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

Tannehill = dead last in Total Quarterback Rating?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by normaldude, Nov 10, 2015.

  1. normaldude

    normaldude Active Member

    225
    204
    43
    Oct 13, 2009
    Based on the more popular "Passer Rating", Tannehill looks to be doing ok this year.

    But by ESPN's "Total Quarterback Rating" (QBR), Tannehill is literally #32 out of 32 quarterbacks ranked?

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

    "..The Total Quarterback Rating is a statistical measure that incorporates the contexts and details of those throws and what they mean for wins. It's built from the team level down to the quarterback, where we understand first what each play means to the team, then give credit to the quarterback for what happened on that play based on what he contributed.."

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6833215/explaining-statistics-total-quarterback-rating

    Is ESPN basically saying that Tannehill is literally the worst quarterback in the league this year?
     
    AdamC13 likes this.
  2. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,461
    38,416
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Why would you pay attention to QBR
     
  3. gunn34

    gunn34 I miss Don & Dan

    21,763
    3,477
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    Oviedo FL
    Hard to argue with them if you watched the games. Of course it will be blamed on the OL, running backs, and defense.
     
  4. normaldude

    normaldude Active Member

    225
    204
    43
    Oct 13, 2009
    I normally don't. But when someone on another board mentioned Tannehill's horrific ranking in Total QBR, I thought it was surprising. I'm not familiar with the Total QBR details, so I'm trying to figure out what it means. Like maybe it means that he's good in garbage time & meaningless throws, but terrible in clutch situations? Or maybe they're blaming Tannehill for a lot of the sacks he's taken?
     
  5. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    96,652
    49,536
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Been trying to figure it all out myself
     
  6. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,937
    9,354
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Figures lie and liars figure.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I'm not sure about 32nd, but I do know from what I'm watching that imo he hasn't been getting it done when he needs to, that's when he's coming up small.

    He's 18th in the standard QB rating and 32nd in the QBR, and I'd probably rank him around the standard QB rating.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  8. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Rosen Staff Member Club Member

    26,404
    27,548
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    QBR has just about always hated Tannehill. Last year, he was a top 12-15 QB by almost any measure, but I think that they had him around 25th. Its a stupid, and biased, piece of garbage.
     
  9. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    11,041
    9,536
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    But Carson Palmer and Ryan Fitzbeard are top 3 and Hoyer is Top 10.

    Sounds legit. :shifty:
     
  10. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    41,125
    14,473
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    Sounds a lot like you've already determined what you want it to mean.

    I don't put a lot of value into ESPN's rating system personally. There's a lot of flaws in it when you look at it's outcomes IMO. It isolates one player far too much in a game dependent on 11 people. For example, it will give the QB a higher rating for a ball thrown downfield if the WR makes a crazy stupid catch that's one in a million for a gain of 48 yards, but it won't give that QB the same rating for a pass completed on say, a slant route 8 yards downfield that was perfectly placed allowing the WR to pile up another 40 yards after the catch for that same 48 yard total. Neither play happens without the QB, neither play happens without the WR, so why would it have a different effect on the player we're trying to rate... the QB.

    I get what it's trying to accomplish, I just don't think it does a very good job of it. However, it does just what ESPN wants it to do. It generates a way for them to say they can compare QB's accurately, but, it just doesn't. There's too much focus on trying to statistically determine the impact of one player IMO. Passer rating, is a more accurate snapshot IMO of the QB's effect on the entire offensive unit. Maybe it gives too much credit at times like the scenario above with a big YAC play, but you can't have the YAC without the throw. I guess you could, if it was a bad throw that leads that WR into a tackler, but the WR makes a crazy play to break the tackle then take off, but again... The same type of scenario can happen the opposite way.

    As for sacks, especially those in clutch time, I don't like the way again it penalizes the QB. They will consider a 3rd and 15 with the game on the line clutch, and if we give up instant pressure, and the QB gets sacked before he finishes the drop back, that's a big negative according to the statistic on the QB, but really, what could he do?

    To me, it's too open for interpretation, QBR is too subjective.

    The fact that Tannehill ranks dead last, I guess you could say is a concern, for sure. I guess that's if you put that kind of value into the system. Brian Hoyer however is ranked 9th overall. In what world, can you say that Brian Hoyer is a better QB, based on QBR than the other 20 some odd on that list below him? He's had a better effect on the Texans, than Tannehill has on Miami? I'm not so sure of that... Derek Carr? Big Ben? Newton? All worse than Hoyer? Ok.. A few years back, Tebow, over Aaron Rodgers? Ok...

    I just don't buy it. I do however buy into the thought that Tannehill hasn't done enough to help us win at times, but to say he's the worst in the league in that regard... That's just inaccurate.
     
  11. normaldude

    normaldude Active Member

    225
    204
    43
    Oct 13, 2009
    - If a QB completes a 5 yd pass, and the WR heroically breaks 3-5 tackles for some crazy 60 yd TD, I'm not sure that's the same as a QB perfectly hitting a deep ball in stride.

    - And if it's 3rd & 9, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that's great. But if it's 3rd & 15, and the QB completes a 10 yd pass, that sucks.

    In any case, there are flaws in the traditional "passer rating". I'm just not familiar enough with ESPN's "Total QBR" system to get a handle on what it actually means, if anything.
     
    dolphin25 and djphinfan like this.
  12. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    3,854
    1,425
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware
    I don't like tannehill but he is not 32nd.Hell they have fitz rated ahead of brady.That tells you all you need to know right there.
     
  13. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    IMO QBR is a much better QB rating system than the flawed QB rater traditionally used.

    QBR takes into account "context" which the QB rating system does not.

    My biggest knock on Tannehill is that he doesn't "contribute" to wins.
     
    Dolphinzdawgg, dolphin25 and gunn34 like this.
  14. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    I had posted the following in a previous thread. I reccommend following the hyperlinks to become more familiar with it if interested:

    It is definitely complex and there is no perfect rating system. Stats are only reliable incorporating the context in which they were accumulated. What I like about QBR is it won't significantly skew a QBs stats positively by throwing a 1 yard TD pass to a wide-open TE when the team is down by 30 points with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter or negatively when a QB throws an interception that was on target when the team is down by 5 with 1:00 left in the 4th quarter. It will take into account runs, fumbles (regardless of which team recovers) and all the little things QB rating doesn't take into account. It also assigns responsibility to all players on the team participating in the play...QB, OL, WR, etc...which on the surface I would think the Tannehill fan base would like b/c the main argument I perceive to be is his poor play doesn't take into account the OL, WR, etc...Of course, the more context that is taken into account Tannehill's rank drops. The other factor it ways heavily is "clutch."

    I recommend this read to get familiar with QBR:

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/68...terback-rating

    Also this one from Football Outsiders:

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

    What I like about it is QBR would factor in all the variables for these scenarios whereas QB rating would totally ignore the context:

    QB A:
    Team is being blown out 35-3 in the 4th quarter with 10 minutes left and the ball at their own 20 yard line.

    1st and 10...QB hits WR for a 5 yard completion.
    2nd and 5...QB holds the ball too long behind adequate protection, fumbles the ball as he is hit and O Lineman recovers football for a 8 yard loss.
    3rd and 13...QB dumps ball off 2 yards pass the line of scrimmage and WR is tackled 3 yards short of 1st down.
    4th and 3...team punts.


    QB B:
    Context...team is down by 5 points with 45 seconds left and the ball is at the opponents 15 yard line.

    1st and 10...QB avoids pass rush on all out blitz, scrambles outside and throws ball away when WRs are covered avoiding a sack the average QB would take.
    2nd and 10...QB is on target to WR in endzone and WR drops easy catch.
    3rd and 10...QB is on target for 13 yards resulting in a 1st down.
    1st and goal at the 2 yard line...QB runs the ball in for a TD and team WINS ballgame.


    According to the standard QB rating system the following ratings would be given for those series completely void of context:

    QB A = 97.9 QB rating
    QB B = 47.9 QB rating

    QBR would take all that into account and be assured that QB B would be closer to 100 (top of the scale) and QB A would be closer to 10 or so (bottom of scale).

    Of course, QBR doesn't have a simple calculator online to plug in att, comp, yards, td passes, interceptions and get that magical number. QBR requires ESPN workers watching video to assign responsibility and algorithms based on 10 years of detail analysis to what leads to winning games done to determine the rating when it was originally set up. ESPN has also made modifications to the algorithms along the way to improve it.
     
    gunn34 and djphinfan like this.
  15. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,717
    27,723
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    QBR is constantly laughed at in the media. No one understands it.

    Ryan Firzpatrick is having a better season than Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady according to this thing.

    Then they have Brian Hoyer rated higher than Big Ben, Carr, and Matt Ryan.

    Lol. I think I'll stick to the old reliable passer rating.
     
  16. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,717
    27,723
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    So that means you think Tannehill is the worst quarterback in the NFL? Not even his biggest haters will say that.
     
  17. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Definitely not a perfect system, there is none. Being last in QBR doesn't necessarily mean worst. It reflects where a QB ranks in terms of his play contributing to a team winning, or not.

    An argument can certainly be made that Tannehill has done the least amount to contribute to his team wining this year.
     
    gunn34 likes this.
  18. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,717
    27,723
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    The system is way too wacky. I honestly didn't even know they still used it until a few weeks ago when some of the national media guys were trying to figure out why Firzpatrick was rated above Brady. As far as I can remember there has always been controversy surrounding their system. I'm sure there are bits and pieces of it that make sense, but overall I think it's severely flawed and confusing. That's just my opinion though.
     
    resnor likes this.
  19. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Figures don't lie but liars figure.

    I think the QBR is a perversion of the truth. As cbrad has pointed out before, the formula isn't open source. There's some truth there though, but it's perverted.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  20. muskrat21

    muskrat21 Well-Known Member

    1,361
    831
    113
    May 11, 2014
    damn i hope we sign hoyer next year then!
     
  21. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    41,125
    14,473
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA

    In your scenario, I'd probably agree with you. That's not the scenario I presented though. I said a jump ball, that's a David Tyree style catch. It's just too subjective of a rating system IMO.

    I think there's flaws in both systems. However, I think there's more in ESPN's QBR because it's too subjective to someone's opinion on what type of play the QB deserves more credit for than another.

    All you have to do is look at some of the QB's high on that list, Brian Hoyer is a great example. What's he really done to be considered a good QB for his team? Many would argue, if Houston had a real QB, they'd be a much better team. QB is really what's holding them back. Yet, here's the QBR rating saying both Mallett and Hoyer are better QB's than our own. I mean, if that's not a flawed system, I don't know what is. Even the strongest of Ryan Tannehill haters can't possibly agree that Tannehill has been worse for us than Hoyer or Mallett have been (or were in Mallett's case lol) for Houston. Can you honestly say Hoyer would be a better QB for this team than Ryan Tannehill given the way he's played? Again, even for the flaws that many perceive Tannehill has, you can't possibly think that Hoyer or Mallett would be a better fit for us given what they've shown. That really says all that needs to be said about QBR IMO.

    If ESPN was more open about how it all comes together, maybe we could be more accepting of it, given what we "know" though, I'm not sure that's possible.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. ExplosionsInDaSky

    ExplosionsInDaSky Well-Known Member

    2,039
    1,161
    113
    Sep 13, 2011
    Well with all due respect both Hoyer and Fitzpatrick are having slightly better years than Tannehill at the moment. We still have eight games to go, so things could change. Tannehill could catch fire, but I doubt it in this offense with Lazor calling the shots. It's frustrating because I think Tannehill has superior upside, he just hasn't tapped into it yet for whatever reason(s).
    I'm not familiar with QBR, but the actual QB rating numbers have been around ever since i've watched football. Things have gone all analytical which I really have no desire to keep up with. The original rating, overall stats, and the way the Quarterback plays on the field (based on me watching them) is honestly all I need to know about them. It's as simple as that. Analytics (while useful) aren't the all seeing, all knowing. It's like the dreaded PER in basketball that fanboys always crutch on when debating a players impact/value.

    This ranking for Tannehill doesn't sway my opinion of him any differently. I still think he's a talented player dealing with impossible circumstances. He's definitely had a down year as of right now, but he's way too young and still way too raw to give up on.
     
    MAFishFan likes this.
  23. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    Tannehill defenders will state that Tannehill needs a much better offensive line, a strong running game, his receivers to never drop a ball, and a top ten defense. If he has all these things, they say Tannehill will then be able to show he is a much better QB than he has shown in the last three and a half years.

    Of course if you gave the worst starting QB in the NFL those things, he would probably get his team into the playoffs. Tannehill is what he is. A very average starting QB who can play at a high level during segments of a game but just doesn't sustain this high level of play for the majority of most games.

    When he goes against the better defenses, he seems to struggle and that is the reason the Dolphins have remained a below 500 team during the 56 games he has been their starting QB.
     
  24. jeremy2020

    jeremy2020 Active Member

    119
    64
    28
    Sep 8, 2010
    Tannehill sucks, but they also Ryan Fitzpatrick as a better QB than Brady
     
  25. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I agree there is some interesting stuff with the QBR, but I think it does need some tweaking, but I think you would agree that the standard QB rating is closer than the QBR in regards to Tanne.
     
  26. ExplosionsInDaSky

    ExplosionsInDaSky Well-Known Member

    2,039
    1,161
    113
    Sep 13, 2011
    Who should we replace him with next season?
     
  27. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Ignorance. Perfect example of why we're mired in this idiotic argument. Hyperbole constantly used to create a strawman.

    1. It has been argued that Tannehill needs an AVERAGE line.
    2. Strong running game correlates to the offensive line woes.
    3. No one has ever said that Tannehill needs receivers to never drop a ball. Tannehill has had many easily catchable balls dropped though, and they are frequently deep balls, which really hurt his stats.
    4. No one has said he needs a top 10 defense. A defense that doesn't routinely give up 30+ would be a huge help, though. How many teams are successful when their defense routinely gives up that many points?

    But feel free to keep arguing things that no one has said, in an effort to make some sort of point.
     
  28. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Landry threw a very bad pass (face it, you'd ALL be calling for Tannehill's head if he threw that pass) that Tannehill bailed him out on and made the first down...the result? Jarvis Landry -- 1/1, 9 yds, 95 QBR (near perfect).

    'Nuff said.
     
  29. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    I like Lynch out of Memphis. Perhaps Hackenberg if he is still around in the 2nd or Kessler in the middle-late rounds. I thought Hundley would have been a great pick last year. Perhaps GB is open to trading him for 4th or 5th. With Dalton firmly establishing himself as an upper-echelon QB this year McCarron may be had for cheap.

    At least bring in some legit competition for Tannehill. Here we are "year 4" of the Tannehill experiment and he hasn't shown he can actually win games for Miami. Even his biggest supporters at this point can only say that if Miami has a good OL, running game and gets a OC that calls great games then RT can be a very good QB. But isn't that true of every NFL starter...and how realistic is that?

    I don't think anyone claims that Tannehill can carry this team on his back, steps it up in clutch time when the game is on the line, makes the difference between Miami winning and losing, makes the players on the team around him better, makes big plays, is a great field-general and leader.

    So if that is the case, why wouldn't Miami want to see if in fact Tannehill isn't the difference between Miami finishing with 7 or 8 wins and making the playoffs then getting another player at the "most important position in all of sports" a try?
     
  30. ExplosionsInDaSky

    ExplosionsInDaSky Well-Known Member

    2,039
    1,161
    113
    Sep 13, 2011
    Fair enough, Hackenburg and MCcarron are certainly two interesting options. Either way Tannehill will get a fifth year.
     
  31. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Dropped deep balls? Do you have examples? Not saying it hasn't happened, I just don't recall that. I know Wallace was terrible at adjusting to short throws as he is the poster-boy for basket-catcher on deep balls (alongside of Ginn). But flat out drops...

    This year I can think of WRs significantly adding to his stats:
    Matthews caught a 48 yard pass that bounced of a Jets defenders hands by maintaining his stride and concentration.
    Matthews caught a 46 yard TD pass that was seriously underthown by coming back to it, going to the ground at the 1 and rolling into the end-zone for a TD.
    Matthews took a routine 8 yard slant for a 53 yard TD.
    Landry to a 13 yard out, reversed the field and went all world's greatest punt returner for a 50 yard TD.
    Miller took a screen pass 54 yards for a TD.

    All of these are significant QB rating enhancers. I think it probably balances out in the end at the very least.
     
  32. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    While I have stated for some time I don't believe he is the long term answer at the QB position, I have also stated that at this time he is the best option for the short term.

    I believe that with all the issues this team has talent wise and at the head coaching and GM position, it is going to be 3-4 years before this team will be rebuilt. So Tannehill will be okay on a rebuilding team because he has shown he is tough enough to take the pounding QB's tend to take during rebuilding programs.

    This will give the new GM and new head coach a few years to find the next young QB who will hopefully be the long term solution at the QB position.
     
  33. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Barring injury you're probably right. But isn't that another good reason to bring in some competition...what if Tannehill goes down with an injury do we seriously want our playoff hopes to ride on Moore? Or if Tannehill doesn't perform next year, again, then wouldn't it be better to at least have a player with a year under his belt who might challenge for the job the in 2017? I think so.

    I would also say it isn't out of the realm of possibilities if a new coach is hired who has some voting power (would have to be an established winning coach) and decided Tannehill isn't the answer then there could be a change. Not likely the case though, but within the realm of possibilities.
     
  34. yoge

    yoge New Member

    195
    60
    0
    Dec 29, 2013
    I woulnd't put Cousins, Bortles, Mallet, McCown, Winston Krapernick ahead of Tannehill. Tannehill currently is 20-25 best qb in the league.
     
  35. IdrA

    IdrA Rebuilding for Eternity.

    3,317
    1,164
    113
    Oct 15, 2011
    Upstate, SC
    Tannehill is not that good or that clutch, he's just ok. Once in awhile he'll be clutch. That's the QB he is. Now you either build around what you have or you start looking at the draft. I blame Lazor for a lot of Tannehill's short-comings (not all.) Tannehill himself has had his share of 'whoopsies' But the play calling for the guy is atrocious. It would be hard to play in that offense as a Quarterback. Lazor is dumb and shouldn't be in the NFL. Lazor's offensive scheme is making Tannehill worse than he actually is.

    Bottomline... I would change OC before I'd change QB myself... Cause Stone Cold Said So.
     
  36. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,340
    7,553
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You do watch the games right? Off the top of my head, real quick...Wallace against Carolina, Damian Williams has a bad one, couple nasty ones against the Pats last year (first four games had a ton of drops, they lead the league), Stills last game, Sims has had a number of drops. There's plenty more.
     
  37. muskrat21

    muskrat21 Well-Known Member

    1,361
    831
    113
    May 11, 2014
    clearly it should be hoyer cause QBR said so.
     
  38. yoge

    yoge New Member

    195
    60
    0
    Dec 29, 2013
    And thats the bottomline....Cause Stone Cold said so!!!
     
  39. IdrA

    IdrA Rebuilding for Eternity.

    3,317
    1,164
    113
    Oct 15, 2011
    Upstate, SC
    1st round draft pick. (not saying that's what I want to do just for the record) But there are potentially 3 1st round caliber QBs in the draft in 16'
     
  40. yoge

    yoge New Member

    195
    60
    0
    Dec 29, 2013
    I just seen Cam Newton who is number 24 on that list. Yeah that thing is bogus. To me Tannehill is 18-24 best qb in the league. That is just my opinion.
     

Share This Page