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

Dolphins’ QB Josh Rosen solid in first start with Miami

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Sceeto, Sep 26, 2019.

  1. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What I meant was that quarterbacks possess individual ability, at varying levels across QBs, that has nothing to do with their surroundings. Their individual ability is a function of what’s internal to them, not what’s external to them. Their performance is determined in part by that ability, and not wholly by what’s going on around them.
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,266
    7,477
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Except it is completely dependent on the surrounding players. Again, for the quarterback to have a good performance, he NEEDS the receivers to catch the ball. So his performance is completely determined by someone else. Doesn't matter is you're Dan Marino or Tim Tebow, you still need the receiver to catch the ball.
     
    mlb1399 likes this.
  3. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The QB is completely dependent on his surrounding players but his performance is not "completely determined" by them. Big difference in meaning. Completely determined means that you do not need to consider anything else to know the outcome. Thus, to say that QB performance is "completely determined by someone else" means that QB performance does not depend on the QB at all.

    This distinction btw is important in mathematics. A function f(x,y) is dependent on x and dependent on y but it is not "completely determined" by x or by y. Instead, it is "completely determined" by both x and y.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  4. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,266
    7,477
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Well I assumed that since he was separating ability and performance, that performance is what happens on the field: TDs thrown, completions, etc.
     
  5. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah the distinction still holds. You can't have a completion without someone throwing a pass, so the QB (in this case) has to be part of the equation. Thus, passing TD's and completions are determined by both the QB and the receiver (among others).

    Either way, you're definitely right that the QB is "completely dependent" on his surroundings for any outcome (e.g., TD or completion).
     
    resnor and The Guy like this.
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Really there’s nothing monumental about what I’m stating, because the clamoring teams do to find an elite quarterback indicates everything I’m saying regarding their individual ability.

    If quarterbacks’ surroundings determined the entirety of their performance, teams would clamor for surrounding pieces and make quarterbacks themselves a far lower priority.

    This is really nothing more than a commonsense point.
     
    Pauly and cbrad like this.
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,266
    7,477
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    No it's not. I look at it like a spectrum. There's a middle ground where what you're saying is true. However, if you go too deficient in talent around the QB, the results won't be there, no matter how good the QB is.
     
  8. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,338
    8,295
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    LOL, stop picking on our boy Preston Williams...he really wanted to catch those TD's!
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What I’m stating is only that quarterbacks have individual ability independent of their surroundings, and that teams’ clamoring for elite quarterbacks is a testament to that.

    To dispute those specific statements, you would have to take the position either that quarterbacks have no individual ability independent of their surroundings, or that NFL teams don’t clamor for elite ones. Is that the position you’re taking?
     
  10. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,266
    7,477
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sure they have individual ability. However, if had all the QBs they're at targets and throw into buckets, stuff like that, even the worst NFL QB is gonna have amazing individual skill. I mean, these are elite athletes, the best of the best of the best at what they do. Yes, some guys are better under pressure etc...but that's still dependent, usually, on other players not doing their job.
     
  11. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,135
    3,050
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    This is getting into a Sorites paradox. Usually explained by saying if you have a heap of sand then you remove one grain is it still a heap? Then if you remove another grain is it still a heap? And so on until you reach one grain of sand. At some point it stops being a heap of sand, but no one will agree as to what point it is definitively no longer a heap of sand.
    It is also sometimes to as adjacent case logic. It is decided that group A, for whatever reason deserves a benefit. People then argue that if group A deserve a benefit, then group B, which is almost the same should also get the same benefit. If group B gets the benefit then group C which is almost the same as Group B should also get the benefit. And so on until you end up with group Z, who are nothing like the original group A, but claiming they should get the benefit because group Y who they are similar to also has the benefit.

    Because football is such a complicated sport with many dependent and independent variables people can argue that the OL is all important or completely unimportant using the same underlying data and observations. You can make the same arguments for pretty much any position in football.

    The simple fact is that we cannot measure in isolation just how important any one single element of a team is, with the possible exceptions of kicking and punting.
     
    Hooligan and The Guy like this.
  12. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,338
    8,295
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Did you watch the Seattle game last night? Because in the 4th quarter, it wasn't Wilson taking over...it was a stud running back plowing people over.

    The position he's taking is that there are more factors than the QB that can change a game in a moment's notice. CB, RB, DE, LB...truly elite players make differences regardless where they are on the field. The same can be said of an offensive lineman though, and just because people don't realize it doesn't make it any less true. You're completely twisting the argument into something it's not.
     
    resnor likes this.
  13. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,176
    43,615
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Its the people on the opposite side of resnor that are making the definitive conclusions. All his side is doing is explaining there are variables that could change the conclusion and the other side is saying, "no definitely, it stops being a heap at 4,672 grains of sand."
     
    resnor and Irishman like this.
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If you follow the posts above closely, I think you'll see that I made two very specific points: A) that QBs have individual ability independent of other parts of teams, and B) that NFL teams clamor for elite ones.

    Resnor then said those points weren't true, because C) QBs' performances are contributed to by other parts of a team.

    In other words, I said "A and B are true," and resnor then said, in essence, "no they aren't, because C is true."

    A, B, and C can all be true. You don't have to say A and B aren't true to tout the truthfulness of C.
     
  15. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,176
    43,615
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That's not really what res was trying to say.

    Again, this comes down to the very simple concept that it takes 2 people to complete a pass (ignoring the very rare instance of a QB catching his own batted pass). If you are judging the QB, on how he read the field, threw the pass, timed the pass, arc, velocity and the placement....all regardless of person 2 doing their job properly and catching the pass and getting adequate YAC, then yes the assessment of the QB is valid.

    But very few people here are doing that. They are judging the eliteness of a QB based on stats that require the WR to catch it, the line to block, the defense to not stop the play and coaches to call the right play.

    To your point specifically, every team wants elite players at all the positions and try and get the best they can. I mean, if cost were equal you'd take Jerry Rice over Legedu Nananee all day, every day. You'd do that because you'd know regardless of who your QB is, Rice will make him look even better than he is with an average WR and Legendoodoo would make the QB appear worse than he is with an average WR.

    Hell, people lost their collective chill, when we traded away Tunsil.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2019
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I think the way the discussion pertains to what you said above is that it's highly unlikely any team will consist of such poor surrounding pieces that the quarterback's individual ability becomes completely undermined and meaningless, and so it makes sense for NFL teams to prioritize quarterbacks and not surrounding pieces.

    In other words, there is far more likely to be the situation on a team in which a quarterback's individual ability is the limiting factor in its performance, than the situation in which the surrounding pieces are the limiting factor.

    So while we can argue that, yes, a quarterback needs a receiver to catch a ball to capitalize on the quarterback's individual ability, the variation in "catching balls" that exists in reality is so small over the long haul, in comparison to the variation in quarterbacks' individual ability, that it makes sense to prioritize quarterbacks and not receivers.

    The "QB needs a receiver to catch the ball" argument essentially becomes meaningless, because "catching balls" doesn't vary throughout the league at a level enough to make it relevant or meaningful over the long haul.

    Preston Williams can drop a touchdown pass and affect Josh Rosen's passer rating significantly in a single game, of course, but over the long haul, across the league at large, the relatively large variation in QBs' individual ability is going to determine teams' fortunes far more than the much smaller variation in receiving corps' pass-catching ability.
     
  17. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,176
    43,615
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I think the fallacy is that it "all comes out in the wash", so to speak. Why take Jerry Rice over Legedu if that were the case? Why worry that Tunsil is gone?
     
    resnor likes this.
  18. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What I'm comparing is QBs to the rest of the offense, so the comparison would be between Joe Montana and Jerry Rice, not between Jerry Rice and Legedu Nanee.

    Obviously you want Rice over Nanee, but do you want Rice over Montana?

    If one of today's teams were building a roster from scratch and drafting #1 overall, and both were available and their future career performances could somehow be known in advance, do you think they'd take Montana or Rice?
     
  19. Dol-Fan Dupree

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

    34,123
    24,407
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I'd take Rice
     
    resnor likes this.
  20. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Over a 5 year period differences in surrounding cast come about half way towards completely "washing out". The standard deviation in win probability if team strength was totally random from year to year is 0.29 while in reality it's about half that: 0.15.
    https://www.thephins.com/threads/thoughts-on-the-dolphins-cowboys-game.94643/page-3#post-3207211

    So it does matter who the receiver is and what kind of OL you have and what kind of defense you have (half of their effect not washing out is meaningful for sure). However.. washing out about half of the effect of surrounding cast over a 5 year period is pretty huge IMO.

    The first graph in that link is actually informative in this regard. Note how big the effect of sample size is for passer rating even over a single season, yet also note that the variation asymptotes and can't go to zero (it would go to zero if surrounding did not matter at all).

    The argument I made above shows you how close we can get towards measuring how important any single element of a team is. You can go about halfway. Theoretically if you had sufficient random variation you'd measure the variation in win% for each position when the surroundings change. Those variances tell you the relative importance of each position: the greater the variance the less important that position is (because it's more affected by changes in surrounding cast).
     
    The Guy likes this.
  21. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    1,681
    1,455
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I would too. Montana was fine, but Rice was once in a lifetime.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Who is throwing to him in that scenario, if you don’t take Montana? You’re just going to let that be a question mark, instead of having one of the best quarterbacks of all time in the bag?

    I’m not arguing how good Rice was at all, but my lord, somebody’s got to throw him the ball. I don’t see how you could want him instead of Montana and then just leave the other half of that equation to chance.
     
  23. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,338
    8,295
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Umm, hello...the Dolphins are made up of almost entirely rookies and CFL players. That's EXACTLY the point Resnor and others have made here repeatedly.
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And the quarterback isn’t one of them?
     
  25. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Montana vs. Rice? Should be obvious: Montana.

    First time Montana started 8+ games is the first year of the juggernaut that became the 49ers. Look at San Fran from 1981-1998:
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sfo/index.htm

    That's the 2nd greatest run in NFL history over a 18 year period with 5 SB's and almost every year in the playoffs. Only NE barely beats that with 6 SB's from 2001-2018. And that 18 year period coincided with the tenure of Montana and Young, who statistically are the 2 best QB's (by efficiency) in NFL history (Young 1st, Montana 2nd).

    Compare that to the effect Rice had. He entered the league in 1985 and started most games in a season from 1986. Very little improvement in win% due to Rice.

    It's interesting though that once both started to age their effect on a team became negligible. Montana went to KC in his final 2 years and didn't affect their win% while Rice went to the Raiders and also Seattle his last 4 years and didn't affect their win%.

    Both are historic greats at their position, though Rice might be unquestionably the #1 among WR's. But the QB position is just far more influential than the WR position so if you're starting a franchise you choose Montana over Rice if you have to make that choice.
     
    Hooligan, cuchulainn and The Guy like this.
  26. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    susanpowter_stoptheinsanity.jpg
     
    KeyFin and Dolphin Dundee like this.
  27. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It's just friendly banter dude. Passing time during a "tank" season. Not to mention we're not playing this week.

    It's only insanity if you let it affect your life lol. (hint: don't let it affect your life)
     
  28. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Some would take Kuskus.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  29. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Statistically speaking; what are the chances that I'll ever get to party with cbrad? :bighug: :hammertime:
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2019
    resnor and cbrad like this.
  30. Dolphin Dundee

    Dolphin Dundee Well-Known Member

    483
    326
    63
    Sep 27, 2015
    Yeh these discussions lately are making my head hurt. So to pass the time this season i've enjoyed visiting Jets forums..Man those guys are miserable! At least we're trying to suck. Go Gase!
     
    Hooligan, cuchulainn and Sceeto like this.
  31. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Good question! In principle we can make that probability anything we want.

    I'll say this though: a bunch of us absolutely should get together after the Dolphins win their next SB. Too much history here not to do that.
     
  32. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    :up: ...word up, brotha'.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  33. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,382
    8,652
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Wow.. it really is interesting to read that stuff. There's a guy with the name "Same DarnOld Jets" on theganggreen.com lolol. Clever and accurate IMO. Lots of people souring on Gase (makes total sense) but many still think Darnold is a true franchise QB (all I can say is LOLOL). That place will explode if they're 0-6 instead of 0-3. They play the Eagles, Patriots and Cowboys so there's a good chance!
     
    cuchulainn and Dolphin Dundee like this.
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,176
    43,615
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right, but I don't think anyone is suggesting Rice is more important than Montana. The point is, do you think Montana looks better as a QB with Rice or with Legedu?
     
    The Guy and resnor like this.
  35. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Yeah, imagine if it was Gino Carmazzi to Rice instead of Montana.
     
  36. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    12,452
    5,063
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    How about Gino to Legedu?
     
  37. JPPT1974

    JPPT1974 SB LIV 2020

    370
    71
    28
    Apr 15, 2012
    Yeah but we would not have a Joe Montana or a Jerry Rice for that matter!
     
  38. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    334
    355
    63
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Do you think we can get Mr. Ross to pick up the tab?
     
    Sceeto, cbrad and Dolphin Dundee like this.
  39. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    1,681
    1,455
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Honestly, I dont think Montana is one of the best of all time.

    I think he was a "very good" player who had an elite supporting cast that could steamroll most opponents.

    Rice would take a 3 yard pass for 70. Dont look up exactly how many times that exact feat happened LOL it's just an example, but Rice can inflate a QB rating on his own.

    If you were asking me Peyton or Rice, Peyton all day. I'm not that high on Montana though.
     
    resnor, Dol-Fan Dupree and The Guy like this.
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,617
    834
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So you believe that quarterbacks have individual ability, just that Manning had more than Montana. I can live with that.

    What I find hard to live with is the idea that there is no variation in QBs' individual ability, and everything about them is attributable to their surrounding casts. If you push that to its logical extreme, we get to the position where a 10-year-old child could step onto an NFL field and, with the requisite surrounding cast, perform just as well as Dan Marino.

    Of course that flies in the face of the way every team in the league approaches the importance of the quarterback position, in comparison to other positions, in terms of resources allotted, in today's game.
     

Share This Page