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 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

Ryan Tannehill is...

  1. A terrible QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. A below average QB

    2 vote(s)
    7.1%
  3. An average QB

    1 vote(s)
    3.6%
  4. An above average QB

    13 vote(s)
    46.4%
  5. An elite QB

    9 vote(s)
    32.1%
  6. The GOAT.

    3 vote(s)
    10.7%
  1. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He was not throwing to unusually open receivers or under less pressure than typical. In fact, it was the opposite. He threw into tighter windows and/or under more pressure as shown by his CPOE metric. He also threw longer passes as shown by his intended air yards.

    He was also effective running the ball, posting an impressive average EPA of 0.78 on his runs with a 77% positive EPA.

    Not really sure what you are looking for and I suspect you don't either.
     
    resnor likes this.
  2. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Other than the fact that you have committed countless hours to the idea that Tannehill was no better than average, WHY is this a question you need to answer?
     
    resnor likes this.
  3. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Again, I ask WHY????? You spent years ignoring situational factors in Miami, now you are somehow compelled to investigate all possible aspects of situational factors.
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  4. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    6,952
    9,101
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    He's not trying to answer a question AT ALL- he's already accepted an answer and desperately trying to prove it when everything around him says it's false.

    You know what it reminds me of? Those modern-day, so-called prophets who said the world was going to end on an exact date. And when it didn't, they fall silent for a little while, only to claim that they forgot to carry the 2 in their equation and the world will actually end on this date instead. They question everything and anything as a sign in their equations except the most simple answer- maybe they're not a divine prophet after all.

    There's a very simple math problem here that cBrad and others have answered 10,000 times- was Tennessee better or worse with Tannehill at the helm? It ultimately doesn't matter what Henry did, who was coaching, whether or not it rained that Sunday and every other excuse we've seen, because again....there's only one question to ultimately answer. Tannehill made Tennessee better and there's really no logical way to dispute that.

    And the reason I used the prophet example is because it directly correlates- what RT did in 2019 has nothing to do with what he'll do in 2020 or at any other point in his career. Cherry picking stats to try and prove something un-provable is a fool's errand. Tannehill will either continue on an upward trajectory next season or he won't...it really is that simple.
     
  5. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Appreciate your work on that cbrad.

    And just to answer the other question I posed in the post of mine quoted by the one above -- the correlation between Mariota's passer rating and Derrick Henry's yards per rush, in the games started by Mariota in 2019, was 0.69.

    The correlation in that regard for Tannehill in 2019 was 0.64. And again correlations that strong between passer rating and yards per rush are highly deviant from the league norm.

    So, apparently the functioning of the passing game was extremely intimately intertwined with that of the running game for the 2019 Titans, regardless of who was quarterbacking it.
     
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm just a student of the game, especially regarding the quarterback position. The emphasis started with my realization that the game functions largely around that position and the fact that the Dolphins didn't have what was needed there, which made me study what was needed in that regard for them to win a Super Bowl.

    Regarding Tannehill in 2019, it's interesting to speculate about what was going on, because obviously it's rare to have a guy function at the average level for six years and then vault upward to that degree for a season. So that inspires either a reappraisal of how the position functions, or some explanation of how Tannehill is an exception to the rule. And again I don't think we'll adjudicate that definitively until after next season.
     
  7. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,942
    9,414
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You're including the Denver game, which is fine if you really looked at Y/A for Henry only when Mariota was in the game. Are you?

    Regardless, the difference is that Mariota's correlation with Henry is not statistically significant from zero, while Tannehill's is. So with Mariota's correlation that's better ascribed to small sample size.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  8. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,942
    9,414
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I had to take a picture of this one.. (I took it on Feb 14th, 2011 at UT Austin, TX):
    [​IMG]

    Can you imagine? Tannehill would have never been drafted and this thread would have never been lol.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
    Hiruma78, Irishman, Pauly and 2 others like this.
  9. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Do you know what else is rare? Being unable to fix an offensive line for 8 years (and counting). Spending years starting multiple linemen so bad that they never play another down in the NFL, that’s rare. A QB that is able to survive that without destroying their ability to play to position, that’s rare. A QB that takes a pounding for years and still is willing to stand in the pocket is rare. It is far more common to end up like David Carr and Tim Couch than Ryan Tannehill.
     
    Etrius24 and resnor like this.
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    For some, drafting Ryan Tannehill was the end of the world.
     
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  11. xphinfanx

    xphinfanx Stay strong my friends.

    10,752
    2,179
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I disagree with your conclusion or Mariota would have signed a 4 year, $118,000,000 contract with the Tennessee Titans, including a $20,000,000 signing bonus, $91,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $29,500,000 or something close to that.
     
    Irishman, resnor and Cashvillesent like this.
  12. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, for the Denver game I split things between Mariota and Tannehill based on who was playing when. Henry had 4 carries for 1 yard when Tannehill was in the game. I didn't figure the Mariota correlation was significant with so few games, just found it interesting that it was consistent with Tannehill's. So we surely can't say there was ever a time during the 2019 when the running game and passing game weren't strongly correlated.
     
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    LOL -- you have to wonder what the owner of that vehicle did the morning of May 22, 2011.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Well and that's really the question at hand, the Tannehill X situation interaction. Was the situation in Miami terrible and limiting the expression of Tannehill's ability, or was the situation in Tennessee extremely good and boosting his performance over and above what would otherwise be average?

    I don't think we'll know until the end of next year, but I think the number of combinations of surrounding personnel (players and coaches) he had in Miami points toward the latter. I don't think the odds are good that he suffered through six seasons in Miami, across that many combinations of surrounding personnel, all of which roughly equally limited the expression of his ability. There were flashes here and there, certainly, but that happens for all QBs. What I mean here is the overall caliber of his performance during the six years.
     
  15. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    There really wasn't a conclusion in the post you quoted, at least in terms of whether Tannehill's performance in 2019 was due primarily to his ability or to the situation. The only conclusions made there were that 1) Mariota and Tannehill's performances in 2019 weren't statistically significantly different, and 2) both of their performances were extremely strongly related to the performance of Derrick Henry, at least when compared to the league norm in that regard.

    So if we're making the point that Tannehill's performance in 2019 points toward his individual ability and away from the situation on the basis that his performance differed so much from Mariota's, well that point really doesn't have merit. Not only were their performances no different (statistically speaking), they were both performing hand-in-hand with Henry! Those findings 1) point toward Derrick Henry as the prime mover here, and/or 2) suggest that Mariota and Tannehill are no different.
     
  16. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not sure how you could possibly come to such an incorrect conclusion. Just bizarre......

    "statistically"


    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
    Hiruma78 and resnor like this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,942
    9,414
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Once again, that's assuming 2019 is a separate condition from pre-2019 Titans, but there's no statistical evidence of that, neither with Mariota nor with Henry. And when you combine 2015-2019 for Mariota or combine (for example) 2018-2019 for Henry you only get statistical significance with Tannehill.

    So the starting point here has to be that something different happened with Tannehill as QB.
     
    resnor, Pauly and The Guy like this.
  18. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    OK I must've misunderstood what you said earlier about that. Are you saying that within 2019, there is no statistically significant difference between Mariota and Tannehill, nor with regard to Henry's performance with each?
     
  19. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,942
    9,414
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That's correct. It's only within 2019 that there's no statistically significant difference between Mariota and Tannehill, or between the correlations of each to Henry. However.. there is actual statistical evidence that 2019 pre-Tannehill was no different than say 2018, both for the QB and for Henry. In other words, you should combine data for both, and when you do you get statistical significance with Tannehill. In other words, those 2019 results are just small sample size effects.

    So whatever you do, start with the assumption that what happened with Tannehill is statistically significant.

    btw.. just to make this clear w.r.t. Henry, that's the correlation between Henry and the QB I'm talking about. Henry's Y/A per se is not statistically significant with Tannehill vs. 2018-to-pre-Tannehill. That was one of the things I was bringing up earlier as to why Henry might have been the more influential of the two (on each other). But that's just Y/A per se, not the correlation to Tannehill.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
    The Guy and Pauly like this.
  20. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    why don’t you do a study of offensive line roster turnover? Try to see if there is a correlation between instability on the OL and OL performance. Even better if you can include a measure of number of games started after leaving a team. The idea is that teams do not change players for no reason. They do it when players are not performing. If those players that were replaced don’t go on to have success somewhere else, they we can assume they were the problem.

    I have no need to do the study because I already know what happened in Miami. It might help you understand.
     
    resnor likes this.
  21. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Certainly that's a plausible area of exploration. The issue I've always had with offensive line stuff is that 1) there isn't a large degree of variation in offensive line performance across the league, and 2) the variation there is doesn't predict performance in the passing game very well.

    Take a look here at the correlation between pass blocking win rate -- which I think is probably the best available measure of team pass blocking we currently have -- and passer rating, team-by-team, in 2019. Pass blocking win rate is the figure with a percentage attached to it below, and the following figure is the team's season passer rating:

    1. Green Bay Packers, 72% 95.3
    2. Baltimore Ravens, 69% 109
    3. Indianapolis Colts, 65% 85
    4. Tennessee Titans, 63% 108.3
    5. Oakland Raiders, 63% 101
    6. Cleveland Browns, 63% 78.4
    7. Pittsburgh Steelers, 62% 76.1
    8. Houston Texans, 62% 95.3
    9. Buffalo Bills, 62% 82.8
    10. Arizona Cardinals, 62% 87
    11. Dallas Cowboys, 61% 99.5
    12. New York Giants, 61% 86.4
    13. Chicago Bears, 61% 83.9
    14. Kansas City Chiefs, 60% 104.4
    15. Detroit Lions, 59% 88.2
    16. New York Jets, 59% 80.6
    17. Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 58% 84.1
    18. New England Patriots, 58% 88.2
    19. Philadelphia Eagles, 58% 92.1
    20. Los Angeles Chargers, 58% 89
    21. Washington Redskins, 58% 83
    22. Los Angeles Rams, 57% 85.6
    23. Minnesota Vikings, 57% 103.9
    24. Jacksonville Jaguars, 56% 90
    25. New Orleans Saints, 56% 110.2
    26. San Francisco 49ers, 55% 103.1
    27. Denver Broncos, 55% 84.1
    28. Seattle Seahawks, 54% 105.3
    29. Atlanta Falcons, 50% 93.8
    30. Carolina Panthers, 50% 74.7
    31. Cincinnati Bengals, 47% 76.2
    32. Miami Dolphins, 41% 80

    The correlation above is a mere 0.28, indicating that 92.2% of the variance in passer rating is unexplained by pass blocking win rate.

    Here's more about pass blocking win rate if people are interested:

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/26888038/pass-blocking-matters-more-pass-rushing-prove-it
     
  22. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    578
    420
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    This is why stats in Football are waste of time and are for kids.

    They have the Browns listed as #6 in terms of pass blocking, wich in reality is isnt even close to how good they were. They were pathetic.
     
    xphinfanx likes this.
  23. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    But here's the thing about pass blocking win rate (and also a commentary about how league ranks can't be relied on in the manner above, as @cbrad has mentioned many times) -- the Browns may have been sixth in the league in pass blocking win rate in 2019, but that doesn't even put them a standard deviation above the league average. The league average in 2019 was 58.5%, and the standard deviation was 5.9%.

    So sixth in the league may look "good," but it isn't even significantly different from average, and that's even if you consider just one standard deviation from average as an indication of "significance."

    This is what I was referring to in post #6661, about how there isn't all that much variation in pass blocking win rate across the league. The sixth-best team in the league for example isn't different from the sixteenth-best team in the league.
     
  24. Phin McCool

    Phin McCool Well-Known Member

    434
    486
    63
    Jan 29, 2017
    United Kingdom
    What happens if this thread gets so big, it creates its own gravitational field and pulls the moon out of its orbit? Scary thought but just saying like....
     
    KeyFin, Irishman, xphinfanx and 2 others like this.
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here is some more about pass blocking win rate as applied to Tannehill in 2019, as well as some other things related to many of the recent posts here -- keep in mind that this article was written on December 13, 2019, when there were still games remaining in the season:

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...ll-breakout-real-why-advanced-stats-love-next

    What I suspect there is from the above that's consistent with what @FinFaninBuffalo said in post #6660 is that, while the correlation between pass blocking and performance across the league may be relatively low, the correlation in that regard for Tannehill specifically may be extremely high, such that when his pass blocking is comparatively poor, his performance plummets, and when his pass blocking is exemplary, his performance soars.

    If that's true, then the issue there of course becomes any team's, and of course especially his team's, ability to replicate and sustain well above-average or exemplary pass blocking. The Titans have already lost their 2019 starting right tackle to free agency, for example.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  26. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Far too simplistic.....
     
  27. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That analysis follows precisely from the hypothesis you raised in post #6660, given that pass blocking win rate would mediate the relationship between offensive line turnover and performance in the passing game.

    How else would you investigate whether that hypothesis has merit in a methodologically sound manner? If you had a high degree of offensive line turnover amidst an unexpectedly high pass blocking win rate, you'd have to account for that. You certainly couldn't say offensive line turnover was causing poor pass blocking in that scenario.

    In other words, the offensive line turnover, in itself, isn't necessarily a measure of pass blocking. Pass blocking win rate of course is a far better measure of that.
     
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why do you always assume that Tannehill is different that other QBs?
     
    resnor likes this.
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Far too simplistic. There are many, many other factors that are not accounted for by ONE metric.
     
    resnor likes this.
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but again, if that metric mediates the relationship between all of those other factors and performance in the passing game, what's the problem?

    In the end you have to measure pass blocking itself somehow, regardless of whatever other factors are responsible for it (personnel turnover, poor coaching, etc.).
     
  31. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    But didn't you already write this?:

    there isn't all that much variation in pass blocking win rate across the league.
     
    resnor likes this.
  32. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I don't always assume that; however, based on the data in the post you're quoting, it's reasonable to hypothesize that Tannehill may be more dependent than other QBs on high-quality pass blocking. And certainly that fits with individual observations as well, many of which have been posted by various people in this thread, who presumably focused on him heavily for six years of his career.

    It's really very simple -- if a QB experiences difficulty focusing on both the pass rush and his downfield reads simultaneously, then obviously that QB is going to be more dependent on high-quality pass blocking for his passing performance. His passing performance rests on the offensive line's ability to remove the pass rush from his awareness, so that he can focus downfield exclusively.

    If the offensive line can't do that, then 1) his passing performance will suffer, and 2) he'll take an inordinate number of sacks when pass blocking breaks down, as the pass rush suddenly intrudes upon his awareness, which had been previously directed elsewhere, before he can adequately evade it.

    And that fits with observations of Tannehill the player, as he's always seemed "surprised" by the pass rush when it arrives, as though all of his conscious awareness had been allocated elsewhere beforehand. At that point he's unable to avoid a sack because whatever evasion of the sack he attempts has been rendered inadequate by then.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  33. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I have no doubt he is more dependent than some QBs. I highly doubt he is more dependent than very many. This is based on watching many different QBs. Every QB has strengths and weaknesses. Tannehill is not a good improviser. He is slower to pull the ball down and scramble than the best at that (Rodgers, Wilson, Watson, etc). But, IMO, he is not worse than Brady, Brees, and other excellent QBs.

    OTOH, he is willing to stand in the pocket to the last second and make throws and do it accurately. It is a trade off. You should not focus on one without the other. That willingness and ability is providing value to his team. That is reflected in his CPOE. A metric that I have been trying to get you to pay attention to for weeks.

    BTW, I have also been telling you for weeks that Tannehill showed the traits that made hime so good this year at times in Miami, especially in 2016. The article you linked pointed out that he had a CPOE of 5% in 2016 (actually it was 5.4%). That was good for 6th that season. The biggest change from 2016 to 2019 is the average depth of intended target (9.6 vs 8.1).
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  34. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I think the issue there is that he's not as aware as them of the pass rush. He has an issue with dividing his attention between what's going on around the pocket and what's going on downfield. So he's slower to pull the ball down and scramble, yes, but I think that's a product of being late to become aware of the pass rush. That fits with his sort of appearing "surprised" when it arrives.

    It's an interesting measure. Here is a good article that uses that stat and some others we've discussed here:

    https://theathletic.com/1409182/201...s-crowning-the-2019-nfl-most-valuable-player/

    Notice in this table it looks at a lot of different things we've discussed:

    [​IMG]

    Here are the measures explained:

     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
    Fin-O likes this.
  35. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Sorry, I disagree with your idea that he appears surprised. I don't think anyone can be aware of the rush and be focused down field at the same time. I think those QBs have a quicker internal clock and they know that they are very good scramblers. What is never discussed is how many plays do they leave on the field because they pulled the ball down too soon. Each team has to evaluate their game film and decide if they are balancing the tradeoffs appropriately for their offense. You can't look at two sack rates and just say the the lower rate is better. It depends on what the offense is designed to do and what payback they are getting for the sacks they allow. Tennessee got a lot of chunk plays from the passing game.

    That was the difference in Miami. For much of the time, they were running a short quick passing attack that lacked the big play. They often held in extra blockers and still they could not provide adequate protection. There was nothing balancing against the sacks they were allowing.

    The final irony is that you were one of the people blaming Tannehill for the line's performance in Miami. Last season they were dead last in PBWR without Tannehill....... Fitzpatrick put up a worse passer rating than Tannehill had put up since his 2nd season and people seemed happy with Fitzpatrick....... just doesn't make any sense.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No I didn't blame Tannehill for the line's performance -- I simply made the point that the relationship can be reciprocal. There were hundreds (or maybe even thousands) of people involved in the discussion, and there wasn't anyone involved who seemed to perceive the relationship between the line and the QB as anything but unidirectional (line --> QB).

    Again this was when Tannehill was viewed as the savior of the franchise, and so there were lots of biases that favored him it seemed.
     
  37. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,405
    9,967
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Not sure i can get on board with that one. I think many Qb's can "feel" the rush yet still be aware enough to find an open WR. I'm not saying Ryan can or can't.....but I think we have more than a few Qb's who do this.
     
  38. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,412
    1,986
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    nobody claimed the relationship was unidirectional. The question was how much fault should be assigned to the line vs the QB. You claimed that Tannehill deserved much of the blame despite video evidence and two independent reviews of every sack.
     
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but the mechanism of action I proposed there was different than was proposed in those analyses. Take Tannehill's rookie year for example, when his passer rating was a mere 76, the team was behind on the scoreboard a great deal, and people perceived that Tannehill's performance suffered because of the high degree of pressure he was experiencing.

    Well of course he was experiencing such pressure -- at that point he had no ability to play in such a way to tilt the game in the Dolphins' favor, keep opposing defenses honest versus the run, and get them to back off and respect his downfield game.

    So under those conditions "short sacks" (ones that happen relatively quickly after the snap) are expected. But again he was being viewed as the savior of the franchise at the time, and so anything short of his performing like Russell Wilson (who was playing very well as a rookie third-round pick the same year) had to be attributable to surrounding factors and not to him.

    The mantra was that Tannehill would be playing just as well with Seattle, and Wilson would be playing just as poorly with the Dolphins. And this was with no track record to go on for Tannehill other than part of his rookie season! It was as if his having been drafted in the top 10 overall was a guarantee he'd be a star.
     
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,239
    1,011
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here's another highly statistically-driven rating system for QBs people might find interesting:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2019-nfl-predictions/quarterbacks/

     

Share This Page