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
    Henry's ypc has been relatively stable, even last season being 5.1 vs 2018 4.9.

    But his number of 100+ yard games increased significantly under Tannehill. I think he only had like 5 total prior to Tannehill, and had basically that amount just last season.
     
  2. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but with the stability of his YPC as you pointed out, that has to be a function of number of carries, and that squares with Tannehill's low passing volume in 2019.
     
    resnor likes this.
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    But I think it also means that Tannehill was completing passes when needed, extending drives, allowing a Henry to have some more carries. It's symbiotic, not so much chicken or egg.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  4. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Some additional data perhaps of interest.

    Over Tannehill's 17 games with Tennessee (including the playoffs), his percentage of pass dropbacks per game is 49.2%. Again the league average is 58.8%.

    The correlation between Tannehill's passer rating and Henry's YPC, game-by-game, over those same games is now 0.52. That remains well above the league average, although that correlation in 2020 alone is a whopping -0.87. Totally the opposite of what happened in 2019, although it's far too early to make any meaning of it.
     
  5. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
  6. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Do you think maybe a reason he had more carries was...I dont know....they had a QB who could give them a lead instead of playing from behind and not being able to run as much as they'd like?

    Then perhaps Tannehills low volume came from....being ahead and not having to pass as much because Henry is great?

    It could also not be the case. I'm just wondering if you even considered that before shutting him down.
     
    resnor likes this.
  7. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Something else on this:

    http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2011/11/runpass-distribution-by-win-probability.html
     
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    About a thousand posts ago:

    https://www.thephins.com/threads/ryan-tannehill.94693/page-226#post-3290473
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And when you put this:

    https://www.thephins.com/threads/ryan-tannehill.94693/page-226#post-3290473

    ...together with this:

    http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2011/11/runpass-distribution-by-win-probability.html

    ...you get the finding that the Titans have called run plays during Tannehill's tenure consistent with a win probability between 81% and 91% (in terms of how the league functions), yet I suspect the percentage of the time they've experienced win probability that high explains nowhere near that degree an emphasis on the run game.

    In other words, the Titans have called a percentage run plays consistent with running out the clock on their way to a win (i.e., 81% to 91% win probability), yet given their cumulative point differentials at halftime and after the third quarter, they've experienced that sort of game situation nowhere near as often as that would indicate.
     
  10. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I don’t care what the league average is. If those teams want to play an idiotic strategy and see who can throw the most, their families will be happy to know they’ll be home for the playoffs.

    I’ve said it time and time and time again, the Titans are BALANCED...half run plays, half passing plays. And because defenses don’t know what’s coming...Henry right up the middle, ripping through the secondary for a 20+ yards run...or Tannehill faking that handoff to Henry and burning the defense with a 30+ yard pass. Defenses are dumbfounded and don’t know how to stop them.

    And when opposing defenses are able to stop Henry and force the Titans into 3rd and long, Tannehill has been dependable converting another set of downs.

    If all you’re going to do is throw throw throw, your OL better be all pro blockers and your receivers better be money on their routes and catches otherwise your quarterback is going to look like as stupid as a football bat!!!

    Throwing all of the time is such a stupid unreliable strategy. All defenses have to do is bide their time and they’re getting their turnovers.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    There is no team that should operate in that fashion unless it has a workhorse running back(s) who performs extremely well, alongside a QB like Tannehill who can't win through the air with typical passing volume and whose performance is dependent on the run game. Any team with a QB with the talent to win through the air should be using a league norm or lower frequency of runs and winning through the air.

    See here for example:

    https://thepowerrank.com/2018/09/24/the-surprising-truth-about-passing-and-rushing-in-the-nfl/
     
  12. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    A useful graph showing how rush percent (rushing attempts divided by rushing + passing attempts) in the regular season has changed over the years, not just for the league as a whole but also for playoff and SB teams.

    [​IMG]

    Note that since 2006 every SB winner except 1 passed more than they ran, and that the great majority of playoff teams did the same. This is especially impressive considering that winning teams run more because they try to run out the clock.

    Also note that almost all SB winners since 2006 straddle the league average. This means that once you remove the effect of running out the clock, SB winners in the last decade and a half tend to be biased towards the pass.

    So not only is "balanced" as in near 50/50 balance between rushing and passing attempts generally NOT a good strategy in the current NFL (exceptions exist of course, but those are exceptions), the most successful teams are slightly biased towards the pass once you remove the effect of running out the clock.
     
    Irishman and The Guy like this.
  13. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    That's all well and good, but Super Bowl winners are almost always really complete teams. To throw even when they know you're throwing is difficult, you've got to have more than a great QB.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    True, but consider that the Titans have done little to improve their passing game personnel-wise since Tannehill's emergence. They had opportunities to do that in free agency and the draft, and they acquired no skilled position players with any highly-valued resources. And that's despite signing Tannehill relatively long-term and hitching their wagon to him.

    Now, perhaps they're banking on the continued development of Brown, Davis, and Jonnu Smith. If they view those players as comprising the necessary passing game arsenal to capitalize on the talents of one of the league's best QBs, they should certainly be tilting the balance of their play-calling toward the passing game, and using the pass to set up the run with Derrick Henry, rather than vice-versa.

    So far this year, however, they show no signs of doing that. Their percentage of pass dropbacks in games this year has been 56.4, 40.3, and 53.4 (overall well below league average), despite that each of their three games has been a nail-biter (margin of victory has been two points per game). It's not like they had a comfortable lead in any of those games and used the run game to control the clock and wind the game down.

    So what does it mean that the Titans continue to ride Derrick Henry and not Ryan Tannehill, despite that passing wins games? They're apparently content to play nail-biter games they could easily lose (as they did last year as well) instead of utilizing Tannehill's talents to a greater degree and being more likely to win?
     
  15. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    First of all, the Titans don't "need" to improve their passing game. There are a few of you here who just seem to feel that if the Titans aren't throwing the ball at the league average of 58.8%, then they aren't a good team offensively...that Tannehill isn't a good quarterback and can't win games on his own. Your logic is, "if the rest of the league is doing this, then the Titans need to be doing it to". Says who?

    I already illustrated that majority of these high passing teams spend the playoffs at home. Of the top 7 teams in offensive passing yards last season, only 2 of those made it to the playoffs. If all you do is throw throw throw, then the odds are more likely to home you're going to go go go.

    And why? Why does the Titans' offense need to start tilting to more passes? Because "you" say it needs to be? Because that's what the league average says it needs to be? We had an expression in the army..."if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

    As it is right now, offensively...as a whole...the Titans can't be stopped and until teams can figure out how to stop the 1-2 juggernaut punch of the Titans' offense, they're going to keep running that same playbook over and over...with Henry embarrassing defenses...with Tannehill burning defenses. And although it may outside of the Titans' design, they have demonstrated they can go heavy on the pass and win. Off the top of my head, they had to do it twice last season against the Raiders and the Chiefs for the win.

    And nail biter games? Pfft, are you serious? The only "nail biter" games last season after Tannehill took the helm were the first 2...which is understandable. Tannehill was starting for the first time with his new team. Had to shake out the rust...and the following game against the Illustrious Chiefs...which the Titan's WON. All of the games after that...Tennessee's win....SOUNDLY defeated their opponents.

    This season? I told everyone back in July/August after we learned there would be no preseason due to Covid that all bets were off on any team in the NFL. There are 4 preseason games and we all have always said that a team isn't really established until game 4 of the season. That's 8 games. Due to this Covid affected season, there are going to be quite a few shockers this season. But I guess stats sheets don't factor in pandemics.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Says what wins in the league. Passing plays of the ilk of Tannehill's 2019 performance generate far more points than running plays of the ilk of Derrick Henry's 2019 performance. If you have a QB who can perform at Tannehill's 2019 level and you use him at merely the league average level in terms of passing volume (assuming he can perform just as well at that volume), you stand a much better chance of winning than if you use such a QB the way the Titans have used Tannehill.

    Or are you saying Tannehill can't play as well at that volume?

    And you've been informed time and time again that that reflects the fact that winning teams run the ball late in games to run out the clock, while losing teams do just the opposite and pass the ball late in games to try to mount comebacks. Why does this not sink in for you? Why do you continue to believe that running the ball (in general) is strongly related to winning when the objective evidence says it isn't?

    Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Right now the Titans are 0.16 standard deviations above the league average in points scored per game, against teams with a combined record of 1-8. They've been merely average offensively. What is this "can't be stopped" nonsense?

    Again you just go on and on saying the same things when just a modicum of research dispels nearly everything you say. And you've been informed of much of this already and continue to be dogmatic about your beliefs anyway. My lord, open your mind dude.
     
  17. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Try and understand this, will you? The number of passes a quarterback throws doesn't win games. The number of yards a quarterback throws doesn't win games. POINTS is what wins games...when YOUR team score MORE POINTS than your opponent is what wins games. When Tannehill took over at the Titans' starter last season, they averaged 30.4 points per game. Do you know who averaged MORE points? Nope, not Kansas City, New Orleans, nor Green Bay...the Baltimore Ravens averaged more points with 33.2 points per game.

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team...able/passing/sort/totalPointsPerGame/dir/desc


    And I've shown you and others time and time again....play by play, series by series that your assertion about running the ball to run out the clock does not apply to the game strategy of the Titans. Whether they are up by 10 or down by 10, they will continue to run the ball. If a defense gambles that it's a play action pass and don't stack the line to stop Henry, Henry burns the defense with a huge run. If they stack the line to stop Henry and it ends up being play action, Tannehill burns them with a long play action. It's just another version of the RPO that's burned defenses in recent history. Put the stats sheets away and pull up a game log and follow each and every play in each and every situation.



    And yes, I do know what I'm talking about. You guys mocked me last season. I had the last laugh. You guys are mocking me again this season and once again, I'll have the last laugh.
     
  18. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    This has been disproven for the most part. Where are the shockers? Look at the standings. With few exceptions teams expected to win are winning, just like in previous years.

    Also, watching the games you didn't see any extra sloppiness that many predicted would be due to lack of preseason, and the stats show far fewer turnovers and penalties across the league than in previous years. Furthermore, that trend has stayed steady for all 3 weeks played so far, which isn't what you would predict if teams needed extra practice time.

    The main effect of COVID-19 has been the vast increase in offensive production, from points scored to passing and rushing yards as well as vast increases in efficiency metrics like passer rating. This is most likely due to lack of crowd noise. QB's are now whispering in the huddle!! Coordination is much easier than before.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  19. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You posted an article recently that claimed that Tannehill was driving that offense.
     
  20. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    See if you can absorb some some information about how the average passing play generates far more expected points than the average run play. Here's a starting point:

    https://thepowerrank.com/2018/09/24/the-surprising-truth-about-passing-and-rushing-in-the-nfl/

    In the games Tannehill started last season, including the playoffs, the Titans were fifth in the league in points per game, 1.37 standard deviations above average. Ahead of them were Baltimore, SF, KC, and New Orleans. In the playoffs alone that figure was 0.38 standard deviations -- far lower. This year they're a mere 0.16 standard deviations above average, and 14 teams are ahead of them.

    Yeah well, if we consider that to be accurate hypothetically, so far this year it's gotten them three wins by a margin of 2 points per game, against teams that are a combined 1-8. So it may soon be time for the Titans to reconsider their strategy.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2020
  21. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    How important is it to avoid "close" games, defined as win or lose by 7 or fewer points? Check this out (size of the circle is proportional to the number of teams):

    [​IMG]

    The top graph shows that there is only a minor effect of percent of total games that are "close" as you get better, until you're way beyond average at which point the team tends to play few close games. In other words, the percent of close games you have doesn't tell you how "good" a team you are, unless you're at the extremes of the win/loss column.

    The 2nd graph shows what matters: your ability to win close games. The better the team, the more likely it is you'll win close games. So how many close games you have doesn't really matter, it just matters that you can win them.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    How much more likely is a team to win a Super Bowl if it's part of that positive extreme?

    The other thing we need to consider with regard to the Titans is the caliber of opposing teams. It's early in the season so it's difficult to determine conclusively the caliber of the teams they've played, but as I said above they've beaten three teams with a combined record of 1-8 by 2 points per game.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2020
  23. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Here's a graph of the probability of making the playoffs and winning the Super Bowl given win percent in the regular season. It's really interesting how predictable the relationship is. But to answer your question, SB win probability is still pretty low even at 80% = 13 wins, though it does start to go way up if you can win 14+ games (14 wins in a 16-game season is 87.5%). Anyway, if you didn't already know, winning the SB is hard lol.

    [​IMG]
     
    The Guy likes this.
  24. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    So let me ask you this, Tannehill entirely out of the equation because I'm curious.

    When a team DOESNT have a top 5 (or so) QB you are describing throughout this thread, what should they do? Tank until they have one or continue to work with their own QB they are having success with?
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  25. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    573
    532
    93
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Looks like the % is leveling off a little below 45%. There seems to be an upward trend the last 3 or 4 years. This year will show if that trend is continuing. Since this is an unusual year, due to a disrupted training camp and no preseason games, it will be interesting to see how that effects the graph, or if it affects it at all.
     
  26. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I think you have to take that on a case-by-case basis, considering other things like how much talent you have elsewhere on the team, salary cap hits, competition within your division and conference, etc. I do think however that it'll be the exception to the rule that you evaluate all the relevant variables and come away thinking that building around an average QB will make you competitive for a Super Bowl. So yes, in the vast majority of cases tanking would be the prudent approach, just theoretically speaking.
     
  27. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    The issue I see with the tanking route, isnt from a "would it be successful for the team individually" type of viewpoint but rather how it would impact the league as a whole.

    Noone particularly wants to watch a season where between 15 and 20 are simultaneously trying to tank for a QB. It actually makes it impossible to tank if everyone is doing it.

    Do you see a way around this issue that I'm not? Obviously this is hypothetical, as in if X number of teams did decide that was most prudent.
     
    resnor likes this.
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I don't see a way around it because the league has let the game (d)evolve to the point that it revolves very strongly around one player.
     
    AGuyNamedAlex likes this.
  29. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    That is fair. Rest of the post is off topic of thread but on topic of this discussion.

    Honestly I'd prefer to change some rules that make the QB position still important obviously but a bit less so.

    I'd like to allow more physicality with the WRs within 7 to 10 yards for instance. The short passing game has become far too difficult to defend without giving up the long ball.

    This part will be controversial, but I believe we should also be protecting the QB a bit less from hits. Obviously knee shots should be illegal, but I'd like to see where if the defender is moving towards the QB, within 5 yards of him when the ball is released, leading with the shoulder to the upper body is legal. Or I guess rather a bit more emphasis on what is a "clean" hit rather than flagging every hit on the QB if the defender is a split second late.

    In other words we dont need to go back to the rules of the 70s and 80s but I do think the best thing forbthe league going forward would be to evaluate how to make other facets of the game more important again whether it's my suggestions here or something entirely different.
     
    resnor and The Guy like this.
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Going to be tough to move in those directions with the CTE issue. I think the NFL is very sensitive to its sustainability given that. Expect more progression (or regression) toward "flag football."
     
    resnor and AGuyNamedAlex like this.
  31. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Oh I agree not to expect it, sadly.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  32. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Real hard to argue that Tom Brady is done when he throws a pick-six that helps his opponent get up 24-7 with a 90% win probability, and then proceeds to throw 4 TD passes to four different receivers with an overall passer rating of 117 for a 38-31 win. That sure looks like good ol' Tom Brady.
     
    Bumrush likes this.
  33. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    In the game noted above BTW, Justin Herbert threw for 11.6 yards per attempt, 3 TDs, and a passer rating of 137.9.
     
  34. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Brady's done. Even last year when he ended below average he had some really good games. Coincidentally Brady just passed that 150 passing attempt threshold (barely at 155) and currently has a 99.45 rating when league average is around 96 (we'll see after today, but the ratings so far suggest that's going up if anything). So he's just a tad above average so far in 2020.

    And let's not forget Tampa Bay had the 3rd best offense last year. So it's not like good offensive production is totally unexpected. Anyway, I predict Brady straddles average at the end of the year, making it several years in a row as "average".
     
  35. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I think we have to consider the interaction between performance and win probability in this case. Can't make too much of one game obviously, but in this case the whole world knew Brady had to pass (10% WP) and he dominated anyway. That's Patriots/Falcons Super Bowl-level stuff.
     
  36. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, but can he do that consistently? If he can he'll easily end up well above average. I bet he can't. We'll see. I'm predicting straddling average, and you think he's well above (i.e., he's not "done"). After 4 games, he's straddling average.
     
  37. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Probably not, but we need a measure that incorporates degree of difficulty, such as passing as a function of win probability or run/pass probability. Otherwise the "Tom Brady factor" goes undetected.
     
  38. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, well don't go too far with that idea. Everyone who has tried to incorporate "difficulty" into their own version of QB rating ends up inserting something subjective into the equation, like ESPN does with their "clutch" factor.

    I'd stick to something more simple: if you can do something when it's difficult, you should be able to do it when it's easy, and if that's true any "Brady isn't yet done" hypothesis will show up in passer rating.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but in determining whether he's done we're comparing him with QBs who can do it only when it's easy, perhaps.

    [Ahem -- did someone say "Tannehill"?]
     
  40. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    So? It should still show up as a difference, which is all that matters.

    Also, win probability isn't a good proxy for difficulty. Do you think being down by 21 makes the actual throws more difficult than being down by 7? Or a similar throw when you're up by 7? Win probability is telling you how likely or unlikely it is for the team to win, not how difficult the throws are.
     
    Pauly likes this.

Share This Page