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

Encouraging read on Ryan T

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by djphinfan, Jun 17, 2017.

  1. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Good comment. TD's don't factor anyway into this equation so that won't change anything. It would if I was using passer rating but that has so many more components I'd rather use Y/A.
     
  2. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I wasn;t talking specifically about the Y/A equation, as I know what yards per attempt means. I'm talking in general.
     
  3. ChrisKo

    ChrisKo Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    3,062
    1,889
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    Desert
    I believe Kaepernick was the draft before.
     
  4. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,098
    837
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN
    Kap was the year before in the 2nd round, he had his breakout season in 2012 though.

    Chrisko beat me to it never mind.
     
  5. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

    Just my opinion:
    SOLVED/DISPROVEN - He's got a problem with the deep ball.
    He was part of the problem, but not the main part of it - He's the problem with the W/L record.
    ALWAYS THOUGHT HE WAS DECENT AT THIS - He can't handle the rush.
    IMPROVED NOTICEABLY - He has terrible pocket awareness.
    BETTER RECEIVERS, LONGER PROTECTION FROM OL TO ALLOW DEEPER ROUTES, BETTER COACHING TO GET MORE FROM PLAYERS AROUND HIM - His YPA is terrible and is his fault.
    TANNY HAS IMPROVED HERE, BUT MOSTLY SEE ABOVE REASON - His receivers not getting YAC (until Landry) were because he doesn't "throw them open".
    I STILL THINK HE HAD TROUBLE TRUSTING WHAT HE WAS SEEING QUICKLY ENOUGH AND IT WAS CAUSING HESITATION THE FIRST FEW YEARS, THAT'S MORE ABOUT HESITATION WHEN THROWING THAN AUDIBLING THOUGH - He's too stupid to audible.
    HM NO. - He's too stupid to do anything other than Go or Go Go.
    I AGREE THAT HE HAS LACKED AN IDEAL LEADER'S PERSONALITY. TERRIBLE? NO WAY. AVERAGE UP TIL NOW, BUT I AM CONVINCED THAT HAVING GONE THROUGH EMOTIONAL HELL LAST YEAR WHEN HE WAS OUT INJURED, HE WILL COME BACK MORE EMOTIONALLY CONNECTED AND INTENSE IN THE WAYS LEADERS SOMETIMES NEED TO BE - He's a terrible leader.
     
    Tin Indian, Fin-O and resnor like this.
  6. Conuficus

    Conuficus Premium Member Luxury Box

    17,128
    16,238
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    Well away from here
    The ****ing season cannot come soon enough.
     
    Tin Indian, Bpk, brandon27 and 2 others like this.
  7. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,031
    9,530
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    Shall I translate? :chuckle:
     
    Tin Indian and Bpk like this.
  8. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,208
    3,150
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The issue with this that offense design factors into YAC.
    Short passes have more YAC than deep routes.
    Go/slant routes have more yac than comebacks/curls.

    If you have an offense built on a lot of slant routes your air yards will be less but yac will be higher than in a traditional offense.
     
    Fin-O and jdang307 like this.
  9. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I don't see the problem. YAC is mostly on the receiver. Removing those numbers would better show what the QB is responsible for.
     
  10. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Yup. It's less on the wr and more on the route they're running.
     
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Which is still quite a bit on the receiver... gotta run good, crisp routes.
     
  12. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Yeah, no.
     
  13. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,031
    9,530
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    In some cases though, specifically with curls and comebacks....YAC is extremely hard to gain. Those routes are designed for the play to get to that "spot".

    There isn't a WR in the league you will see get consistent YAC on these routes.
     
    dolphin25 and Pauly like this.
  14. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I mean, yes they have to be competent. But put Landry outside and running deep routes his yac will disappear. Julio Jones, AJ green, Dez Bryant have really low yac numbers.
     
  15. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Here's some statistical evidence YAC is more on the receiver than the QB. I took the top 20 players by receiving yards:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/rushing.htm

    then looked up their YAC from here:
    http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/...ivingYardsAfterCatch/qualified/false/count/41

    and compared it to their team's total passing yards:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/#all_team_stats

    The correlation between YAC and total passing yards is a meager 0.15, but the correlation between receiving yards and YAC is much higher at 0.39.

    So I think that's evidence that while both routes, QB's and receivers matter, the receiver is more responsible for YAC than the QB who was involved in all those passing yards.
     
    resnor likes this.
  16. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Not the point at all.
     
    resnor likes this.
  17. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I understand, between QB and WR, yes the quality of QB doesn't factor in much to YAC. With respects to the WR, I think the route they run has a much greater effect on yac than the skills of the WR. That's what I'm trying to point out, and agree with Pauly. RBs and Slot WRs dominate the yac category. Shorter routes = more YAC. 65% of this guy's yards, were yac.



    I watch it, and he's not nearly as impressive as Landry. He accelerates pretty quick, has decent vision, but is no where as shifty as Landry and not even half as tough to take down. It's why Alex Smith leads the league in yac vs air yards (55%) while Jameis Winston is dead last around 33% of his total yards are YAC. Alex dinks and dunks. Winston is hucking it down the field to Mike Evans.
     
    dolphin25 and Fin-O like this.
  18. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,031
    49,964
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    boom.
     
  19. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Which is why we're saying if you remove YAC stats (YAC and TDs scored directly from YAC, but not the actual catch) you'll get a closer representation of the QBs' real numbers.

    You and Pauly are missing the point of why i brought up YAC in the first place. I'm talking about judging the QB not the WR.
     
    resnor likes this.
  20. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,683
    7,085
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    I don't troll the sports sites like some so I really have don't a gauge on who is is talking about who and who is saying what about whom but it seems to me that so many times the Dolphins, in general receive little to no positive coverage at all.

    I would have thought that this in depth analysis, with video coverage would have garnered a lot of positive feelings and encouragement to our team's chances this year to have a winning season but alas, it's turned into yet ANOTHER anti-Tannehill thread.

    With the exception of this first 5 game stretch that I've often commented on, I can't wait for this season to begin.
     
  21. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Yeah, better than Moore's, however. lol

    I was disappointed in his INT's last season, but I don't think it's a sign of things to come. After all, he had a 2.0 INT% the two seasons before. Hopefully he can start working that number down close to 1.
     
  22. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    If you could measure the blocking from the o-line and the coaches ability to call the right plays this would be even better. I doubt that can happen, however.

    When I look at how a QB performs I look at their stats, but I also factor in their team. Not in a real mathematical formula way, but in my own objective way. Right or wrong, and yes some can claim I'm not being objective, I think you have to do this in order to get the true value of one single player.

    I think the QB position is most likely the most important position in football. However, I think coaching trumps any position by a mile. If you take the top 20 starting QB's in the league you will find that some are better at certain things than others. However, overall they are not that different. Same with any other position. What matters most, IMO, is coaching. For example, Rodgers is probably the greatest QB to ever play. I have never before seen his combination of size, brains, scrambling ability, and arm. You place him on the Pats and he wins 10 Super Bowls. I honestly believe that. However, you place him on the Packers and he wins MAYBE 2-3 in his career.

    There have been only a hand full of QB's that had the ability to turn a non-playoff team into a playoff team. IMO, Rodgers is the only QB playing today that that can be said about.
     
    resnor likes this.
  23. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,031
    9,530
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Will you please explain why you feel this thread is "Anti-Tannehill"?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Bpk likes this.
  24. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    26,858
    29,993
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I definitely agree that you could put almost any QB in a situation that will likely lead to failure regardless of how good he is. And conversely you can set-up a QB for success where emphasize what he's good at and protect him from his weaknesses. I see Montana as one of the greats but I have no doubt that he would never have made it above the third string in many systems. IMO Tannehill was placed in a situation where he was set-up to fail. The difference under Gase was that he improved the situation around him. I firmly believe that if we had drafted Wilson, who I believe is now a top 5 QB, we wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs before last season and all these Tannehill threads would be identical but they would be Wilson threads. And conversely that if Tannehill had ended up in Seattle that they would have still been in the SB right away.
     
    Bpk, resnor, Fin D and 2 others like this.
  25. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,031
    9,530
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Let me explain why I feel that is flawed.

    Because with the case of BOTH teams you have subpar OL's. The fact Wilson is much more of a "scrambling QB" than Ryan (and 80% of the league) he is gifted the capability to somewhat neutralize an OL's shortcomings.

    Wilson made too many plays with his legs during these 5 years for Seattle that I can't get on board with assuming Ryan would've been able to take those teams to that same level. The styles are too different.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Puka-head, Bpk, dolphin25 and 2 others like this.
  26. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Wilson didn't have a coaching staff take away his legs, though, like Tannehill did. Wilson also had a great run game.

    Agreed, though, that Wilson can scramble in ways that Tannehill can't. Wilson has lateral moves like Barry Sanders.
     
    Puka-head, Bpk and Fin-O like this.
  27. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    If you can trust FO's data collection this is what they show (see table 1):
    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2010/introducing-yac

    You get the most YAC throwing behind the line of scrimmage, 2nd most when you throw deep downfield, and third most when it's at the line of scrimmage. Worst area is just beyond the line of scrimmage to 15 yards out.

    So what you're saying is true IF by "shorter routes" you mean "not past the line of scrimmage". If a slot receiver is catching 2-3 yard passes and has lots of YAC then that's on the WR.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    They didn't take away Wilson's legs BECAUSE of his running ability. I can't imagine even Philbin being so stupid as to tell someone like RW he shouldn't scramble. I doubt any coach is that stupid.
     
    djphinfan and Finster like this.
  29. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    41,127
    14,474
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    Well, this was a pretty interesting read actually. I think it's polishing things up a bit more than they need to be though.

    The whole section on Parker, made me cringe to be honest. For his size, his potential, it's pretty amazingly sad how he plays with essentially no physicality and body/positional awareness. He plays soft. If he can fix that, and get more physical he still can be a special player. I'm just, at this point not sure that's in his DNA to play that way. Seems as if he lacks confidence, or toughness. For a WR of his size, he should be playing more like an alpha dog out there. I'd love to see him play more like Dez Bryant, AJ green etc. when it comes to using his body.

    That throw from Tannehill against the Rams, cross body, down the field like that... My god. That's impressive. I wish we had a better angle there to be able to follow Parker, because it sure seems that if there was better blocking up front on that play that could have been a huge play down the middle of the field if that pass is able to get off on time, and if RT isn't flushed from the pocket. Sure looks like with the proper timing on that play, it would have been huge, if not 6.

    At times, I feel like Ryan is too patient in the pocket. Easy to say for me though when we don't always get to see what he's seeing downfield. I think his pocket presence isn't the issue, but more so his patience, or reluctance to give up on a pass play and just make something happen with his legs that causes the problem. I guess you could call that pocket presence... I don't see it like that. Sometimes, yes, but I think he's just too patient at times for his own good, he's ok with taking some extra time in there to get the play to open up because he's willing to take the big hits, which gets him into trouble and those negative plays though. I don't see a guy who's oblivious to pressure. Instant pressure like we've allowed so many times, for sure, but I'd rather his eyes be downfield there and the OL actually hold a block more than a split second. :lol: It's the times where he's got "all day" and nothing happens that leave you scratching your head. I feel like he refuses to give up on some plays when he should. Especially since he's so good at throwing on the run.

    I do agree with the general purpose of the article though. I don't think much changed with Tannehill himself this season. I'm sure they cleaned up some issues they may have had with his mechanics and footwork. However if anything, it's just things got better around him, and he was put into a better position to succeed with what we have to work with because we have a coach that at least understands how to tailor his system/offense to the unique talents of the players within it. I think if you even go back to some of the early Tannehill NFL tape, you saw the ability of him to make throws like this. It's always been there.

    I think at this point we can all agree that he's not going to be elite. Likely not top 5. Maybe pushing around 10 though. It's not a huge concern, because you should be able to win that way though. You can win with him, and that's all you can really ask for unless you're fortunate enough to somehow end up with one of the very seldom found "Elite Qb's".

    That being said, I also think people often get mislead by some of the Elite QB's though. Thinking that they do it all themselves because they're "that good". Every QB needs things around him to be solid to perform well. Is Brady as good as he is without their quick passing system, and WR's that are excellent at getting off the line, getting open quickly and putting themselves in positions to make plays? Likely not. Is Rodgers as good without some of his good WR's? Matt Ryan, without guys like Jones? Look at Andy Dalton... everyone has seen his struggles, it's well known. Just the same as everyone's seen his solid play when he had guys like AJ Green, and Jones, and stuff around him. He's not elite, but he was sure playing at a damn high level when things around him were much more solid and stable than they are now. Flacco is the same. Ultimately, to me of course there's elements to a QB that make some better than others, but ultimately their success IMO is always attached to the situation around them. Again, what did you see Peyton Manning do if a WR wasn't executing his route perfectly? What do you see Brady do? Rodgers? Etc. etc. They're all over those guys. How many times have you seen a WR excel in a system with an "elite" QB, and that WR moves on in free agency and isn't very good anymore? The system, the players within it, and the execution of it play a HUGE role into the success of a QB IMO. You even heard Gase talk about this early on in the season when we were struggling. WR's not where they were supposed to be. Lazy route running etc. That hinders performance, and usually gets unfairly lumped onto the QB. What we saw here last year IMO was the beginnings of that taking place here which makes me excited for year 2 of Gase and Tannehill, and the offense. I just wish we'd done something up front to at least address the group we want to call our OL.

    Keep building, keep pounding the importance of execution of things EXACTLY the way they're supposed to be, and I think you'll keep seeing Tannehill "get better" while everything surrounding our offense does as well.
     
    resnor, danmarino and LI phinfan like this.
  30. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Isn't it pretty well established that Philbin and Co basically forced Tannehill to stay in the pocket? That's what I mean. Granted, Tannehill isn't as gifted a runner as Wilson, but he's pretty damn effective, if he's allowed. Now Gase is trying to undo years of Philbin's teaching.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  31. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Yes go routes are also high yac as Pauly pointed out, but rarely do many receivers run go routes exclusively and when they do, it's not a high percentage of hookups. Mike Wallace a leader in yac one of his great years in Pitts because those who run it, are usually fast and it's just a foot race.
     
  32. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Philbin was a bad coach. He was detrimental to Tannehill's progress I agree.

    However.. where things become murky is where to assign blame when we hear Tannehill isn't being given the freedom to do X,Y,Z. Every coach will restrict responsibilities if they think the QB can't handle the responsibilities. I don't think Tannehill was ready his first few years to do all the coaches wanted from him, so part of the reason Tannehill's freedom was restricted is because he wasn't capable of utilizing that freedom effectively.

    On the other hand, a QB isn't going to develop properly if you never give him the freedom to try and fail. How much to give and when to give it so that the person develops properly is more an art than a science and depends on the person. In this case, I agree Philbin was too apprehensive about letting Tannehill try and fail and lacked the creativity to figure out how to utilize him more effectively in the meantime.

    So on one hand yes I think more responsibility should have been given, but on the other hand Tannehill just didn't have the skills his first few years so that it was warranted to give him full freedom IMO.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  33. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    As you point out Tanny can't move like Wilson. Seattle's run game wasn't all that great. 4.3 ypc isn't something to write home about. It's okay middle of the pack.

    If you take away wilsons running that year they averaged 4 ypc, and a little over 100 ypg. That's not great. That would be towards the bottom of the league actually. Somewhere in the low 20s in ypg

    So when we talk about Wilson benefiting from a great run game, you have to give him credit for not having a bottom half run game. He's the one that elevates it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2017
    dolphin25 and danmarino like this.
  34. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Those are 2013 stats just so people know.

    In 2012, Seattle had a YPC of 4.8 and without RW it was 4.7. In 2013 you're right Seattle had 4.3 and without RW it was 4. In 2014, the numbers are 5.3 vs. 4.7, in 2015 it's 4.5 vs. 4.3, and in 2016 it's 3.9 vs. 4.

    League average YPC tends to be 4.1-4.2 and standard deviation tends to be 0.45-0.5.

    So only in 2012 and 2014 did Seattle without RW have a good running game (measured by YPC).
     
    jdang307 and danmarino like this.
  35. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    2012, Lynch rushed for almost 1,600 yards, 11 tds.
    2013, Lynch rushed for almost 1,300 yards, 12 tds.
    2014, Lynch rushed for just over 1,300 yards, 13 tds.

    Regardless of ypc, that means they had a commitment to the run game, and Lynch delivered. Spinning it the way it's being spun now is not exactly honest, imo.
     
    Puka-head, danmarino and Fin D like this.
  36. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    There's no spin in using YPC, especially after I put (measured by YPC) in parenthesis to make sure that was clear.

    In this case YPC is probably the best measure anyway for comparing Seattle with RW vs. Seattle without RW because volume stats like yards or TD's will measure commitment to the run game and be confounded by W/L a lot more (because you run more when ahead) than how good the running game was with or without a given player. Of course, you're correct about Seattle having a commitment to the run game we didn't.

    I think the 3 best measures of the running game are YPC, YPG and TD's. YPC measures efficiency, YPG measures overall commitment/impact and TD's just happens to be best correlated with which running backs get into the HoF.

    So while YPC isn't the be-all-end-all, if you want to see how things are with vs. without RW that's the measure I'd choose.
     
    jdang307 likes this.
  37. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,680
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Not regardless of YPC though. YPC and those totals actually PROVE they committed to the run. Lynch's YPC wasn;t great and he still put those total yards BECAUSE they ran it so much.

    Rushing Attempts
    2015:
    Seattle: 3rd in attempts.
    Miami: 32nd in attempts.

    2014:
    Seattle: 2nd in attempts.
    Miami: 22nd in attempts.

    2013:
    Seattle: 2nd in attempts.
    Miami: 29th in attempts.

    2012:
    Seattle: 1st in attempts.
    Miami: t-14th in attempts.

    But no....Gase taught Thill how to move his feet and that was the difference.....
     
    Puka-head and resnor like this.
  38. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It is spin, though. The reason you use ypc, and not overall attempts or Lynch's overall yards, is to try to act like they weren't getting significant yards and scores from the run game.

    But they were. Lynch was called "Beastmode" for a reason.

    As to the run more when ahead thing, Seattle held teams to 16ppg on average, and frequently held teams to single digit scores in games. So, yes, it's important to consider how often they ran the ball, regardless of ypc, especially considering their feature back was eclipsing 1200 yards each season.
     
  39. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,575
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    That's the point you're missing...that's the argument that EVERY NFL team makes in a win-now league. RG3, Kaep, Tebow, Osweiler, Flynn, etc. were all expected to be superstars when they were drafted/traded, and they each got a very short leash on the field when the team wasn't winning. Look at the Jets with their QB carousel...hell, look at us over the past 15 years. No other QB made it to year five without at least one winning season. It just doesn't happen in the NFL these days.

    Hell, Tebow had a winning record, a playoff win and still never played a snap at QB again. That's just how this ultra-competitive league works. Either you shine right away or you find the bench.

    I don't think anyone has ever said that it's 100% Tannehill's fault like you keep saying...but it is always partially the QB's fault. That goes for greats like Marino, Elway and Manning as well as Ryan Tannehill.
     
  40. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Dude.. no one in their right mind would use YPC to "try to act like (a running game wasn't) getting significant yards or scores from the run game". You use YPG and TD's for that. The entire argument here (post #74) is how to compare a running game with vs. without a player.

    And for that, you shouldn't use YPG or TD's because the raw numbers will obviously (as in 100%) decrease, biasing any results unless your goal was to just calculate the % of the stat due to a player.

    That's not the question here. The question is how well does the running game do with vs. without RW (a key element of the running game). If you use volume stats to try to answer that question, THEN you're spinning. And remember the word "versus" before you respond. You have to compare, not just say what the running game looked like without RW.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2017

Share This Page