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)
    10.0%
  3. An average QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. An above average QB

    10 vote(s)
    50.0%
  5. An elite QB

    6 vote(s)
    30.0%
  6. The GOAT.

    2 vote(s)
    10.0%
  1. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No what I said was that the strongest probability is that any one team in the league, in any way, is average. There are lesser probabilities that teams are other than average, good or bad, and the Patriots 2001-2019 happen to be one of the teams that occupy an other-than-average position. And again that is readily objectively supported.

    In other words, if you don't know how good or bad a team was in a certain way, the default belief should be that it was average in that way. If it's objectively supported that the team is different from average, however, then that belief should change on the basis of that objective support.
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Again, being "average" doesn't tell you anything. However, you didn't provide any stats, you are talking probability, and drawing broad conclusions from that.
     
  3. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. Go to a Patriots message board and demand they prove they were better than average......
     
  4. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    That is his new method to discredit. Tannehill is average and you must prove otherwise. He has previously stated that he feels there are a few elite QBs and a few terrible QBs at any one time and everyone else is average. He then dares you to call Tannehill elite, and if you won't then you are admitting he is average.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Anybody there with a shred of analytical ability would do that in about five minutes.
     
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What we're talking about are Tannehill's surroundings 2012-2018. The strongest probability is that any QB's surroundings in the league are average. When people propose that Tannehill's surroundings were significantly worse than average, they're making a claim that is improbable. Not impossible, but improbable.

    My only point in that regard is that a consensus of the team's most ardent supporters shouldn't determine the validity of that claim, especially when the claim is improbable to begin with. It's possible the consensus is wrong.
     
  7. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    This statement is ambiguous enough to be completely worthless. Even if there were a way to precisely measure "the surroundings" of a QB, you've already shown an arbitrary definite of average in a similar context.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2020
    resnor likes this.
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And because of that I'm fully comfortable concluding that we don't know the caliber of Tannehill's surroundings 2012-2018. I'm certainly not going to let a consensus of the team's most ardent supporters determine that.

    In other words, we shouldn't analyze the cause of his change in performance in 2019 as though we know for certain his surroundings 2012-2018 were bad, simply because a bunch of the team's most ardent supporters believe that.

    The change in the quality of Tannehill's surroundings from 2012-2018 to 2019, if any, is unknown.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2020
  9. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Miami is tied for the 10th worst W/L record and the 6th worst margin of victory (or loss) since 2012. Their margin of loss was -4.2 which is larger than 1 standard deviation from the mean. Below average.....
     
    resnor likes this.
  10. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Okay, then we can only base it on Tannehill's performance using the most widely used measures - passer rating or YPA. He finished first in both. Coincidentally, that's rare, so even more evidence that Tannehill was the best QB last season.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2020
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'm not sure why you're so hung up on probability. You're saying that probability says that the most likely scenario is that most teams are average, but YOU haven't:

    1. Proven that most teams are average
    2. Proven that the Dolphins were average

    But yet you're drawing the conclusion that people on here are wrong, even though they've been giving you facts and stats to back up What they've been saying for years. You're going further, and actually dismissing every fact or stat posted in these discussions over the years, then asking people to prove that something that didn't happen was actually the most logical thing to have happened.
     
  12. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but that doesn't tell us whether his surroundings went from 1) bad to average, 2) average to good, or 3) bad to good.
     
  13. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Take a break from Tannehill and figure out the precise credit to give every other QB in the league, past and present.
     
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    OK, so here are the z-scores for the Dolphins from the time period 2012 to 2018:

    Win%: -0.33
    Points scored: -1.04
    Points surrendered: 0.34
    Point differential: -0.84

    So, if we're using those measures to determine whether Tannehill's surroundings were significantly different from league average, the assertion that the Dolphins were significantly worse than league average 2012-2018 isn't supported objectively. They functioned within the average range overall, in terms of those measures.

    If you want to use one standard deviation as the cutoff in that regard, then you could argue that they were significantly below average in points scored, but the z-score there is so close to one standard deviation that it certainly doesn't paint the picture that the team was horrendous.

    https://www.pro-football-reference....rature_gtlt=lt&c5val=1.0&order_by=points_diff
     
  15. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The only point I'm making here is that when we're figuring out how to explain the change in Tannehill's performance in 2019, we shouldn't take it as a given that his surroundings in Miami were bad in comparison to the league average, simply because many people on a message board convinced each other of that for seven years.

    His surroundings in Miami may have indeed been bad, but we need to determine that more objectively if we're going to have more certainty about how to explain the change in his performance in 2019.
     
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here are the z-scores for win percentage throughout the league from 2012 to 2018:

    NWE 2.44
    SEA 1.58
    PIT 1.17
    DEN 1.14
    KAN 0.89
    CAR 0.77
    GNB 0.73
    DAL 0.65
    NOR 0.57
    CIN 0.57
    MIN 0.57
    IND 0.57
    BAL 0.33
    PHI 0.33
    ATL 0.25
    ARI 0.12
    HOU 0.00
    STL / LAR -0.04
    SDG / LAC -0.08
    DET -0.25
    MIA -0.33
    BUF -0.41
    CHI -0.56
    SFO -0.61
    WAS -0.61
    NYG -0.73
    TEN -0.89
    NYJ -1.14
    OAK -1.30
    TAM -1.46
    JAX -1.95
    CLE -2.31

    If we define average as z-scores between -1 and +1, 23 of the 32 teams in the league were average during that period of time.

    So 72% of the teams in the league were average in terms of win percentage 2012-2018. Teams had only a 28% probability of being something other than average (good or bad) during that period of time. Teams had only a 16% probability (5 of 32 teams) of being worse than average during that period of time.

    Can you see now why being average is what's probable? Can you see why being worse than average is highly improbable?

    Making the argument that Tannehill experienced significantly worse than average surroundings, for seven straight years, is certainly a stretch.
     
  17. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Why do we define it like that?

    Seems like again, you set the parameters to get the definition you need, to get the result you need.
     
  18. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    exactly
     
  19. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Again, here we go with my exploring the objective support (or the lack thereof) for a claim you're making.

    Define the thing yourself and then we can investigate it in the way you've defined it!

    This is why I started this back-and-forth with you by insisting that you define your terms, but here we are once again with my doing the objective exploration of the issue, only to have you say the method of exploration doesn't hit the target.

    Then you do it!
     
  20. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I already did it. Margin of victory. You ignored it because it didn’t support your agenda.
     
  21. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The Dolphins' z-score for point differential (i.e., margin of victory [or defeat]) was -0.84 from 2012 to 2018 (Tannehill's tenure with the team).

    Please help me understand how that supports the assertion that the team was significantly below average during that period of time.
     
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The problem you're both having here is that you've proposed that a team was below average in the league for seven straight years.

    As I've said before, in a league geared toward parity among teams, it's highly unlikely that any team remains significantly below average for that length of time.

    This is why 72% of the teams in the league are between -1 and +1 z-scores in terms of win percentage from 2012 to 2018. Given the parity in the league, only 28% of the teams could achieve something significantly different from average during the entirety of those seven years. Only 16% of them were below average over that period of time.

    So, think of the claim you're making here and whether it has any basis in reality. It very likely doesn't.

    Once again, the fact that many people convince each other of something on a message board doesn't mean it's valid.
     
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    That is close enough to -1 for me.
     
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And the win percentage, with a z-score of -0.33?
     
  25. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    too easily skewed by one decent season.
     
  26. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If you remove 2016 from the analysis, the team's z-score becomes -0.54.

    NWE 2.22
    SEA 1.58
    DEN 1.21
    CAR 1.02
    PIT 1.02
    CIN 0.75
    NOR 0.75
    IND 0.66
    KAN 0.66
    GNB 0.57
    MIN 0.57
    PHI 0.47
    BAL 0.38
    DAL 0.29
    STL 0.29
    ARI 0.20
    SDG 0.20
    ATL 0.01
    HOU -0.08
    CHI -0.17
    SFO -0.17
    BUF -0.35
    DET -0.35
    MIA -0.54
    WAS -0.72
    NYJ -1.00
    NYG -1.09
    TEN -1.09
    JAX -1.73
    TAM -1.73
    OAK -1.82
    CLE -2.01

    Now you're simply proposing that a team was significantly below average in win percentage over six of seven consecutive years.

    That's not easy to do in a league geared toward parity! Only 22% of the teams in the league fit that bill.
     
  27. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Post 6958 on page 173, I asked you to define average, after you declared that dolphins teams have been average. Finally on this page you posted some wacky definition of average, based on parameters YOU defined. You didn't take an average. You made a range and declared that average fell in that range. I asked you to explain, you told me I wasn't being objective.

    What did I miss?
     
  28. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Further, I've never said the dolphins overall were or weren't average. I've argued that the oline was below average. I've argued our receivers were below average. I've argued the coaching was below average. These are things that I'm not making up, it's where we rank, man.
     
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Also, you put a list together, with Miami in the bottom third, but declare that that somehow makes then average.

    I'll never understand stats.

    Or at least not how you apply them.
     
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Put this back into the bigger picture context -- what we're talking about is whether Tannehill went from 1) bad surroundings to average surroundings, 2) average surroundings to good surroundings, or 3) bad surroundings to good surroundings.

    The prevailing belief is that it was possibility #3 (or possibly #1, but certainly not #2), and so what we're determining now is whether the team was significantly different from average during Tannehill's tenure with it.

    If the team wasn't significantly worse than average during Tannehill's tenure with it, then the change in his performance in 2019 can't possibly be explained by his having gone from a bad team to something better.

    Instead we have to start with the notion that he came from merely an average team, and then it becomes more likely that the surroundings he was experiencing in 2019 were exceptionally good.
     
  31. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Take a look at this image:

    [​IMG]

    "Standard deviations" above is interchangeable with z-scores. This is how just about anything in the world is distributed, including team win percentages in the NFL. You notice above that 68% of the values (in this case win percentages) fall within one standard deviation of average. Those are your average teams -- they are "nothing special" (or nothing exceptional) either way. The ones that fall beyond that, on either side, are your teams that are above or below average.
     
  32. Losferwords

    Losferwords Member

    75
    60
    18
    Sep 1, 2012
    Save your breath... you're arguing with fanboys.
     
  33. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    526
    572
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Guy

    Last year the Miami Dolphins had the worst point total differential in the league.... They were dead last. It is arguable that they were the worst team in football last year.

    Yeah they sucked.
     
    resnor likes this.
  34. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    You consistently have trouble placing your comments within the most basic context of the discussion.
     
  35. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    2,447
    2,031
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
     
  36. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    1,410
    1,982
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Your own list shows SEVEN teams with z scores of -1 or lower. SEVEN. How could those be???? I mean, that must be near impossible right? Parity, parity parity. Your list show 22% of the teams with a score of -1 or less, not the 16% you predicted. How could those be???? I mean, that must be near impossible right? Parity, parity parity. Guess what? It is not a normal distribution. It is skewed to the left. Most of the teams at the bottom would be recognized as poor franchises by NFL fans.

    I still maintain that margin of victory is a better stat because it takes into account score differential. A team that loses 10 games by 10 points each is not the same as a team that loses by 1 point each. You are purposely throwing away information because it doesn't fit your agenda.

    A z score of -0.84. Poor team, case closed.
     
    resnor likes this.
  37. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,404
    9,963
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    When Tannehill has an above average supporting cast he has proven to be a well above average QB, when he has less than that he has proven to be average himself.

    This should be an easy conclusion to come too, no?
     
    resnor likes this.
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    LOL -- spoken by someone whose threshold for below average changed from -1 to -0.84 because that's where the team fell during the period of time in question.
     
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    3,191
    1,008
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No, that isn't the contention, apparently. The contention is that the Dolphins' surroundings were a tremendous ball-and-chain on him, and so the Dolphins' must've been especially poor 2012-2018. All he needed was the roughly average surroundings he had in Tennessee in 2019 and he'd blossom.

    It can't be that the Dolphins' surroundings were average and the ones in Tennessee were exceptionally good -- that's impossible because lots of people on a message board said so, and people on a message board are never wrong, especially when lots of them agree about something.

    Message board consensus = reality.
     
  40. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    14,048
    7,974
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    But how can you test whether or not Tannehill actually made those garbage players better? I mean, he turned Hartline into a 1000 yard receiver, for instance. He took over a 2-4 Tennessee team, and lead then to the playoffs, and they looked very different with him at QB then they did with Mariota.

    You are ignoring the possibility that while Tannehill had garbage in Miami, he actually made them look better than they were.
     

Share This Page