I don't know, that figure, though, didn't take out defensive points for us. But I don't think we have enough pick sixes to move us to around four points per first half. I will check, though.
I'll try to do it sometime this weekend if I remember but Rock just posted some stats on our first half time of possession. We're last. Aren't we also last in third down conversions overall or close to it? In case I forget or don't do it for whatever reason, if those stats are correct, we can safely assume those translate over to the first halfs we've had. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sorry. It's late, I'm tired (long work week). The 47 came into play I believe when we were talking about the games in which the defense gave up double digit 1st halves. Not the entire season. But, adding in defense and special teams the offense's average is under 10.
We have two first half pick sixes. So, point total goes to 113 total for first half points. So, 9.4 average points in the first half. And yes, I do think that is pathetic.
Yeah, wow. It's ridiculous that you would even think two NFL OCs of the same damn team wouldn't even bother to evaluate the same damn QB on whether or not he can audible. I don't know, I dislike Ross as much as the next guy, but it's really hard for me to believe he'd hire two guys in a row who are THAT incompetent. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why are we grasping at "halves" now?? The defense has been better than the offense, thats not even arguable. What in the sam-hell is wrong with you folks.
It's just sad that even if the defense struggles early (which as you pointed out was 4 times in 12 contests), there's no shot to get back in the game.
It'd be really interesting to figure out how much goes to offense, special teams and defense. Something tells me the offense is even worse than we think. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its not ridiculous at all. Its also not what I said. But apparently details don't matter. Do as you wish. Create whatever reality you choose, its a free country and there is literally no responsibility for you to make up whatever you choose. Carry on.
They are the worst offense in football. Ever since Blazin Blaine Gabbert took over in SF, Miami has a slight edge on Cleveland for the worst Off.
"I'm saying you are making an assumption that he was evaluated on audibling at all." Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe I did the wrong math, but with the INT adjustment I got 12.5 for the D and 10.5 for the O, 168 pts given up and 137 scored(pre adj), keeping in mind that 41 points scored vs Houston, so 10.5 isn't a "real" avg due to a huge anomaly. Readjusting and removing the high marks and dividing by 11; O avg 7.5 per 1st half D gives up 11.8 per 1st half So as you can see, the D is about the same, not even a full point off, but the O is a full 3 points off due to the one aberration. 5 times the Fins scored more than 7 points in the 1st half. 7 times the fins scored 7 or less in the first half. That is a problem, and not a small one mind you, with the offense, the D is bad, but not nearly as bad as the O.
Well, I consider field goals to be part of the offense. Landry's PROBABLY TD was a fourth quarter td. We had two defensive first half scores. So, the offense, tds and field goals, is averaging 9.4 points in the first half. I agree it's bad. This exercise wasn't an attempt at pricing that the defense was worse so far this season. This last statement intended solely for Fin-O.
If McCown stayed healthy, I'm willing to bet we'd be ranked dead last. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks Finster! I couldn't locate my post from a week or so ago where I broke down those numbers without the anomalous blowouts skewing them.
Yup. He had them playing very competitively before the injuries started sprouting. I almost traded for Gary Barnidge (their TE) in FF when he was in there. LOL
You should also remove low marks, like the zero ones, cause the negatively skew. Or are we only removing the good ones?
Well the offense puts special teams in a position to score field goals, but I'm wondering about field position as well. Meaning how long the average FG we hit is, how we've done in the return game, if our punting has pinned the opposing offense far enough for the defense to do work and give offense good field position, stuff like that. Basically, how much credit the offense should really get. Sounds like it would be really complicated to figure out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I managed to pick up Barnidge off the waiver wire in one league. I'm most likely going to sit him for Gates now that Rivers is missing big targets and Manziel is starting. I'm in the playoffs in both leagues I'm a part of and I'm projected to advance to the next rounds in both [emoji41] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No problem, that 41 points vs Houston accounts for a full 3rd of the points scored in the first half, so it's impossible to get a true avg counting that huge aberration, this O has just been blowing chunks, especially in the 1st half. 7 out of 12 games where we have failed to put up more than a TD in the 1st half is embarrassing.
You're back in the habit of throwing out "anomalies". It's bad statistical practice so you shouldn't do it. If you don't like data points that look bad and you want a measure of an "average", take the median instead of the mean. But you have to do that for all data. The median is insensitive to outliers. Anyway, just to point out where the difference between your 12.5 and my 11.4 in post #406 comes from, 12.5 is the average if you only account for Tannehill's pick 6's. But as I argued in that post, one should look at net points and that means you want to include pick 6's by your own defense, which leads to an average of 11.4.
A single game accounts for a third of all points scored in all first halves???? That's mindblowing... Great job, appreciate the effort. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, and what exactly does that have to do with Sherman? I never brought up Sherman and audibles, you did. I was talking about Lazor. But again, doesn't matter, you're not going to accept that either. You have your mind made up. You, like the others, believe Tannehill to be the worst QB in the NFL. Facts hasn't changed that. Rational thought hasn't changed that. Common sense hasn't changed that. This thread has been people calmly explaining their viewpoints while a different set of people yell, insult and complain that everyone else is stupid or trolls....and why? Because some people don't think Tannehill should shoulder all the blame for the offense, the team, racial tensions, a poor economy, New Coke, and the Matrix sequels. None of it has changed though. The same people swore up and down Ireland was the worst thing ever and not only should be fired but given cancer and raped with pickles. So he leaves and we still have the same record. Ok, now Philbin is the worst thing to ever happen to the planet and should be fired, drawn and quartered, roasted on a spit, eaten by terrorists, crapped up and then re eaten by any remaining Nazis before they are shot into space. So he leaves and we are still doing the same. So clearly the problem is now Tannehill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How can anyone not see that he is the devil's ******* ****ting all over the field and murdering babies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Meanwhile the rhetoric never changes neither does the record. The reason? Because you guys refuse to accept nuance. You refuse to see the whole picture. One guy is the real problem and everyone who doesn't see that is a stupid troll who is stupid and a troll! I've actually been told by you guys that Tannehill sucks because look at his record, but when we win, it was in spite of him. I've been told the audible thing is a big deal, then not a big deal, then of course he just fails at it which proves he sucks! I've been told he thinks too much and that he's too stupid to assess the field. I've been told that you shouldn't make assumptions, while those same people are making assumptions all over the place and not only that but those assumptions are actually PROOF!!!!!!! I've been told he doesn't see the field and he doesn't see the rushers. I've been told no one says he sucks and then I've been told he sucks. I've been told he sucks because can't throw the long ball and when he does throw it, any QB can do that. I've been told he's not a leader because....look at his face in the huddle the few times they show it! There's a crap ton more...but somehow I'm a stupid troll because I question all that? That's why it doesn't matter. That's why you just enjoy whatever reality you and the others make up for yourselves. I sincerely hope you enjoy it.
Let's face it... Ryan is having a horrible season, and when you are an unproven QB who prematurely got a huge contract and you come out and play WORSE than you did before when your biggest asset was that you were ascending??? You naturally will get a lot of crap thrown your way. The guy will be our QB next season because we can't cut him and nobody would trade for him, so lets all just HOPE something clicks and he shows signs of being a decent QB.
As soon as you said I believe Tannehill is the worst QB in the NFL, I stopped reading. Just admit it's stupid to think any NFL OC wouldn't evaluate a starting QB's ability to audible. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is simply not factual. He's not having a "horrible" season. He is a decent QB. He's not elite, like you guys apparently want. The offense, as a whole, sucks. The special teams is not great. The defense is not great. The team, as a whole, is not good. It doesn't all come down to Tannehill, no matter how much people stick their fingers in their ears, scrunch their eyes up, and yell that it does.
Do i need to add a disclaimer with every post saying that just because Ryan is playing bad I also need to mention every other aspect of the team that is struggling too?? Would that help with hurting your feelings?? Because you look ridiculous accusing everyone of "BLAMING IT ALL ON RYAN" everytime he is talked about?? If you are going to cry this much then stay out of the threads if you can't handle it. And you can call it a decent season and Ill just assume your definition of decent means not very good. He's sucking ***...but label it anyway that makes you feel better.
When trying to find a true avg, huge anomalies should always be thrown out, that 1 game out of 12 accounted for a full 3rd of all points scored in the 1st half, and as I showed, the fins have scored more than 7 points only 5 times out of 12, so it quite clearly skewed the avg of what to expect from this team. As far as the math, I counted a total of 165 points against, divide that by 12 and you get 13.75, minus 14 from 165 = 151, 151 divided by 12 is 12.58, the most points given up by the Fins in the 1st half is 20, 151 minus 20 is 131, divide that by 11, because of eliminating the highest game, and you have, 11.9. I don't understand why you would take out our pick 6s when determining how many points were scored against us, that's having your cake and eating it too, I took our pick 6s out of OUR scoring.
By the way, the actual definition of "decent" is...... conforming with generally accepted standards of respectable or moral behavior. And the [FONT=arial, sans-serif-light, sans-serif]definition of "horrible"..... [/FONT] very unpleasant. So you think he is having an acceptable year?? I know you [FONT=arial, sans-serif-light, sans-serif]don't. I think he is having a very unpleasant season.....not an unfair evaluation by any means.[/FONT]
Show me where I said he's having a "decent season" or an "acceptable year." I said he is a decent quarterback already. I don't have to hope he becomes one. But keep on with the hyperbole, and keep on acting like I'm the one making ridiculous claims. I pointed out the team, because it's important to the discussion. If the Dolphins were 8-4 right now, I doubt you'd see so much anger and frustration. If they were 9-3 right now, you wouldn't see the anger and frustration. But they aren't. The team is not good. But everyone wants to whine and complain about the QB, when I don't think that changing the QB would make a whole heck of a lot of difference.
How is that fact? Why did you thank his post? He flat out lied and said I believe Tannehill is the worst QB in the league. He just went into a huge rant and took it out on me because I called him out for believing Tannehill hasn't been evaluated on his ability to audible. He claimed he didn't say that. Then I quoted him as saying that. You claimed his post as fact and thanked it. Why? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The ONLY true average is one where you do NOT throw out any data. You want to stay on your island of bad statistical reasoning? Be my guest but ANY analysis you do after throwing out data that cannot be shown independently to come from a different condition is bad analysis and should be dismissed. btw.. there is literally NO statistician that will side with you on this and the reason is simple: determining what is an outlier is totally subjective.. might as well just start off with the conclusions then (seriously, change your thought process on this). The question was how many points did the defense give up, not how many were scored against us. If you're just talking about points scored against us then 12.58 is correct. But if it's how many the defense gave up, then 11.4 is correct.
Dude, this is not math theory, determining an outlier is totally subjective? lol. really? an entire 3rd of all points scored was in 1 game out of 12, and they failed to score over 7 in over half the games, but whatever. As far as the math, you need to look at what I wrote; D gave up 165 points, divide by 12 and that is 13.7, not 12.5. Take away 14 points from the 2 INTs by Tanne leaves 151, divide that by 12 and it's 12.5. It's real bad form for you to come in here and throw around slights, while attempting a lecture on math when you can't even get the simple math correct.
Wow.. really terrible on your part. First, yes determining what an outlier is is completely subjective. No one in statistics has ever developed a principled method of determining what is an outlier. And second, I just got through explaining that your 12.58 is correct if you only take away those 14 points. You have to take away 14 MORE points for the pick 6's by our defense, which gives you 137/12 = 11.4. Yeah, real bad on your part to claim I can't get simple math right when that's exactly what you just did.
Real simple solution to this silly math class debate. You leave all the points in, but take into account how many were scored in one game when determining that our offense sucks.
