an elite level... It is not like the Titans were a powerhouse when Tannehill took over... They were 2-4!

    So they start winning... Tannehill shines... They even beat Mahomes and the Chiefs. He suddenly is their leader on offense and the team MVP... (Everything we hoped he would become here. ) Someone pointed out that his QB rating last season was the 4th highest in the history of the NFL...

    I honestly think at this point there are half a dozen members here that come to this thread to see what the next argument against Tannehill will be! One by one they get debunked only to be swapped out for a set of new ones with lightning speed.

    It could easily have gone a different direction.... Tannehill shines... We all say that we knew he was a great QB... and wish he was still here... and move on. We are fascinated now as to how people can continue to diminish Tannehill and try to deny what he just accomplished.

    Just my take on it.

    Despite all of that Guy comes up with half a dozen theories as to why Tannehill was not that good... Why it was all due to Henry... Why Tannehill was just lucky etc...
     
    resnor and cbrad like this.
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Pot, meet kettle.
     
    Irishman, resnor and Etrius24 like this.
  6. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    Guy

    Nobody that I ever recall said Tannehill had to be Aaron Rodgers to be great. No Dolphin fan I know of was expecting him to be the best QB in football or even close. What we saw in him or hoped to see was a QB that could lead a team and be capable of winning playoff games.

    Tannehill has shown he is that QB
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  7. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    This is 100% correct.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  8. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not even the biggest Tannehill supporters have ever referred to Tannehill as an elite QB. He was in constant battles over Tannehill on another site (that he was banned from twice) and for a long time his pet stats revolved around sacks. He argued and argued that Tannehill was responsible for the sacks in 2013 despite all the evidence to the contrary (including a film review of every sack by an independent football site).
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The thing that I railed against was not the perception that Tannehill would be the next Aaron Rodgers -- it was that his high number of sacks was attributable to his surroundings and not to him. That I thought reflected confirmation bias, and that has been proven correct over time and with variation in his surroundings. He clearly has a penchant for sacks for which he is responsible, primarily, and from 2012 to 2014 very few people wanted to hear that.
     
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    You were wrong then and you are still wrong. It was proven over and over again to you.
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Tannehill just had the second-highest sack rate in the league in 2019 -- behind only the rookie Dwayne Haskins -- while leading the league in passer rating.

    I'd say the sacks issue is open-and-shut by now. He has a problem with sacks.
     
  12. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Actually, I found one of the threads. Two independent sites reviewed the sacks and agreed that the OL was the problem. This quote was from an article on Football Outsiders at the time:

    Dolphins quarterback Ryan Tannehill has been sacked 17 times (53.1 percent) on short sacks, 12 times (37.5 percent) on medium sacks and three times (9.4 percent) on long sacks. It’s a pretty clear sign that the Dolphins sack problems (and they are significant problems) are the line’s fault, and not the fault of wide receivers failing to get open or a quarterback who holds the ball too long.
     
  13. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    You ignore the fact that after a sack rate of 9% in 2013, it dropped to a very Aaron Rodgers like 7.1%, 7.2%, and 6.9% the next three years. Hmmm.....

    Sacks are only a problem when you are not getting a commensurate benefit. Many teams trade sacks for big plays. Seattle does it every year. The Titans did it last year.
     
    resnor likes this.
  14. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Okay guys

    I will say this...

    In the past Tannehill got sacked a lot... But the O line was **** and we lacked more than one receiver worth throwing the football to. I do not consider Cotton a good receiver.

    Now you might say the sack rate was high for the Titans in Tennessee.... But I watched the games and there were times when the coverage was completely blown and Tannehill had more than one pass rusher coming... He tucked the ball and ate it... Took the sack and did not give up the turnover. In those situations that is the best possible outcome... Do not do something like leave the ball unprotected and fumble... do not throw up a flailing duck for an easy interception.

    The O Line was decent in Tennessee... but far from elite. Because the O line was not the worst in the league... We saw Tannehill play like he was an artist... That extra split second saw him show poise and touch... screen passes... extending plays.. Things we did not get to see In Miami.

    Guy it sounds like you just did not watch the games. Tannehill several times a game turned broken down plays into game changing plays... There is a reason the players there love him and would run through a wall for him... He led... He took hits... He won. He delivered strikes deep taking a pounding that won football games.

    So yes he took some sacks still in Tennessee... But he won... and he played at an elite level... Brown averaged over 20 yards per catch.... Henry went from 3.8 yards per carry to almost 6 yards per carry when Tannehill took over. The titans became the #2 scoring offense in football with Tannehill as their QB

    You have ignored and refused to address all of these things.

    Sacks happen.... Tannehill still played at an elite level in the 2019 season.

    When will you admit it?
     
    FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  15. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He led the league in YPA and passer rating. They are the two most correlated with winning stats. Most running/scrambling QBs take sacks at a higher rate because they have a tendency to try to escape rather than throw it away. As I said in another post, as long as you are getting a good trade off in chunk plays, sacks are not a big issue.
     
    resnor likes this.
  16. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    I agree

    When you lead the league in yards per pass and qb rating and you complete over 70% of your passes you are doing a lot of things right... No question... when your team is the #2 scoring team in football... You are doing something right.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  17. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    But Derrick Henry.... blah blah blah
     
  18. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    573
    532
    93
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    It's interesting to note this is one of the more active threads on the forum, even though it concerns a man who wasn't on our team last year and will not be on our team this year.

    Every poster here owes Ryan Tannehill a great big "Thank You" for giving us something to talk about.

    It seems to be the right time to make this post (4-1-2020). LOL
     
    Pauly and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  19. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here's the most accurate assessment at this point in my opinion, which "admits" that he played well in 2019, but argues that it says relatively little about his ability in general right now:

    https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-titans-scheme-has-made-ryan-tannehill-a-top-10-quarterback

    What Tannehill has done this season is impressive, and it's potentially a turning point, yet it still should only marginally affect our assessment of him as a passer. Incorporating the entirely of Tannehill’s career, our best guess for how Tannehill will perform going forward is roughly in line with an average quarterback.

    Bayesian updating not only provides a single, best-guess estimate but also allows you to form a range of potential outcomes that narrows with more evidence.

    [​IMG]

    As you can see there, based on his history -- even when including his performance from the 2019 season -- there is almost no probability that he will consistently perform as one of the best QBs in the league. The probability curve almost completely flattens out around the 85th percentile.

    So, is there a chance he can play as well as he did last year for the rest of his career? Certainly. But no one would be wise to bet on that right now. You would be far wiser to view last year as an aberration.

    Now, let's say he comes back down to earth for the remainder of his career, which again has the strongest probability associated with it right now. Then how do you view 2019? To what do you attribute the difference in his performance that season?

    Obviously then the situational and environmental factors that I've been proposing here (i.e., low-volume games, Derrick Henry, etc.) would have the most merit. And given that the strongest probability right now is that 2019 was an aberration, it certainly makes sense to discuss the possible effects of those situational and environmental factors right now. Doing so doesn't indicate a bias against Tannehill -- it merely represents an appraisal of reality.

    Only those biased in favor of Tannehill would think any differently, and there appears to be a few folks here of that nature. I doubt any of them would bet much of their belongings on his continuing at a level non-significantly different from 2019, however.
     
  20. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    And both you and the article author would have bet 2019 wouldn't happen either.... so based on my track record assessing Tannehill's potential versus yours, I'll take mine. All season you predicted it would last despite this (from the article):

    Tannehill ranks first among quarterbacks in nearly all of our critical passing factors: clean-pocket, standard dropback and no-play-action passing. These are the more stable measures of passing, which points to continued success.

    It also doesn't account for 6 additional games of mostly excellent play. Those games included passer ratings of 92.2, 133.6, 130.8, 61, 109.5, and 108.1. That's a rating of 108.1. That would be third in the league.
     
    resnor and AGuyNamedAlex like this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah I'd throw that "analysis" completely out the window. Seriously, people need to understand that you have a lot of quacks that don't know much about statistics but know how to use a statistics software package doing these analysis. It's because there's no serious interest from the scientific community in this kind of stuff (obvious right?.. money goes towards medicine, military, engineering or just basic research studying nature for obvious reasons, not sports).

    We should really put certain people on a black list so that we can just ignore their "analysis". I can't remember which article it was but Chase Stuart proved he has no clue and he's mentioned in that article, and we can now add Kevin Cole to that list. Just ignore these guys.

    Why?

    In this particular case it's because Bayesian updating assumes the data points are being generated from the same source (under the same circumstances) the entire time. That is, it's assuming there's no learning effect, there's no statistically significant change in the environment, etc.. But we know that to be false (learning effect you can't show, but 2019 was statistically significant relative to 2012-2018), so there would be no reason to ever use this approach.

    That's just for starters. No one uses Bayesian inference when you have all the data right in front of you, which we do. You use it when you obtain precisely ONE extra data point and you want to know how to change your hypothesis from what it was previously.

    Also.. Bayesian updating starts with prior probabilities, and those are apparently based on draft position. Why? Why care about draft position when you are estimating QB ability in the NFL? Like I said, throw this "analysis" in the trash.

    Finally, given that 2019 was statistically significant AND took place in a completely different environment, I don't know how you'd use statistics to make a decent prediction about 2020 onwards in that new environment. It's certainly possible Tannehill reverts to an average level of play, or maybe he'll play significantly above average. Hard to use stats to predict because it's in that new environment.
     
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah for me it was less about the technicalities of the analysis and more about the general sentiment regarding his history and what it portends. And that's despite the change in environment, because as I've harped on here, we don't know the extent to which the new environment can be replicated. If the 2019 environment was "one-in-a-million," well then obviously the probability that Tannehill can replicate his performance is very low.

    I'll ask everyone again here: if someone held a gun to your head and forced you to bet all of your belongings on it, would you bet on Tannehill's performing in 2020 at a level 1) non-significantly different from 2019, or 2) non-significantly different from his previous career?
     
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. Just beautiful. Thank you!
     
    resnor, Irishman and cbrad like this.
  24. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    So, it was all about confirmation bias then.
     
    resnor and Etrius24 like this.
  25. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Considering it was the 4th best passer rating in history, his next season could be a step down from that but still incredibly good.

    Yeah I'd guess his numbers arent quite as good as last, because youd have to start considering him an all time elite QB if he put up those type of numbers back to back.

    That isnt the question. The question is if hes good enough to build around. The answer is yes.
     
    resnor likes this.
  26. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Again no response to the question about the bet.
     
  27. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You'd have to adjust historical passer ratings to 2019 to make that determination, and if you did Tannehill would be nowhere near fourth of all time.

    He's always been good enough to build around. Hell the Dolphins could've won a Super Bowl with him in 2016 if they'd have had roughly the best pass defense in the league and enjoyed an extremely good turnover margin.

    The question isn't whether any one QB is good enough to build around -- the question is how likely you are to "build" in such a way that it compensates for the shortcomings of a QB of that nature and wins you a Super Bowl?

    That's never been likely for Tannehill, and it still isn't.
     
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    You knowingly linked to a flawed statistical analysis because it supported your view. That is the definition of confirmation bias that you claim to dislike. Why should anyone take you seriously?
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I would bet that Tannehill will finish with a passer rating above 100 and will finish in the top 10 in passer rating. My view on Tannehill since 2014 has been that he has top 10 QB potential.
     
    resnor, Irishman and Etrius24 like this.
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    These analyses aren't getting peer reviewed for journals. They have merely heuristic value in terms of how to think about the situation at hand. You have to understand that cbrad is going to approach this from a highly technical point of view.

    Again if you're at all reluctant to bet all of your belongings that Tannehill will perform in 2020 more consistently with his 2019 performance than with his pre-2019 performance, then you can easily understand the heuristic value of the analysis, despite its technical flaws.
     
  31. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Guy

    Thank you for at least admitting that you do not give a damn about the analysis unless it in some way diminishes Tannehill and then you can subsequently use that in some form of argument against Tannehill on here.

    Now you are arguing he was merely benefitting from the Scheme of the offense in Tennessee. Got it.

    This just keeps getting better and better.

    Thank you.
     
  32. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Notice no answer to the question about the bet, despite that the answer may be entirely consistent with the heuristic value of the analysis.
     
    Etrius24 likes this.
  33. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    I too have been in this same boat. When Tannehill threw for 4000 yards a season and averaged 24 touchdowns a year for that two year stretch on a bad Dolphins team with ****ty coaching... He deserved to be considered as a top 10 NFL QB

    Hurting his Knee... Gase... Even worse talent around him.... The perfect tri fecta of suck... all happened at the same time... and Tannehill never got the chance to continue to show us his development and growth...

    It sucks for those of us that saw his talent and development. I am happy that Tannehill got a chance to start somewhere and made the most out of it. All of the work he did in Miami to become a better passer... To improve his accuracy on mid range and deep throws... To read defenses.... It is all paying off for him.

    Through all of this .... My stance has not changed... He is a top 10 NFL QB.
     
    resnor and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  34. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Again, you're living in fairy tale land now.

    Why dont you do some research on what the probability of acquiring a QB who is in the top 6 of all passers for over 50% of his career is in any given draft.

    I'd guarantee you have a higher probability of winning with Tannehill than what you're proposing.

    By your standards there are probably 1-2 QB good enough.

    Ideally I'd like a 21 year old Peyton Manning. I live in reality though. You work with what is available to you, and once you have something to build around you keep it.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL....... you got caught.... again......
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  36. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    Guy

    Man up and admit that if 365 days ago we were having this discussion about Tannehill and a bet... You would be homeless asking members here for food and clothing... Because you were 100% dead wrong about Tannehill in regards to the 2019 season and there is no way you would have avoided losing all that you own... If such a bet was made one year ago.

    Never think I will run away from and be scared to address the points you make.
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL.... now garbage analyses have "heuristic value".....
     
    Irishman likes this.
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Not that it means anything to you, but I'd take that bet (the portion colored yellow above) in a heartbeat.
     
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm not saying there's always a ready-made alternative to the low probability of acquiring such a QB. The position is only that if you have the option of either 1) drafting high enough to get a QB like Tua for example, even though he's unproven in the NFL, or 2) keeping a Tannehill-level QB, paying him the going rate for a QB of his caliber, and trying to build around him, you should pick option 1.

    This is analogous to what the Cardinals did with regard to Murray and Rosen, only they did it even well before Rosen would be paid at the Tannehill level.
     
  40. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    That is the entire point.

    You're crapping on Tannehill without pushing another viable option to acquire something better.

    Also, again, it's incredibly easy to find numbers for any QB that show he cant win a Superbowl or is unlikely to. Every single QB is unlikely to win a Superbowl, before even adjusting for the strength of each team around the QB, there is only a 1 in 32 chance of winning a Superbowl each season.

    Winning isnt one player and there is no one way to build a team. His salary doesnt prohibit them from building a strong offense or defense. What will enable or prohibit that is the talent of the GM.
     
    resnor likes this.

Share This Page