Discussion about this post

User's avatar
GT Counter's avatar

I loved the 2019-20 titans offense. It’s like Plato’s ideal old under center offense. Run and pass and play action with FB and or 2nd TE. Henry finally had a QB so 11 defenders can’t just focus on him. Great OL. Mariota made all this look bad; Davis and aj brown and Jonny’s smith were GREAT! Good DL too.

The season hinging on goal line stand is a topic to research. 2007 NYG would have been 0-3 if not for a goal line stand. Write about SB participants who we’re only there because they punched it in or stopped someone else from doing so…

Expand full comment
David Harris's avatar

I would think the persistent question about Tannehill is whether he was as good as his statistics, which just from my "old school" perspective were always very good. That was a dirty little fact that the "quarterback tier" proponents who wanted to keep him out of the club of the first two or three tiers didn't want to grapple with.

You piqued my interest on his 2016 combination of statistics. I was thinking of that question of whether he was as good as his traditional stats. You suggest that the disparity between his EPA/Play (27th) and his CPOE (+5.3%) was a matter of the Dolphins not having much talent around him. Indeed, we know that Jarvis Landry was a running back in a receiver's body and so not exactly gifted with speed. We know DeVante Parker was notorious for lack of separation and the low completion percentages to him.

But what I would propose is that the EPA/Play here might really be very insightful in reflecting Tannehill's true quality of play. Note that his yards per completion of 11.48 (+0.71 on league average) more than kept up with his simple advantage in completion percentage over league average (67.1 vs. 63.0). The Dolphins WERE getting yards out of those passes. It wasn't that RT was completing them, and then guys weren't going anywhere, and hence EPA/play was weak.

Then you look at how the Dolphins fared on third downs -- I don't have that adjusted for the yards to go on those third downs, but their 36.7% conversation rate placed them 31st of the 32 teams.

So it seems they didn't really pair their plays well, or that there must be something phony in both the pure completion and yard numbers. So in this one case, I do suspect Ryan was not as good as the old school numbers (and CPOE) said.

I should also say that that sack pct of 6.94% (or 7.1 more sacks per 600 attempts than the average 2016 rate) was another factor that at least theoretically should have brought passing production closer to average from its initial appearance of being well above that. (Know your characterization of the number here as "workable" was accurate. Just wanted to make a full accounting for my analysis, also, to be workable. :))

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts