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

Titans to start Ryan Tannehill

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

  1. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,531
    8,919
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I introduced correlations because that's the proper statistical analysis to do!

    And regarding the "restricted range" argument, remember how almost every relation between NFL stats is linear over most of the range? If it's linear, then you actually have evidence that the correlation over a restricted range (a little over half of it) most likely applies to the rest. That is, the default hypothesis is that the relation is linear in this case, and anyone arguing otherwise would need to prove that.

    I'm just fine with saying it's just the evidence we have and be done with it, but the point is that IF you care about restricted range, then the default argument (based on league-wide correlations) is that the relation is linear and what I found applies to the entire range.
     
    Irishman, Pauly, PhinFan1968 and 2 others like this.
  2. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. You spend 472 posts trying to convince people that there is a correlation between the number of Tannehill passing attempts and the likelihood of his team winning. When it is shown statistically that there is no correlation, you claim that correlation shouldn't be used......
     
  3. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    It isn't linear. Tannehill bounces all over the place in low-volume games, and plays predominantly poorly in high-volume ones, thus diminishing the correlation when the range is restricted predominantly to the low-volume games.
     
  4. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    LOL...I can only see half the conversation, but can plainly see somebody just got straight wrecked. Wow.

    Too funny.
     
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    carnage..... too funny...
     
  6. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    459
    343
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    At this point you are just confusing yourself, my friend.
     
    Hiruma78 and Irishman like this.
  7. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    459
    343
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Well moving the chain does equal points, such as FGs but yeah I get what your saying...

    TDs > FGs.
     
  8. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,531
    8,919
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    To extrapolate, you obviously can't use Tannehill's own stats! And the correlation for Tannehill is zero so there's obviously no linear relation in his case. I'm just saying that IF you want to extrapolate you need to use population stats, and in general such relations are linear.

    In any case, statistically there's no support for your premise. So you should argue this one without statistical analysis.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm not confused at all.

    For his career in low-volume games, the standard deviation of his passer rating is 28.6. For high-volume games it's 20.5.
     
  10. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,383
    8,376
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    What you showed there is actually pretty important- it points out that an elite QB is 10x more likely to win a Super Bowl over an average QB.

    Also, a 23.3% chance of winning it all means you should finish right around the top 4 team in the league...which we see with Tennessee in the final four. The other three teams have passers at #7 (Mahomes), #8 (Garoppolo) and #13 (Rodgers IF we don't count Matt Moore at 9th w/ 91 attempts. If you do count him then Rodgers is 14th). So I think you could make the argument that it's not all on the QB alone based on rating...there are other factors involved.

    For instance, Tennessee eliminated #3 Lamar Jackson which SHOULD HAVE happened based on passer ratings, but the Saints lost to the Vikings, Minnesota lost to the 49ers and the Seahawks lost to Green Bay. Passer rating #'s 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 10 are all out of the running so it's pretty obvious there's something else creating a larger impact than just QBR alone.

    Note cBrad, I already know what you'll say...passer rating is not meant to predict wins. I completely get that. But we're on page 125 of a topic where a few keep pushing that RT is not good enough to win in the playoffs with, when statistics show only a portion of that success is on the QB anyway. AKA, the top QB's don't always win (which your 23.3% clearly illustrated) and their advantage is not insurmountable.

    In fact, Tannehill is the ONLY QB that's still aligned with your probabilities, so it's pretty ridiculous for some to still be arguing against his accomplishments.
     
    resnor, PhinFan1968 and cbrad like this.
  11. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    459
    343
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    You still aint gave me your top QBs man. Aside from Mahomes, Brady, Rodgers, Brees,Wilson, where would you rank guys like Watson, Cousins, Tannehill?
     
    PhinFan1968 likes this.
  12. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    That is because of the low number of pass attempts in the "low volume games". Each completion, TD, INT, and passing yard has a larger relative impact. I would expect there to be larger variation in low volume games.

    Here is an example:

    7 completions 10 attempts 0 TD 0 INT 70 yards = passer rating of 89.58

    Now assume one of those passes went 1 yard further (YAC) and was a TD

    7 completions 10 attempts 1 TD 0 INT 71 yards = passer rating of 123.33

    Now let's assume that TD pass was coughed up by the TE 1 yard short and it was ruled an INT

    6 completions 10 attempts 0 TD 1 INT 70 yards = passer rating of 41.68

    That is a 82 point swing in passer rating with no change whatsoever in the QB play.
     
    Phins_to_Win and resnor like this.
  13. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    He hasn't addressed me refuting his claim about elite QBs winning the SB either or Watson's play in the 2nd half last week.
     
  14. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

  15. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    In that article:

    "Marcus has my utmost respect. He's been the perfect professional. He's such a good dude and teammate even though his role has changed," receiver Tajae Sharpe said. "It was a tough situation, but the coaches decided it was the right decision to help the team. Ryan did a great job of leading us once he came in. He was very vocal and upfront about what he wanted from us on certain routes as a receiving group. He fits in perfectly with this team. He definitely has a swag to him, too."

    Wow...I was told he didn't possess those intangibles...that he didn't have "it."

    "If you're a football fan and pay attention to the details of the quarterback position, then you appreciated Ryan," Stills said. "If you're a Dolphins fan and don't have respect for him, I don't know what football you were watching."
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
    Hiruma78, M1NDCRlME, Irishman and 4 others like this.
  16. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    459
    343
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    PhinFan1968 likes this.
  17. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent Well-Known Member

    459
    343
    63
    Dec 8, 2019
    Tannehill was perfect for the Titans' physical, no-nonsense culture. Vrabel refers to his team as "street rats" because of how hard they play, and Tannehill fits in that group, too.

    "He's athletic. He's accurate. He's prepared. He's a really good leader," Vrabel said. "He's been able to hold players accountable in his own way. I'm glad we have him on our team."
     
    Irishman, resnor and PhinFan1968 like this.
  18. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    He's not a #1 receiver, but he can damn sure take the top off a defense. He'd have fit in well with Tennessee's receiver group.
     
  19. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,944
    9,364
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    That’s the beauty of it. Change of scenery. He get’s humbled by being traded from a dysfunctional organization, sits behind a QB he knew he was better than. I’m sure he decided if he got another shot? He was going to do things HIS way.

    No Dolphins fan should be upset we traded him, you weren’t sniffing the Tannehill you see now.

    I can’t think of a more perfect example of a win/win.
     
    Bumrush likes this.
  20. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Ya there was a part in that article where Tannehill said that exact thing...next shot, he's taking full advantage.

    Kinda makes you wonder how different it would have turned out in Miami had they ever brought in any competition for him, as many fans wanted, even in the early years.
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  21. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,347
    7,561
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    That Stills quote is pretty awesome.
     
    Hiruma78, Irishman and PhinFan1968 like this.
  22. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I'm not intending to extrapolate. What I'm saying is that the correlation between Tannehill's pass attempts and passer rating game-by-game in 2019 isn't informative with regard to the premise because it involves a restricted range of pass attempts.

    The statistical analysis that supports the premise is the one that shows that Tannehill's performance plummets far more than that of several of the top QBs in the league when he passes the ball an above-average number of times in games. That's consistent as well with his 2019 performance, where his average passer rating plummeted from 118.6 in low-volume games to 87.3 in high-volume games.

    So, Tannehill's 2019 passer rating has meaning as a predictor of his performance only to the degree that his very low number of pass attempts in 2019 can be replicated. That requires at the very least a very strong running game.

    And in terms of winning a Super Bowl, we shall see whether he can remain in a low-volume role in the passing game when facing one of the best quarterbacks in the league in the playoffs, who can put lots of points on the scoreboard. If he can't, then he needs an elite pass defense as well, to mitigate the difference between how he and those kinds of quarterbacks will likely perform in a high-volume passing game (again the best QBs in the league don't show anywhere near the performance decrement he does in high-volume passing games).

    If that's the case, then the quarterback with the highest passer rating in the league needs the same surroundings as an average quarterback (an elite pass defense) to win a Super Bowl. That isn't usually the case for the quarterback with the highest passer rating in the league. Typically that quarterback can be competitive for a Super Bowl with just an average pass defense.
     
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    Jesus, how many ways can you be told you are wrong? You haven't done a statistical analysis. You've done nothing but make nonsensical arguments.

    Your current mission is to label Tannehill as average through some twisted and completely unsupported logic. You spent the first 5 or 6 games insisting that he could not keep up the historic level of efficient play. You assured everyone that he would regress. No football rationale. No analysis of the play. Just some selective statistics. When Tannehill crushed that argument, by finishing the season as the league leader in passer rating and YPA, and near the top in numerous other categories (completion %, red zone efficiency, TD %, big play %, TDs per game, points per drive, etc, etc, etc), you had to find something else.

    First you assured everyone that in the playoffs Tannehill would crumble. You pulled out yet more selective (but different) stats to "prove" it. After the Titans beat NE, you decided to focus in on passing volume. You insisted that there was NO WAY that the run first, low pass attempts approach would work against the Ravens. Well, WRONG AGAIN.

    Now you using two playoff road victories to "prove" that Tannehill is no better than average..... you just cannot make this stuff up.

    Each football argument and statistical argument have been repeatedly shot down. It is embarrassing.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
    Hiruma78 and PhinFan1968 like this.
  24. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Just block him bro...it's much more enjoyable around here without his gibberish.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Mahomes, Wilson, Brees, and Rodgers are top-tier in my opinion. Then there is a second tier with Cousins, Watson, Ryan, and Jackson (above the third tier because of his running ability). Third tier would be Tannehill, Stafford, Prescott, Garoppolo, Wentz, Carr, Goff, and Rivers. Everyone else basically doesn't matter, though there are QBs who are developing (like Kyler Murray for example) and could enter one of the above tiers at some point. Brady and Roethlisberger aren't included because their career trajectories are up in the air at present.
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,531
    8,919
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Sorry that doesn't work. IF you have an issue with "restricted range of attempts", then you HAVE to extrapolate. So if you're saying you're not intending to extrapolate then you have no valid critique with using a correlation.

    You haven't provided any "statistical analysis". All you've done is cherry pick data. A statistical analysis would explicitly test the null hypothesis that the correlation between passing attempts and passer rating is zero, and when you do that for that correlation of -0.0893 taking into account sample size you get a p-value of 0.7718 which is clearly not significant.

    So that's what a hypothesis test tells you. Once again.. the stats say you are wrong.
     
  27. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    :sidelol::sidelol::sidelol:
     
    Hiruma78, KeyFin and Irishman like this.
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. I’m not a stats guy and I was able to tell him that he hadn’t done a statistical analysis.
     
    KeyFin and Irishman like this.
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    There is quite a bit of comic relief.
     
    PhinFan1968 and Irishman like this.
  30. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,112
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The meaning of it is that the exception proves the rule.

    For example if you have a traffic sign that says “No parking except on Sundays” the exception proves that you cannot park there any other time.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  31. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,657
    7,034
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    Brad, he’s saying the same thing over and over and over and over...and over and over again and again and again (taking deep breath) and over again...

    Because Tannehill doesn’t throw the rock 50 plus times a game, he’s just an average quarterback. It doesn’t matter that one if the reasons he’s throwing so few passes is that 1 out of every 5/6 passes results in a touchdown.

    I’m done with this ...person. Hes just trolling and it’s gotten annoying, so don’t even bother
     
    KeyFin and Irishman like this.
  32. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah I didn't mean statistical test. I meant statistical analysis, i.e., just analyzing the statistics involved (i.e., passer rating and pass attempts).

    We can do this with correlations however. The career correlation between pass attempts and passer rating, game-by-game, for Tannehill is -0.37.

    For Russell Wilson it's -0.18.
    For Aaron Rodgers it's -0.16.
    For Patrick Mahomes it's -0.19.
    For Tom Brady it's -0.10.
    For Deshaun Watson it's -0.15.

    Tannehill's passer rating in games is far more a function of pass attempts than it is for those other QBs.
     
  33. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,112
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I will assume for a moment that your hypothesis that Tannehill has poor performance in high volume games is correct.

    The next part of the hypothesis is to ascertain why that is the case.
    Null hypothesis. Random variation explains all the difference.
    Your hypothesis: Tannehill has weaknesses in his game that become exposed in high volume games.
    Alternate hypothesis: Gase and Lazor sucked at playcalling whenever they were behind on the scoreboard and opposing Ds were able to exploit their known tendencies
     
    PhinFan1968 and The_Dark_Knight like this.
  34. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,657
    7,034
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    It’s called being a troll
     
    Hiruma78 and PhinFan1968 like this.
  35. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    The point I was making in that regard is that the odds aren't with the exceptions. They certainly aren't more likely to happen than the rule, yet the person I was responding to consistently portrays data in that manner, i.e., because the inevitable exceptions exist, the rule is false.
     
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    1,731
    862
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That would be plausible hypothesis if he didn't demonstrate the same pattern of performance this year, where his passer rating plummeted, on average, from 118+ to 87.3 in high-volume games.

    And again that degree of performance decrement between low- and high-volume games isn't what we see with the league's top QBs.
     
  37. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,173
    3,112
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Many people misunderstand or misuse the phrase, which is why I posted the correct meaning. No comment was meant or implied regarding your position.
     
    The Guy and Irishman like this.
  38. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    481
    978
    93
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL... “pattern of performance“.... do you mean correlation?
     
  39. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,657
    7,034
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    Are the Titans the next New England Patriots?

    VERY intriguing read
     
    Irishman likes this.
  40. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Who skurrd?

     

Share This Page