Ryan Tannehill

"Mcduffie81 wrote:

I don’t believe it’s unfair to questions people’s evaluations or past record of doing so. Especially if they take themselves very seriously as an evaluator. Lucky for me I don’t make many proclamations.

(The players I can remember proclaiming I liked are Haskins, Derrick Henry and Devante Parker.)

Folks forget about bust predications, they just wanna highlight a miss for whatever reason, only you know that..

What about Ponder, Geno Smith, Russell, Locker, Claussen..

Ryan Has proven me wring up until one last point, and that point is trusting that he can play at a high level on the road, and make those individual plays I think every Qb has to make on their way to a champ.. I saw some good throws last week, especially the conversion, but overall I thought he and that team was carried and won by one dominate running back..

"Mcduffie81 wrote:

I don’t believe it’s unfair to questions people’s evaluations or past record of doing so. Especially if they take themselves very seriously as an evaluator. Lucky for me I don’t make many proclamations.

(The players I can remember proclaiming I liked are Haskins, Derrick Henry and Devante Parker.)

Parker, was incredibly high on him, Henry did not talk crap about, Haskins, not a bust, solid first round grade, but not in the category of a prospects like Mahomes, Wilson, Watson..

"djphinfan wrote:

Hmm, with 0 run game, and the worst oline in football??

I don’t believe that to be true..and I don’t think that’s bashing the player either.. Ryan had better talent on offense during his tenure dont ya think? Not better coaching but can we say better talent?

Maybe the question being answered is, Ryan can play better if he has a dominant run game and good protection, but not so much if he doesn’t?

Is that fair?

Ryan Tannehill's numbers in 2013 (as a 2nd year QB with far worse skill position players, a more poorly coached team, and an OL that gave up 58 sacks): 60% completion, 245 yards per game, 24 TDs, 17 INTs, 81.7 passer rating. 8-8 record.

Ryan Fitzpatrick's numbers in 2019 - 62% completion, 235 yards per game, 20 TDs, 13 INTs, 85.5 passer rating. 5-8 record.

I think you are splitting hairs here. In addition, this is a comparison of a 2nd year QB (that was supposed to sit a year) and a 15 year veteran. Finally, I'd take the 2019 Dolphin receivers over the 2013 receivers all day.

"djphinfan wrote:

I saw some good throws last week, especially the conversion, but overall I thought he and that team was carried and won by one dominate running back..

By design.

"cbrad wrote:

There isn't a single way of determining the relation between win probability and passer rating. Each approach answers a different question.

If you want to know what the probability that a winning QB had passer rating X then you do what you just did: you look at the distribution of passer ratings for all wins and calculate based on that. There the t-test doesn't matter because you're conditioning on winning so you HAVE to use just the distribution of passer ratings when the QB was on the winning team.

If however you want to know the probability of winning GIVEN a certain passer rating in a single game, you need to do logistic regression. So on the x-axis is passer rating and y-axis goes from 0 to 1: every passer rating for a loss gets a 0 while every passer rating for a win gets a 1, and you fit a logistic function to it.

If however you want to know the probability of winning GIVEN a certain passer rating over multiple games (e.g., season ending passer rating), then you do linear regression with passer rating on the x-axis and win probability on the y-axis. That graph I already provided.

So for the probability of winning GIVEN a passer rating you always use both winning and losing distributions. It's only if you condition on winning or condition on losing that you use one or the other regardless of t-test. So the proper interpretation of the stats you have from the winning distribution is to say that IF the QB was on the winning team X% of the time the passer rating was at least Y, etc... But you can't say a passer rating of Y means the probability of winning is X% from that.

Appreciate all that. What I'm interested in specifically is the passer rating needed to give a team at least a 50% probability of winning in the playoffs. Would that involve logistic regression?

I’m rooting for Ryan like I said a million times, I think he deserves success for what he put up with here..I just want him to do what I always though he should do, and that is to establish his legs early in the game and beat the opponent with his entire skill set, now some folks can say he’s a progression read QB, that’s not how he plays the game, but I say, do whatever it takes to win, I know he has it in his repetoire, so show me you get that when the situation calls for it.. don’t just rely on the progression bringing you an open man..

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

By design.

and it worked this time..

"djphinfan wrote:

and it worked this time..

And at least one person (not you) wants to "blame" Tannehill for it.

"Mcduffie81 wrote:

Hey, let’s not act like I have some kind of personality flaw because I brought it up. It sucks but the Mariota thing isn’t going to die. I’m not saying I’m going to continue to throw it around. You like to toss out things like “put your money where your mouth is” or “at least I stick my neck out and make my evals”. So no doubt people are going to call you out on it.

But in this case I brought it up because it’s a DIRECT example or comparison of someone you loved and fawned over, to Tannehill who is someone you disregarded as not good enough.

.

The only time I talk like that is when someone is talking shit

I took a lot of shit when I said Murray and Wilson and Mahomes would become superstars in this league, all three had heavy backlash..sometime when sh## gets to heavy and out of hand, you have to stand up and meet the challenge.

You can keep harping on it like you say, if it makes you feel good, do you.

"djphinfan wrote:

I’m rooting for Ryan like I said a million times, I think he deserves success for what he put up with here..I just want him to do what I always though he should do, and that is to establish his legs early in the game and beat the opponent with his entire skill set, now some folks can say he’s a progression read QB, that’s not how he plays the game, but I say, do whatever it takes to win, I know he has it in his repetoire, so show me you get that when the situation calls for it.. don’t just rely on the progression bringing you an open man..

If he can develop that part of his game to be more consistent, he'd be a perennial top 5-6 QB. His athletic ability combined with his arm talent and intelligence would be incredibly difficult to defend. I don't think he will ever have the escapability of guys like Wilson, Watson, and Jackson, or even Aaron Rodgers. He is just a different kind of athlete. Not nearly as agile but he has good straight line speed and can threaten a defense with his legs.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I liked Vince Young back in the day I cant talk haha

Jeff Fisher. :censored:

Vince showed some flashes, but Fisher never wanted him (I believe the owners forced the issue) and pretty much killed his career.

"The Guy wrote:

Appreciate all that. What I'm interested in specifically is the passer rating needed to give a team at least a 50% probability of winning in the playoffs. Would that involve logistic regression?

@7089

If so, here are the results:

Model Summary
╔══════╤═════════════════╤════════════════════╤═══════════════════╗
║Step 1│-2 Log likelihood│Cox & Snell R Square│Nagelkerke R Square║
╠══════╪═════════════════╪════════════════════╪═══════════════════╣
║ │ 242.14│ .15│ .20║
╚══════╧═════════════════╧════════════════════╧═══════════════════╝

Variables in the Equation
╔══════╦════════╤═════╤════╤═════╤══╤════╤══════╗
║ ║ │ B │S.E.│ Wald│df│Sig.│Exp(B)║
╠══════╬════════╪═════╪════╪═════╪══╪════╪══════╣
║Step 1║Rate │ .04│ .01│25.45│ 1│.000│ 1.04║
║ ║Constant│-3.18│ .65│23.78│ 1│.000│ .04║
╚══════╩════════╧═════╧════╧═════╧══╧════╧══════╝

The variable entitled "Rate" is passer rating.

"djphinfan wrote:

. You can keep harping on it like you say, if it makes you feel good, do you.

And you can keep ignoring the fact that I’m not harping in it.

"texanphinatic wrote:

Jeff Fisher. :censored:

Vince showed some flashes, but Fisher never wanted him (I believe the owners forced the issue) and pretty much killed his career.

That and the league didnt have a plan for Mobile QB yet, coupled with the fact Fischer wasnt innovative enough.

They didnt use his athleticism to set things up. It was drop back, if it isnt there run.

I dont want to bring in debates about Vick as a person, but I find what he did with his legs more impressive than Jackson (just talking legs, not arm or other skills) because the way he got his yards wasnt designed but mostly running for his life.

Probably the closest thing to Barry Sanders style I've ever seen.

Pretty good article describing the Titans offense and Tannehill in particular:

https://weeklyspiral.com/2020/01/08/nfl-film-breakdown-derrick-henry-ryan-tannehill-and-how-the-titans-offense-is-getting-it-done/

"The Guy wrote:

Appreciate all that. What I'm interested in specifically is the passer rating needed to give a team at least a 50% probability of winning in the playoffs. Would that involve logistic regression?

Yeah.. here's the solution:

That log odds of winning = -3 + 0.0315*passer rating (PR) means that the equation for win probability (WP) is:

WP = e^(-3 + 0.0315*PR)/(1+e^(-3 + 0.0315*PR))

Solve that for WP = 0.5 and you get around a 95.5 rating. The reason you need logistic regression is because of where the passer ratings of the losing teams are. If the passer ratings of the losing team are lower, then for the same set of passer ratings for the winning team you get a shallower slope for the logistic function. So you have to take both into account. Anyway, use that equation to calculate the probability of winning X% of games in the playoffs.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah.. here's the solution:

That log odds of winning = -3 + 0.315*passer rating (PR) means that the equation for win probability (WP) is:

WP = e^(-3 + 0.315*PR)/(1+e^(-3 + 0.315*PR))

Solve that for WP = 0.5 and you get around a 95.5 rating. The reason you need logistic regression is because of where the passer ratings of the losing teams are. If the passer ratings of the losing team are lower, then for the same set of passer ratings for the winning team you get a shallower slope for the logistic function. So you have to take both into account. Anyway, use that equation to calculate the probability of winning X% of games in the playoffs.

Awesome -- thanks very much!

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

Ryan Tannehill's numbers in 2013 (as a 2nd year QB with far worse skill position players, a more poorly coached team, and an OL that gave up 58 sacks): 60% completion, 245 yards per game, 24 TDs, 17 INTs, 81.7 passer rating. 8-8 record.

Ryan Fitzpatrick's numbers in 2019 - 62% completion, 235 yards per game, 20 TDs, 13 INTs, 85.5 passer rating. 5-8 record.

I think you are splitting hairs here. In addition, this is a comparison of a 2nd year QB (that was supposed to sit a year) and a 15 year veteran. Finally, I'd take the 2019 Dolphin receivers over the 2013 receivers all day.

I only wanted to compare both skillets relative to this years talent level..

Personally I feel Fitzpatrick made a point in his mind that he recognized the deficiencies of his oline and said to himself, I have to play a different way if I’m gonna survive and keep this team competitive, so he made extreme concerted efforts to establish his legs as a threat..Stepping up in the pocket before the pressure got to close almost on a every play occurance, my problem with Tannehill was that even under such dire circumstances he never made that conscious decision even though he has it in his repertoire, so that’s why I say I dont think it’s a stretch to say Tannehill wouldn’t of played as good as Fitz did this year in our offense..

And to me therein lyes the issue if I’m looking for my franchise Qb, I want someone who is gonna beat you in multiple ways..if that is a preference so be it..

Now maybe that was bad coaching on Tannehill being told to stay in the pocket at all costs, but for 6 years that line was bad and I never saw that conscious effort to take matters into his own hands..
A huge trait for me when evaluating a Qb is whether I see him understand the importance of running off script when the defensive alignment turns its back to the Qb, if they are leaving the middle of the field open and just watching their assignments than I don’t care how athletic the Qb is, he can still be aware enough to cut you every time you do it.

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

If he can develop that part of his game to be more consistent, he'd be a perennial top 5-6 QB. His athletic ability combined with his arm talent and intelligence would be incredibly difficult to defend. I don't think he will ever have the escapability of guys like Wilson, Watson, and Jackson, or even Aaron Rodgers. He is just a different kind of athlete. Not nearly as agile but he has good straight line speed and can threaten a defense with his legs.

100 percent agree with all that, always have, have said many many times, there has never been a Qb that came out of college doing what Tannehill did, never.. but if he isn’t willing to mentally understand this important component then it became to frustrating for me to trust his game strictly from the pocket...

I know I could be wrong here, he’s showing with a dominate run game and solid protection he can reach hi levels of performance.. I just need to see it in the road in the playoffs because I feel eventually that protection isnt going to be there all the time on the way to a championship.. so we’ll see if the titans oline and run game can keep him out of those precarious situations or the inevitable will happen and he will have to make individual athletic plays to reset his platform and either throw or run to convert..

I didn’t like that last week he didn’t run once until late fourth quarter. Jmo

"djphinfan wrote:

100 percent agree with all that, always have, have said many many times, there has never been a Qb that came out of college doing what Tannehill did, never.. but if he isn’t willing to mentally understand this important component then it became to frustrating for me to trust his game strictly from the pocket...

I know I could be wrong here, he’s showing with a dominate run game and solid protection he can reach hi levels of performance.. I just need to see it in the road in the playoffs because I feel eventually that protection isnt going to be there all the time on the way to a championship.. so we’ll see if the titans oline and run game can keep him out of those precarious situations or the inevitable will happen and he will have to make individual athletic plays to reset his platform and either throw or run to convert..

I didn’t like that last week he didn’t run once until late fourth quarter. Jmo

I thought the third and eighth throw was clutch and allowed them to run a good chuck of time off the clock

"djphinfan wrote:

100 percent agree with all that, always have, have said many many times, there has never been a Qb that came out of college doing what Tannehill did, never.. but if he isn’t willing to mentally understand this important component then it became to frustrating for me to trust his game strictly from the pocket...

I know I could be wrong here, he’s showing with a dominate run game and solid protection he can reach hi levels of performance.. I just need to see it in the road in the playoffs because I feel eventually that protection isnt going to be there all the time on the way to a championship.. so we’ll see if the titans oline and run game can keep him out of those precarious situations or the inevitable will happen and he will have to make individual athletic plays to reset his platform and either throw or run to convert..

I didn’t like that last week he didn’t run once until late fourth quarter. Jmo

The issue in the playoffs is going to be that, given the correlation between the running game and winning in the NFL, which is relatively weak, and given the overall strength of the opposing teams the Titans will face, Derrick Henry is not going to be able to carry the team and allow Tannehill to continue on with the fewest number of pass attempts per game in the NFL. Tannehill is going to have to rise to the occasion and provide an impact in the passing game for the team to be competitive.

Remember that during the regular season, excluding the Denver game, the correlation between Tannehill's passer rating and his number of pass attempts on a game-by-game basis was -0.87, meaning that when he threw the ball more in a game, his passer rating plummeted.

Obviously it's not a good sign for him that last week that correlation was diminished considerably not by the fact that he threw the ball a lot and played well, but by the fact that he threw the ball very little and nonetheless played poorly. That doesn't bode well for the Titans' chances of winning should he remain in a game manager role when the competition stiffens.

The Titans got by last week because the Patriots' passing game was weak, and so what makes teams win primarily in the NFL (the passing game) was weak for the Titans' opposition, thus allowing Henry to carry the team and Tannehill to remain in a game manager role with only 15 pass attempts. That isn't going to cut it this week. The Titans don't have a particularly strong run or pass defense, and so they're unlikely to similarly shut down Lamar Jackson.

So it's not a matter of pass protection exclusively. It's a matter of how much of a role Tannehill will have to take in the passing game, and whether the nature of his performance will make the team competitive against the best teams in the league.

This is what has to happen with a quarterback if you want to win a Super Bowl in today's game.

"The Guy wrote:

The issue in the playoffs is going to be that, given the correlation between the running game and winning in the NFL, which is relatively weak, and given the overall strength of the opposing teams the Titans will face, Derrick Henry is not going to be able to carry the team and allow Tannehill to continue on with the fewest number of pass attempts per game in the NFL. Tannehill is going to have to rise to the occasion and provide an impact in the passing game for the team to be competitive.

Remember that during the regular season, excluding the Denver game, the correlation between Tannehill's passer rating and his number of pass attempts on a game-by-game basis was -0.87, meaning that when he threw the ball more in a game, his passer rating plummeted.

Obviously it's not a good sign for him that last week that correlation was diminished considerably not by the fact that he threw the ball a lot and played well, but by the fact that he threw the ball very little and nonetheless played poorly. That doesn't bode well for the Titans' chances of winning should he remain in a game manager role when the competition stiffens.

The Titans got by last week because the Patriots' passing game was weak, and so what makes teams win primarily in the NFL (the passing game) was weak for the Titans' opposition, thus allowing Henry to carry the team and Tannehill to remain in a game manager role with only 15 pass attempts. That isn't going to cut it this week. The Titans don't have a particularly strong run or pass defense, and so they're unlikely to similarly shut down Lamar Jackson.

So it's not a matter of pass protection exclusively. It's a matter of how much of a role Tannehill will have to take in the passing game, and whether the nature of his performance will make the team competitive against the best teams in the league.

This is what has to happen with a quarterback if you want to win a Super Bowl in today's game.

It's been asked earlier, but instead of simply claiming he played poorly, actually describe the 15 pass attempts, and explain what you think he did poorly on each throw. That's the only way that we can have a reasonable and rational discussion. You claiming it was poor, but giving no concrete reasons keeps us mired in circular arguments.

"djphinfan wrote:

A huge trait for me when evaluating a Qb is whether I see him understand the importance of running off script when the defensive alignment turns its back to the Qb, if they are leaving the middle of the field open and just watching their assignments than I don’t care how athletic the Qb is, he can still be aware enough to cut you every time you do it.

All other things being equal, I agree with you, but I am NOT going to trade Tannehill's arm talent for Fitzpatrick's or anyone similar just to get the off script stuff. I'm not sure I trade the off script stuff if I am getting far inferior accuracy, pre-snap recognition, or a host of other things.

Also, I think you are underestimating the amount of off script plays that Tannehill makes.

"djphinfan wrote:

I know I could be wrong here, he’s showing with a dominate run game and solid protection he can reach hi levels of performance.. I just need to see it in the road in the playoffs because I feel eventually that protection isnt going to be there all the time on the way to a championship.. so we’ll see if the titans oline and run game can keep him out of those precarious situations or the inevitable will happen and he will have to make individual athletic plays to reset his platform and either throw or run to convert..

I didn’t like that last week he didn’t run once until late fourth quarter. Jmo

It should be said that he has made numerous plays this year by avoiding pressure, resetting and making a killer throw. The only question is if he does it often enough.

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

It should be said that he has made numerous plays this year by avoiding pressure, resetting and making a killer throw. The only question is if he does it often enough.

I will add that Brady and the Mannings have been pretty successful without the Russell Wilson and Lamar Jackson elements to their games.