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

Comparing Tannehill to Luck,

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, May 8, 2016.

  1. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I haven't seen so many straw man arguments in one thread in a long time. Of course their play deviates. Ignoring the team around a QB, especially when compiling stats around blowout wins or losses, is extremely shortsighted.

    Have fun with your chart.
     
    Fin D and eltos_lightfoot like this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    If Gase can elevate Ryan and Ryan is average, then he should be able to elevate other average QB's. So either way it's Gase you want not Tannehill if we accept your assumptions. That's of course assuming Gase turns out to be an above average HC himself.

    In any case, I too think either Tannehill + Gase works out this year or we go with another QB (Gase is new so you give him some time) because Tannehill is now being given everything he needs to succeed, at least on paper: some serious OL help, an offensive coach that adapts to players (allegedly), all the extra draft picks on offense, etc..

    Only thing I'd add is that while Tannehill's production is average, his potential is not. So if we replace him, we better replace him with a guy whose potential is really high (probably a 1st round pick).
     
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I think that is very fair and accurate, cbrad.
     
    Pauly and cbrad like this.
  4. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,938
    9,355
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    His potential is what has allowed me to be excited about the leaps he may take that year....problem is he has not really made any significant leaps. He has improved on aspects of his game, yes. But after 5 complete seasons as an NFL starting QB, potential goes out the window and we will have a decision to make.

    Of course he could do us all a favor and just make a significant leap in some significant areas and save us the trouble.
     
  5. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Early on, TH had issues with throwing certain types of passes, among other things. Now, I think his primary problems are mental: he doesn't know when to run, he isn't as aware as he should be in the pocket, etc...

    Question is can Gase coach the mental side? If yes, TH might turn out to be the answer, but it's hard to have too much hope after 4 seasons I agree.
     
    dolphin25 and eltos_lightfoot like this.
  6. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,938
    9,355
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Couldnt agree more.

    He he has a good arm, his intermediate accuracy is top notch...he is tough as hell. But we need to him to be quicker in his reads and learn to anticipate better. We also need him to do a better job of making plays especially on 3rd downs. That is the single biggest difference in him and Alex Smith at this point. Alex may be limited in ability, but he extends drives.....something Ryan frankly does not do.


    Yet?


    I hope.
     
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, I think, despite what people on here think about me, that we're actually in agreement in alot of areas about Tannehill. I just believe that much of of his inconsistencies were initially from a raw QB on a really bad team, and then a two year QB with bad coaching.

    Well see if Tannehill finally becomes what I think he can be.
     
  8. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    I'm in the minority but I think the only way Tannehill is going anywhere is if he's so bad that Gase is fired (along with Tannenbaum).
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  9. Dol-Fan Dupree

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

    34,224
    24,525
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I think the only way Tannehill goes is if Miami craps out and can get a top pick in the draft

    Unless they can luck into a 2nd round pick out performing him, which does not happen often.

    I believe if Tannehill was drafted in any other draft class, he would be in the discussion as one of the top young quarterbacks in the game today.

    People talk about him like he is Chad Henne or David Carr. Talking about Tannehill as if he is bad to decent instead of what he is right now, good not great.

    Hopefully he can step more into great. Still he is so much better than Chad Henne. So much better.
     
  10. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Just to be clear, I was only talking about what we should do, not what's likely to occur.

    In practice, I think the biggest determinant of whether Tannehill actually stays with the team is what Gase thinks of him. If Gase is on board, then even if Tannehill performs at an average level, they'll probably keep him and just negotiate a lower salary for 2017-onwards. If Tannehill actually regresses, then I think Gase is fine (it's his first year) but they do jettison Tannehill and use a high pick on a new QB.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    This.

    So much this.
     
  12. Thunderkyss

    Thunderkyss Member

    53
    31
    18
    Sep 10, 2012
    That's an overly simplistic view of the matter. A view that many of you seem to have, but is way off base. The difference between Tannehill & Luck is when the balance of the game is at stake, Luck has been more successful than Tannehill. Period.

    You want to win more games, Tannehill has to take more shots & win in those situations, instead of taking the check down or throwing the ball away.

    & while the AFCSouth doesn't have a dominant team like the Patriots to sweep the Colts year in & year out... it's not that different from the AFCEast. I could see if you were sending a Wildcard to the playoffs year in & year out, but you're not. The Jets, Bills, & Dolphins would fit nicely in the mediocrity of the South.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  13. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You want more shots downfield? Perhaps we'll see it this year, with a better oline.
     
  14. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Funnel enough, Derek Carr who Philbin campaigned for could have been that guy ;)
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  15. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,111
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    When the game has been in the balance Luck's team has been more successful. But I think it's still a stretch to say that Luck has performed significantly better than Tannehill.
    0-7 point games
    Luck; 83.1
    Tannehill: 89.1

    So luck's overall performance in close games hasn't helped his teams more than Tannehill

    Rating when trailing.
    Luck: 79.2
    Tannehill: 82.1

    Luck doesn't seem to be doing more than Tannehill to help his team regain a lead throughout the game.

    4th Quarter rating
    Luck: 86.8
    Tannehill: 78.4

    Luck's better than Tannehill, but Tannehill was dreadful as a rookie and has improved a lot. Also the NFL average QB rating from 2012 to 2015 was 87.7 so while Tannehill has been worse than average Luck hasn't been better than average. Also since their career passer ratings are nearly identical that Tanne is a better QB in quarters 1 to 3.

    Trailing and >4 minutes to go (I don't like the >2 minute rating because sample size is too small for my liking)
    Luck: 80.3
    Tannehill: 63.3

    Luck is significantly better than Tannehill, but again Luck hasn't been performing at a great level.

    As for the differences in the divisions, firstly you seriously underestimate just how bad the defenses that have been put on the field by the other AFC South teams have been. Then when you look at the average QB rating of those teams, they've been putting up horrible numbers even against the bad Ds in the AFC South.

    If Miami and Indy had swapped divisions in 2012 we'd have won at least 3 divisional titles, and based on Luck's performance against NE, NYJ and BUF Indy would be averaging a 5-11 record
     
  16. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,111
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Eyeballing this chart 3 QBs stand out as having a team win% out of line with what you would expect from the QB rating.

    1) Drew Brees. His high rating but low win% is explained by being a good QB on teams with awful Defense.
    2) Michael Vick. His low rating and high win% is explained by his extra value that he brings in the run game.
    3) Mark Snaches. His low rating and high win% is explained by being a poor QB on teams with great Defense.

    Which brings me back to my Hobbyhorse on this thread, the explanations for these aberrations are found in the numbers somewhere, if not in the passer rating.
    When you look at the passer rating stats, Luck isn't moving the needle far enough to explain Indy's W-L record in close games under Luck. But there's nothing in Luck's other stats or advanced splits that I can find that help explain why I should attribute Indy's better than expected performance to their QB.
     
    Brasfin and eltos_lightfoot like this.
  17. Thunderkyss

    Thunderkyss Member

    53
    31
    18
    Sep 10, 2012
    I wonder how Brett Favre would look compared to those two guys.

    I should be clear though, I don't think much of Andrew Luck. I think he's been allowed to do whatever he wants to do with little to no direction. Now, they want to start telling him what to do & I don't think it's going to go over too well.

    Tannehill... I'm amazed he's still a starter with so little wins. That doesn't usually happen going into year 5 & a second contract to boot. But he's played well & has taken well to coaching, now you have a bonafide QB Guru, I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't quickly become one of the top QBs in the league.

    Again, neither the Texans or Dolphins have been winning Wildcards over the last four years, so saying the AFC South is a worse division that the AFC East is like saying Tofu tastes better than tempeh. You could probably cobble together enough statistics to prove your point, but at the end of the day...
     
  18. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I think you may be overestimating the impact of division, these are all NFL teams, and the Jets and Bills have not been great either, so it's not like we have played in a great division.

    Also, QB17 has played poorly vs the Bills and Jets, who have been avg, so whats to say that if we played in the south he wouldn't play poorly vs them, because it may be the pressure of playing in important games that is key factor here, because as is evidenced above, Luck plays better in high pressure situations.
     
    dolphin25, roy_miami and cbrad like this.
  19. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Tannehill rating

    2012 - 76
    2013 - 81
    2014 - 92
    2015 - 88

    Where are you getting his rating from?
     
  20. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    The difference in wins and losses can not always be explained by stats. Intangibles count for something, and are not measurable by definition. As an example in that epic playoff comeback and win against KC Luck picked up a fumbled ball and punched it into the endzone. Not every QB is going to have the wherewithal to make that play. Some will jump on it and cradle it. Some, like Newton in the SB, will look at it as a hot potato. So its a play that contributed to a win, but didn't have any impact on any passing stats. And its a play that only a football smart player would make, and football smarts is an intangible.
     
    Thunderkyss likes this.
  21. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Finster pointed out the key rebuttal here. Passer rating doesn't capture everything so all your post is really saying is that passer rating doesn't explain the abnormally high win % Luck (or Indy with Luck) has in close games.

    So the question really should be this: Out of the 181 QB's in all of NFL history that satisfied certain minimum requirements, Luck's team (pre-injury) did something that was statistically speaking 4 times more likely to have been due to skill than luck (post #183). So since it's statistically speaking most likely due to skill, are you actually arguing that NONE of this skill was the QB??

    If even a decent percentage of that skill was the QB, then you have to conclude Luck (with 4:1 likelihood) "performed better than Tannehill in close games". No other conclusion is logically possible.

    So how much was due to Luck (the QB)? Consider that in a comparison with Tannehill you see all these indications of better clutch performance by Luck (again, Finster pointed out a bunch so I don't need to repeat that). So while there's no way to quantify what percentage of that team skill differential in close games was due to Luck, it's not credible to suggest a large portion of it wasn't.

    Sample size is more than sufficient. With Tannehill you have 200 attempts and Luck you have 178 attempts. It's a rare thing in science where you can't make a credible argument with more than 60 sample size. It's only when you want really small confidence intervals (so you want +-X where X is small) that you need much larger sample sizes. So clinical trials and polls often require that because the overlap between the distributions of two groups needs to be made really small.

    No issue with sample size here. Tannehill is clearly well below normal when it comes to <2 and <4 minutes left while trailing in the 4th quarter (incidentally, the issue with sample size should be with the non-trailing stats where you don't have many samples.. thus, the proper thing to do is to really compare the <2 and <4 minute trailing stats with overall average.. you get the same result in Tannehill's case).

    EDIT: I see you only meant the <2 minute sample size instead of combined.. 56 and 54 are on the boundary. I'll have to actually calculate whether that's large enough afterwards. (OK.. I did the calculations.. see post #236)
     
    dolphin25 and roy_miami like this.
  22. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The responses you gave in blue to Pauly's post were right on, but Pauly's attempts to adjust for division are acceptable. There's no way to truly predict how one team would play in another division, but adjusting based on opponent passer rating is fine. If you want to attack the methodology, I'd point out that's not the only way to adjust it and you're likely to get different results based on which method you use.

    Anyway, good post otherwise!
     
    Finster likes this.
  23. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    btw.. let me point out something about the passer rating formula that should be kept in mind when talking about it: it over-weights completion percentage. Keep in mind the formula wasn't the result of finding optimal weights to maximize predictive power, but was based on "expert" opinion in the 1970's.

    Here's the formula:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating

    If you take an average completion percentage in the NFL of 63% in 2015, then plug 0.63 into the COMP/ATT part of the formula you get 1.65. Take the average TD percentage in the NFL in 2015, which was 4.06%, put 0.0406 into the TD/ATT part of the formula and you get 0.812. Average YDS/ATT in 2015 was 7.28, giving you 1.07. Finally, average INT percentage was 2.68 in 2015, giving you 0.67 (and for those wondering about that "2.375" number in the INT part of the formula, that mathematically applies to all 4 components equally).

    So passer rating naturally weights COMP/ATT most at 1.65 vs. YDS/ATT at 1.07 vs. TD/ATT at 0.81 vs. INT/ATT at 0.67, at least based on 2015 stats.

    COMP/ATT is naturally weighted twice as much as TD/ATT. Keep that in mind when comparing any two QB's passer ratings, so when TD's or INT's matter most (like in close game situations) passer rating will naturally weight those less than simply completing passes.
     
    Finster, Limbo and roy_miami like this.
  24. Thunderkyss

    Thunderkyss Member

    53
    31
    18
    Sep 10, 2012
    By the way, I've never seen as informative discussion on any NFL forum.
     
  25. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,406
    27,557
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I agree with Thunder that you guys are having a really solid discussion, and you've all been adults and handled it well. Qudos all around. It made me think though. The fact that Luck and Tannehill have been in the league for four years and we're even having this discussion has to be considered a win for RT17 though, doesn't it? Luck was one of the highest ranked QB prospects ever coming out, and Ryan was a big project, who wasn't expected to even see the field his rookie year, maybe two. And yet here we are, with everyone in this discussion at least acknowledging that the debate is a valid one.
     
    eltos_lightfoot, resnor and Brasfin like this.
  26. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Ryan was pick #8. Not that far from #1. Yes Luck was supposed to be the next baby Jesus, but Tannehill was picked quite high as well.

    You're not supposed to pick projects up at the top of the 1st like that. Best case scenario what, you lose 2-4 years waiting for the project to get to a "rookie" level like the other non-projects? That's silly.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  27. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I think it has more to do with Luck not living up to those stratospheric expectations than it does with Tannehill. Tannehill was unlikely to be a bust; the question was would he blossom into a first-rate QB. Story hasn't been written yet, but we're nearing a pivotal point in his career to find out.
     
    Thunderkyss and Finster like this.
  28. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'm sorry, but that's a bunch of hogwash. Tannehill was drafted that high based on potential. Honestly, he was not expected to start in year one. If Garrard hadn't gotten hurt, Tannehill probably wouldn't have. It's hogwash, though, because it's not Tannehill's fault where he was drafted, project or not.
     
  29. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,406
    27,557
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I agree with you. I think that after he was drafted, with 90% of people, had you shown them Ryan's stats through four seasons they would have considered that a total win. People have gotten angry because of the team's record, and the shiny toys in other people's yards that always look better than the ones they have themselves.
     
    resnor likes this.
  30. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    His average rank over those 4 years is 21st in passer rating. He's worse in other metrics. Add that to the poor win/loss record and I don't know who would be happy with that.
     
    dolphin25, jdang307 and Fin-O like this.
  31. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, people would hate his pass yardage, and td to int ratio. Like, you anti-Tannehill people are so glass half full.
     
  32. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    96,655
    49,541
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    C-brad, Pauly, smart dudes for sure.

    i would bet on arriving to the same conclusion about Luck just a bit differently..

    in lamens term, Luck converts when he has to...at all costs..he is less reliable on variables than others even though his variables were pretty bad..
     
  33. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    96,655
    49,541
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    in no scenario should garrard should of started over tannehill...unless you had an incompetent staff, which we did..so..

    ryan was visibly overwhelmingly more talented than garrard..fu##in idiots bringing david garrard in..lol..professional gms..whatever, their job should not be placed on some pedestal, they are not more advanced in their abilities than a few on this site, they just have way more access to make better decisions..
     
    resnor likes this.
  34. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,341
    7,555
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Well, bad or not, it may have been optimal to have had Tannehill sit and learn for a year or two under Garrard...although, I think, considering the oline problems and poor coaching over 4 years, that Tannehill has developed pretty well.
     
  35. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Pauly's point is very valid, I wasn't trying to insinuate it wasn't, I was putting the high pressure thing in there, which is really my biggest concern with QB17, he may be playing poorly in these games because they are important, but that is just a theory.
     
    dolphin25 and cbrad like this.
  36. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,521
    8,912
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    So, I thought I'd fill in one blank that is important for future discussions on passer rating: effect of number of passing attempts on rating.

    This is useful to know because in many cases we have a relatively small number of attempts and people can validly ask whether "sample size" is an issue. For example, Luck and Tannehill's splits show their <2 and <4 minute trailing ratings and you have for Luck a rating of 81.7 in 54 attempts, and for Tannehill a rating of 48.5 with 56 attempts in the <2 minute trailing category. In the <4 minute trailing category you have 80.3 in 124 attempts for Luck and 63.3 in 144 attempts for Tannehill:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LuckAn00/splits/
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00/splits/

    So how can we quantify how likely it is for Luck and Tannehill's ratings differences to be due to chance?

    OK.. first thing I tried (didn't work but it's instructive) was to simulate passer ratings by taking the actual distributions of completions, yards, TD's, INT's and attempts from 2015 and randomly sampling. It didn't work because the standard deviation for the simulation turned out to be MUCH larger than the actual standard deviations of 2015 passer rating (17.5 to 9.8). It's always worth doing a check like that just to see if you have a decent model of the data. Well.. it didn't work! What that means is that randomly generating passer ratings overestimates the variance in passer ratings. The reason is that in reality this means there are correlations in COMP, YDS, TDS, INT and ATT that one is not properly accounting for.

    So that approach told me to stop trying to simulate data and use the actual data (which I should have thought of doing from the outset anyway).

    Take this from 2015:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2015/passing.htm

    It's already ordered by attempts anyway. So why not look at how passer rating changes as a function of attempts based on historical data? Change the "2015" in the URL to another year and you get the other links. I downloaded 9 of those years (thought I did 10 until after the analysis was done.. so let it be 9) and plotted passer rating as a function of passing attempts:
    http://postimg.org/image/cszyv4ump/

    First of all.. interesting trend there I didn't know about: ratings increase on average as a function of passing attempts.

    Anyway, now you can choose any range of attempts you want and calculate the standard deviations. For between 50 and 60 attempts, the standard deviation was 17.74. Between 150 and 160 attempts you get 12.47, and further on out it gets down to 8.

    So, now we know how to properly adjust for "sample size" with the <2 and <4 minute ratings. In the <2 minute ratings, Luck vs. Tannehill is a whopping 81.7 vs. 48.5, with a difference of 33.2 rating points. Given a standard deviation of 17.74 for that range, the probability the difference is 33.2 or greater is 3.06%. That means with almost 97% probability Luck (or Tannehill) did something the other was unlikely to do due to chance for those number of attempts.

    For the <4 minute ratings the comparable value is somewhere between 87% and 92% depending on which range you look at (closer to 124 for Luck or 144 for Tannehill).

    So, paradoxically, the smaller sample size of <2 minute trailing stats is actually less likely to be due to chance. Either way, those are huge percentages showing that the <2 and <4 minute trailing stats represent (very likely) real differences between the two QB's.
     
  37. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    Passing yards, TDs, INTs and completion percentage are all the ingredients to the passer rating formula, which has him ranked 22nd on average. So those numbers may sound great relative to what Dolphin fans are used to but relative to the other QBs in the league they are below average.
     
  38. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,111
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Luck's passer rating and win% are much worse than Tannehil'sl against NE, NYJ and BUF combined. They get even worse when you factor in his performance against NE in the playoffs. Now if Luck is a big game QB who steps up when its tough, then his performance against NE counts against that theory.

    Luck has performed better than Tannehill in high pressure situations.
    But since their performance has the same overall average, it means that Tannehill plays better than Luck for the first 56 minutes of a game. Points scored in the last 4 minutes don"t get doubled, all points are equal when it comes to determining the final winner of the game.
    But even with QB17's 60 passer rating with 4 minutes to go when behind Miami has gone 14-15 in 0-7 point games with him as QB, which suggests that his overall performance in the first 56 minutes offsets his poor performance in the last 4.
     
    Unlucky 13 likes this.
  39. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,111
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Just trying to look more at Indy's W-L performance I thought I would chart some of the best QBs in the game. I am using 2012-2015 data because passer rating has been steadily rising so older data would not be an apples to apples comparison. Ordinarily I wouldn't include rookie performance because it is a fact the rookie QBs perform worse than veterans on average, but in this case I think it's fair considering Indy's W-L record with Luck as QB.

    Andrew Luck
    W-L record in 0-7 games 20-7
    Passing in 0-7 games:
    612 of 1090 attempts for 7391 yards. 52 TDs, 26 Ints.
    83.1 rating
    6.61 Adjusted yards/attempt (for those who don't like passer rating)
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    66 of 124 for 867 yards. 8 TDs, 5 Ints
    80.3 rating
    6.47 AY/A

    Russel Wilson
    W-L record in 0-7 games 15-16
    passing in 0-7 games:
    564 of 907 attempts for 6639 yards. 38 TDs, 22 Ints.
    88.3 rating
    7.07 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    47 of 91 for 496 yards. 5 TDs, 3 Ints
    72.4 rating
    5.07 AY/A

    Aaaron Rodgers
    W-L record in 0-7 games 12-9
    passing in 0-7 games:
    469 of 756 attempts for 5656 yards. 41 TDs, 12 Ints.
    96.41 rating
    7.85 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    36 of 69 for 139 yards. 3 TDs, 3 Ints*
    63.04 rating
    4.18 AY/A
    *[edited for errors]

    Drew Brees
    W-L record in 0-7 games 16-14
    passing in 0-7 games:
    844 of 1266 attempts for 9945 yards. 74 TDs, 32 Ints.
    99.32 rating
    7.76 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    94 of 152 for 1026 yards. 8 TDs, 7 Ints
    80.13 rating
    5.74 AY/A

    Tom Brady
    W-L record in 0-7 games 19-12*
    passing in 0-7 games:
    807 of 1335 attempts for 9077 yards. 54 TDs, 23 Ints.
    87.09 rating
    6.83 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    56 of 107 for 625 yards. 3 TDs, 1 Ints
    75.48 rating
    5.98 AY/A
    * A study showed most HOF coaches had above 50% winning record in 0-7 games. Don Shula, being the only one over 60% for his career, at 60.3%. I can't find the stats where they got it from quickly. Belichek has a career win% in 0-7 games of about 65%, going back to pre-Brady days. So some of Brady's W-L record is attributable to coaching not QB

    Ben Rothlesbirger
    W-L record in 0-7 games 13-15
    passing in 0-7 games:
    694 of 1058 attempts for 7636 yards. 47 TDs, 20 Ints.
    93.75 rating
    7.26 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    69 of 110 for 886 yards. 6 TDs, 5 Ints*
    87.17 rating
    7.10 AY/A


    Peyton Manning
    W-L record in 0-7 games 13-7
    passing in 0-7 games:
    462 of 740 attempts for 5277 yards. 41 TDs, 24 Ints.
    88.78 rating
    6.77 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    27 of 46 for 339 yards. 2 TDs, 3 Ints
    69.02 rating
    5.31 AY/A
    * Note Peyton Manning went 6-1 in 0-7 games in 2015, which most people would say is more a product of the Defense than Peyton's play that year.

    Ryan Tannehill
    W-L record in 0-7 games 14-15
    passing in 0-7 games:
    642 of 1015 attempts for 7251 yards. 40 TDs, 20 Ints.
    89.5 rating
    7.65 AY/A
    Passing when trailing with less than 4 minutes remaining
    78 of 144 for 936 yards. 4 TDs, 7 Ints
    63.5 rating
    4.07 AY/A

    My comment. Luck's 80.3 rating/ 6.47 AY/A is more impressive than I thought.
    However, performance when trailing with 4 minutes left to play is less predictive of w/l record than may people suppose.

    *NB Post Edited for errors with Aaron Rodger's and Ben Rothlisberger's numbers
     
  40. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,406
    27,557
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Pauly, you rock. And are the stats saying that the only TD that Aaron Rodgers threw while trailing under four minutes the last four years was against us, when multiple defenders botched that late drive?
     

Share This Page