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

Tannehill traded to Titans for draft picks

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Mar 15, 2019.

  1. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,443
    7,123
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    First, I was halfway joking (hence the LOL and the smiley). I say halfway because Gase was adamant that Luke Falk was the best QB in the draft. And if that's my "baseline" for the equation, then it doesn't matter he was taken in the 6th round by another team, because that's not how he was valued in Miami.

    I read a story decades ago where a woman found a valuable painting in a flea market for just a couple of dollars. I want to say it was a Picasso...but this was the 90's and my memory isn't that great for random things. Anyway, she made millions of dollars because the swap meet didn't know what they had. And if we factored out that equation, the $2 price tag (or whatever it was) wouldn't belong in the formula at all.

    So I'm really hoping Gase spotted a Picasso...that's all I meant. I'm not expecting Luke Falk to be the next Marino, but that doesn't mean he can't be based on his draft grade by a team that cut him after a few months. I know the probability isn't high but at the same time, it's exactly as high as any rookie QB. Heck, Josh Rosen was taken 10th overall and he's about to be in the same position as Falk- do we say his probability for success is also zero?
     
    resnor likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,795
    7,411
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No because a bad rookie season is still a lot better than no snaps in the NFL (i.e., the uncertainty in how you turn out is less). Not sure what the actual probability is for Rosen, but if I had to guess it's in the low single digits. The reason it's almost certainly not zero is because there are a lot of examples of QB's that had a bad rookie season but went on to do really well. Steve Young is a great example, John Elway too, and recently you had Jared Goff, though we'll see how he turns out longer term. So probability wise, Rosen > Falk.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  3. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    9,841
    6,407
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,795
    7,411
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Not sure there's much need for analysis. It was a good move for everyone involved.

    Titans don't yet know if Mariota is the answer and Tannehill is as good a backup QB as you'll find, Dolphins needed a fresh start and actually got something in return for a QB they were going to cut, and Tannehill gets a fresh start though he'll have to wait till Mariota goes down.

    Not sure there's much else to say really. Good job to both GM's.
     
    Pauly, Sceeto, KeyFin and 1 other person like this.
  5. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,204
    6,272
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    Getting into this late but am I reading this right?

    We have our starting quarterback AND our 6th round draft pick this year in exchange for...

    A 7th round pick this year and a 4th round pick next year?

    Sounds to me like a loss on our end.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  6. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    621
    583
    93
    Sep 12, 2015
    Someone tell me how this is a bad trade in any way. When you break it down you euther:

    Traded Tannehill for a 7th and a 6th for a future 4th = Win for us.

    Traded Tannehill for a 4th and swapped a 6th for a 7th...which is still a good deal.
     
    resnor likes this.
  7. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,795
    7,411
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It's a terrible deal IF you think Tannehill should have remained our starting QB. But think about this from a different perspective, one where the team had already decided to cut Tannehill (all reports say this is the case, and the trade confirms it). From that perspective it's a good deal regardless of your opinion of Tannehill, even with the extra $5 mil or so we paid.
     
    The Guy, Pauly and resnor like this.
  8. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    9,841
    6,407
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
     
    Dol-Fan Dupree likes this.
  9. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    9,841
    6,407
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
     
    The Guy and Dol-Fan Dupree like this.
  10. Irishman

    Irishman Active Member

    183
    223
    43
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Doesn't "I said you need to take into account the probability of the condition being satisfied" bias the answer based on how subjective your "take the probability of the condition being satisfied" is derived?
     
  11. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    9,750
    3,069
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Im still shocked that they actually did it. Very bold move. I think after next season he will end up back with gase with the jets.
     
  12. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,795
    7,411
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yup. It’s very important that those “prior probabilities” are estimated from historical data. So for example you could find the best estimate of the probability of a QB taken with pick #X of having an average adjusted passer rating of Y. You can also place confidence intervals on those estimates based on how large the sample is (from historical data).

    What you don’t want to do is just subjectively assign those prior probabilities.. totally defeats the purpose of stats lol.
     
  13. Irishman

    Irishman Active Member

    183
    223
    43
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    I appreciate the reply. Statistics always fascinated me because it isn't the math, its the methodology.

    After I realized that the bell curve could never predict a "0" probability because it is asymptotic I started to wonder about its real value. Then I found out that data of natural phenomena's don't exactly match the bell curve but usually have some kind of variation that is compensated for by using special applications like the student's t-distribution and others, and I started to shy away from my admiration for the science.

    Statisticians use a lot of special distributions and other methods, so they clearly have a handle on what they are doing. I'm just a little miffed because I'm a very literal type personality and I like more stability in what I'm looking at. When I found out about confidence levels I went crazy. You mean your guessing at how accurate the answers for your calculations could be. AHHHH!!!

    Now that I'm hooked on analyzing football in a meaningful way I'm going to have to delve in what are to me, the murky waters of statistics. I've just dredged up all my old books: Understanding Basic Statistics, Probability and Statistics for Engineers- both the third and fourth Editions. The school changed the edition used between the first and second semesters. I'm already getting steamed up and I haven't even opened one yet!, Well, not for the last 30 years.

    Then there are the paper backs: Concepts of Probability Theory and a recent addition, the ubiquitous The complete Idiots Guide to Statistics. I think I'll start my review with basic statistics then go back to my primary texts of Probability and statistics for Engineers.

    I'm going to be following your posts and will probably have a few questions from time to time. I hope you won't mind if I start conversations with you off line. I anticipate some of my questions will be technical and my ignorance will be on display. I wouldn't want everyone to know I'm not as smart as I think I am.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  14. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    6,795
    7,411
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.. just PM me with questions if you want.

    Addressing a few of the points you brought up, confidence intervals aren't guesses ONCE you have chosen a model for the data. Simplest example: if you are modeling your data as a coin flip (which is fine for some applications) then the 95% confidence interval could theoretically be exactly calculated by simulating a coin flip an infinite number of times and finding the interval that contains the middle 95% of the data.

    So given a model of the data, the confidence interval is logically implied and there is no guessing going on though precisely how to estimate those intervals may take you into deep crevasses of statistics where certain researchers spend their entire lives lol.

    As far as the normal distribution (bell curve), I think you are confusing some things. The probability of any SINGLE event on a continuous scale (e.g., the x-axis that normal distribution lies on) equals precisely zero. So it does predict zero probabilities for any single event. What you're referring to is the y-axis, and that only comes into play if you're talking about cumulative probabilities. In fact, because the normal distribution (as well as tons of other probability density functions) predicts zero probability for any single event, you'll see it used to predict the probability of intervals rather than single events.

    And the utility of the normal distribution comes from something called the Central Limit Theorem which basically explains why a ton of natural processes should be described pretty well by the normal distribution. Basically, it says that if you sum random variables, then those sums are distributed normally. It's why so many football statistics are distributed normally.

    But yeah, just PM me if you want. Otherwise this will become a stats board lol.
     
    The Guy and Irishman like this.
  15. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    1,696
    794
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    It’s hard not to like Tannehill. He’s a class act, took his beatings like a man and lead this team through several hot messes in coaching, GM’s and personnel. Having said that, he is not the answer and I’m happy we can finally move on.
     
    Wilkimania and Pauly like this.
  16. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    2,966
    2,758
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The big thing for us is the salary cap considerations. Trading Tannehill has value for us simply by moving his salary off our books. So the draft picks don’t amount to much, but the salary cap savings are probably the rough equivalent of a 1st rounder in terms of ability to acquire talent.
     
    Irishman and mlb1399 like this.
  17. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    9,841
    6,407
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
     
  18. Nappy Roots

    Nappy Roots Well-Known Member

    10,293
    4,202
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Bradenton,FL
    I think one thing that is clear, and its not super surprising. Tannehill had his teammates respect, and the idea that was a mutiny in the locker room over him is probably just flat out false.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  19. Irishman

    Irishman Active Member

    183
    223
    43
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Those that have the least to offer don't let that stop them and go out of their way to embellish what they are presenting with any vitriol that is oozing out of their pores at that moment. You can see them all over this thread.

    I see self-justification as the main driving force of egotists when confronted with truth. These are the folks who would then ask "who's truth", totally ignorant that they are actually acknowledging that they don't recognize truth, just those aspects that make them feel good about themselves.

    Hey, I see a germ of a name for a disease that could apply to these folks. I'll name the disease aspectseekers. Guess what? It's already in my dictionary! Any improvement in the name would be welcome. It seems a little too long and dignified for those folks. Just my opinion.
     

Share This Page