Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.
I'd be willing to bet that if you could somehow factor in game situation (i.e. playing from behind) it would turn out that the better QBs were being asked to throw in more difficult situations or asked to make more difficult throws.
OK, so now the question becomes, where are the career data points for Mahomes, Brady, Rodgers, Watson, and Wilson.
Because if theirs are significantly different from Tannehill's, then you have an interaction effect as a function of quarterbacks' ability.
Again the question isn't "is Tannehill's correlation between pass attempts and passer rating significantly different from average."
The question is, "is Tannehill's correlation between pass attempts and passer rating significantly different from quarterbacks with similarly high overall passer ratings."
If that's the case, then it suggests that to get Tannehill to play like those quarterbacks (the very good ones, who have similar overall passer ratings), you have to restrict his number of pass attempts.
What we're doing here is giving his 2019 overall passer rating additional meaning and context, by indicating that he had to pass the ball very few times to achieve that. The league's best QBs don't have to pass the ball very few times to achieve that.
Again, always appreciate the work on your part. Don't let the incessant back-and-forth suggest that it isn't appreciated.
If you trade an NBA player to another team and have him stop shooting three-pointers and his field goal percentage increases significantly, you can't surmise on the basis of that that he's suddenly become a better three-point shooter.
Prior to 2019 the percentage of games in which Tannehill threw an above-average number of passes was 38. This year that figure was 18%, and in those games he played nowhere near like he did in the others.
WELL if you are going to give his QBR rating additional meaning and context then you will need to do that for all the other QBs in the league. Starting with outside vs inside, rain vs sun, injured players vs uninjuried players, coaching techniques, IF it was the players Bday on any given game day (not sure why but its always brought up by the guys calling the game so IT MUST have meaning).
Once you get the other 31 guys going I will start working on Tannehills. I can't wait.
That's already answered in that graph for a single season. Just pick whatever your threshold is for "high" passer rating (e.g., 110 or above in 2019 numbers) and look at all points to the right of that threshold. Tannehill is either around average or slightly above depending on where you put that threshold.
There's also no reason to look at career ratings here because Tannehill's career rating is close to average, so you wouldn't want to compare him to Brady, Wilson, etc... So the claim should be specific to 2019 and Tannehill's slightly better than expected (purple line) there.
You will have to clarify how he played "nowhere near like he did in the others". And remember you can't just throw QB rating out there, cause that needs to be set up with "additional meaning and context". Believe it or not I don't make the rules. This was actually just thrown out there by some guy and now we all have to do it...
What about an NFL QB where his YPA increases and his passer rating increases?
Did you REALLY think he was going to give it up? He's all in still trying to argue his 2 pair beats a straight flush.
He's a high volume poster with a very low completion percentage
This is his whole agenda:
1. Show that Tannehill isn't as good in some way as QBs he rates as elite
2. Imagine that Tannehill will have to face off against one of those QBs in passing frenzy shootout
3. Predict that Tannehill won't fair well
4. Make the assumption that an average QB wouldn't fair well either
5. Conclude that having Tannehill on the team is no better than having an average QB
6. Therefore Tannehill is an average QB
There are assumptions and/or cherry picking at every step.
1. He wants to pick and choose the QBs in the comparison. It is Mahomes or Wilson or Rodgers or Brees. Never once has he mentioned Cousins or Jimmy G (also high passer rating QBs).
2. He assumes the game will be a shootout with a large number of passing attempts by Tannehill. Nevermind that we have 12 games of evidence that Tennessee can score on par with KC in a balanced attack and that they beat KC that way this season.
3. He assumes that Tannehill won't do well and requires cherry picked stats to make that claim.
4. He assumes other QBs won't do well.
5. Bogus assumption since it ignores all of the other games that teams play. It is essentially ignoring the 9-3 record that it took to get here.
6. Completely ridiculous conclusion based on nonsense.
Along with a huge number of INTs and no TDs.
I predict he is scrambling to find the "right" threshold.......
How does that tell us where the best QBs in the league are on the graph?
We have a problem with restriction in range in that year, however, and the relation isn't linear. In low-volume games Tannehill's average passer rating was 118.6, with a standard deviation of 26.5. In high-volume games, his average passer rating was 87.3, with a standard deviation of a mere 4.95.
So again, in low-volume games in 2019 he bounced all over the place. In high-volume games he played far more consistently poorly. Obviously that's going to diminish the correlation between pass attempts and passer rating game-by-game that season.
And that's true for his career as well, where the variation in low-volume games is much higher than the variation in high-volume ones.
I suspect the slope is negative because I feel that the more a QB throws, the more likely the team is behind and with less and less time available to catch up, bigger risks are taken in the passing game.
This seems to be a logical conclusion for me to make.
If you're using passer rating as a proxy for QB ability, then obviously all data points to the right of whatever threshold you choose for "high" passer rating correspond to the "best" QB's.
No we don't because the relation is linear for the population. Of course, since Tannehill's correlation is near zero for 2019 any "linear" extrapolation will also be zero correlation. And the rest of your comments (which I didn't quote) were just cherry picking data.
Anyway, you're circling back to arguments already disproven before. Unless you have something new I think we're done here.
You're reading the graph wrong. The x-axis is passer rating not passing attempts. That graph is saying that the better the QB is (more to the right on the x-axis = higher passer rating), the correlation between passing attempts and passer rating becomes more negative. In other words, the better the QB is the worse the decrement becomes with higher number of passing attempts.
What FinFaninBuffalo said in post #5042 however does make some sense:
I can't test that, but it's plausible that the better a QB is the more they're asked to do when behind, leading to bigger decrements.
Right, and there are many of those that have vastly different correlations than Tannehill's. If Tannehill clusters into one area on that graph, and players like Mahomes and Brady cluster into a significantly different area, what does that tell us?
I've said this before and I'll say it again, thanks for all the effort. I've got to admit, I'm not trained in statistics, but what you post makes perfect sense. I can understand what you are saying without having the knowledge to do the analysis myself. So, kudos for knowing how to do it and knowing how to explain it.
This thread delivers. It's like watching a Rocky fight...only Rocky doesn't come back to whoop Clubber's *** at the end.
And the hits keep comin'! Tannehill has been voted the Professional Football Writers of America's "Comeback Player of the Year" and "Most Improved Player."
"He became just the third quarterback in NFL history to post a completion percentage over 70 and a yards per attempt over 9, joining Joe Montana and Sammy Baugh.
A decisive thrower, Tannehill has thrived in play-action situations. He led the NFL with a 117.5 passer rating and 9.6 yards per attempt.
With six games with a passer rating of 130 or higher, he tied Russel Wilson (2019), Tony Romo (2014) and Aaron Rodgers (2011) for the most in a season since 1960. Four of those games came consecutively, against the Chiefs, the Jaguars, at the Colts and at the Raiders."
And that was despite not getting starter reps until the week he started his first game......
Well.. here are Brady's and Wilson's year-by-year data points plotted against Tannehill's 2019:
You can see that the trend line is pretty good in predicting the distribution of the stats for both QB's. In other words, both those QB's (and I suspect others too) tend to perform around that trend line over time. So based on the single data point in 2019 Tannehill is doing slightly better than expected even for QB's like Brady and Wilson.
In any case, no one should mistake Tannehill for QB's like Brady and Wilson that have proven they are some of the best year after year, at least not until he proves he can do the same. But at least for 2019 there's no statistical basis for the claim that the correlation between his passing attempts and passer rating is somehow worse than would be expected for similarly performing QB's.
And the hits just keep coming:
It should be pointed out that Tannehill did it in 10 games while Romo and Rodgers did it in 15 and Wilson did it in 16.
Yep...been saying that a couple months now. Gotta keep BOTH.
I think everyone has whipped him.
Actually they do. We drafted Tannehill and expected a lot from him...and he did indeed produce. Tannehill owns 9 Miami Dolphins franchise records, eclipsing the great Dan Marino and yet he is still the fall guy for the team rather than placing the fault on oh say...Joe Philbin, Adam Gase or any of the other members of the coaching staff that made STUPID calls and when they didn’t pan out, blame Tannehill instead.
I’m about to make a prediction...Tennessee is going to the playoffs, Tannehill will be named the Comeback Player of the Year and Dolphins fans are going to be crying that we lost him
Be prepared to try every QB until you can find one that supports his claim.....
DAMN DUDE! Great call!!
Some guy doesn't understand the context of high volume passing and the numerous contrasting situations under which it can occur and why. High, or low, passing volume passing games transpire in many different ways in relation to opponent, gameplan, sticks, scoreboard, etc.
I'll now sit back and wait for the inevitable high volume statistical accumulation argument that said guy doesn't realize can not be used to determine the very specific circumstances of individual football games. J/K, I'm not waiting around for that crap.
Here is another comment from from Adamprez2003 in November that "The Guy" liked!!!! I presume that means he agreed with it. At the time, he was on his "it has only been four games. there is no evidence that he will continue.... blah blah blah" tirade.
Fair enough. Let's say he has to win in the playoffs. At least get to the AFC Championship. LOTS OF GOOD QBs haven't been to the SB (rivers, stafford, etc). This way it proves he can win in the playoffs and if you can win in the playoffs you can win a SB
Hey, Guy? What happened?
Again appreciate the work as always. Let me see if I can break down the 2019 season in a more understandable manner.
Consider the following numbers of pass attempts and passer ratings in games for a single quarterback:
14 -- 109.5
18 -- 155.8
19 -- 133.9
20 -- 130.8
22 -- 131.2
27 -- 140.4
27 -- 133.6
29 -- 120.1
33 -- 109.8
36 -- 92.2
39 -- 82.3
The correlation between pass attempts and passer rating above is -0.68, which is fairly strong.
Based on the appearance of the data, the question becomes, why does this quarterback play so much more poorly in high-volume passing games? His average passer rating in low-volume games is far higher than it is in high-volume ones.
Now let's insert two more games of pass attempts and passer ratings for the same quarterback:
15 -- 61.0
16 -- 78.1
What we have above of course are two low-volume games with low passer ratings. The insertion of those games, however, diminishes the correlation between pass attempts and passer rating from -0.68, which is fairly strong, to -0.089, which is almost nothing.
The correlation was diminished not by his playing well in high-volume games, but by his playing poorly in low-volume ones.
However, the quarterback's average passer rating in low-volume games is still far higher than his average passer rating in high-volume games.
Why should we not continue to question why this quarterback plays so much more poorly in high-volume passing games, especially when he has exhibited the same pattern of performance over his much longer career as a whole?
The above are the actual data for Tannehill's 2019 season by the way.
Hasn't this already been answered NUMEROUS times? Dude... seriously.... time to come up with something else.
You cannot remove games to increase the correlation..... that is cherry picking.....
How about we throw out the Carolina game. It was his only 2 INT game of the year. Clearly an outlier.
Let me suggest another theory. Tannehill had three games with more than 30 passing attempts.
33 -- 109.8
36 -- 92.2
39 -- 82.3
In two of the games, the Titans fell behind by double digits (17 points and 14 points). In the other, they never trailed by more than 6 and led the game for large parts of it. Without looking, guess which games are which.
Believe it or not a t-test is significant for the low- and high-volume passing games above, even though the high-volume passing games are an N of just 2. The reason of course is because the mean of the low-volume games (118.6) is so discrepant from that of the high-volume games (87.3), and there is comparatively very little variation in passer rating in the high-volume games.
Dude.. even for cherry picking that's showing lack of skill. You leave in a game with 14 passing attempts but take out two with 15 and 16 passing attempts to make a point about low volume games? C'mon.. cherry picking can be done better than that!
Anyway, you can't remove data like that if you care about proper statistical methodology, and I've already shown the results of using proper methodology. So my role here is over I think lol.
Whatever the Titans are doing defensively in the red zone, the Chiefs have to solve. With respect to Henry, whatever the Chiefs have in the form of thumpers at LB & run-stuffers along the DL, they have to be out there on early run downs. It's tough because those guys are often liabilities vs pass. We may see them play a lot of press/jam on the outside or all 11 in the box. Perhaps some 5-man defensive fronts aggressively firing off the snap in one direction or the other. Quality hits on Henry in the backfield is how you mitigate the power & vision of a RB like him. Well timed run dogs, Henry's a long-strider, so unanticipated adjustments in the backfield are big too.
And in the presser where Tannehill had just found out about the awards, as usual, he was humble and respectful in his reply:
"I think the awards are just a reflection of the guys that we have on the team."