NDL Forum

shel311 wrote:A couple of the advanced metrics guys say Tannehill is the most underrated QB in the league.

on a scale of 1-100 in terms of my interest in advanced metrics in the NFL, i'd put it somewhere in the low to mid single digits... i do like some of the work PFF does but that is mostly using eye test to put a numerical score on a play... so its barely considered 'metrics' since its subjective.

you need constants to be able analyze things with numbers/data. in a sport with 22 moving players all at varying degrees of quality and different goals per play (run or pass, long or short) it's nearly impossible to use metrics to analyze the sport. don't get me wrong, i'd be trying to incorporate it into my analysis somehow... but i'd be using metrics much more in things like play selection where there is an absolute 1st and 10, 3rd and 1 etc. and game philosophy stuff. trying to compare players using it is nearly useless in my opinion. Ryan Tannehill is like the most accurate qb of all time and barely has a .500 winning percentage.

then you have to incorporate sample size and in football the sample is so small that the data is almost always skewed or incomplete. then you have to incorporate what a backup has in terms of prep work throughout a week vs a starter. an offense is like a well rehearsed dance choreography and if you haven't been practicing with the rest of the team the chances are you're going to be off on timing. in other sports, baseball/basketball you don't get those types of moving part issues that you do in football, i could go pitch in the MLB tomorrow and if i've been training my body you can analyze my performance against Kershaw and it'd be pretty fair (with fip data of course )

I certainly agree about the moving parts and all that good stuff, but I also don't think advanced metrics are useless.

It doesn't automatically mean they are correct and "we" are wrong but these dudes are watching film from the all 2 footage which is huge and also watching basically every snap Tannehill takes all season over and over and over again, so at the very least, they have access to way more information than we do, even if it is flawed.

DRiccio21 wrote:

shel311 wrote:A couple of the advanced metrics guys say Tannehill is the most underrated QB in the league.

on a scale of 1-100 in terms of my interest in advanced metrics in the NFL, i'd put it somewhere in the low to mid single digits... i do like some of the work PFF does but that is mostly using eye test to put a numerical score on a play... so its barely considered 'metrics' since its subjective.

you need constants to be able analyze things with numbers/data. in a sport with 22 moving players all at varying degrees of quality and different goals per play (run or pass, long or short) it's nearly impossible to use metrics to analyze the sport. don't get me wrong, i'd be trying to incorporate it into my analysis somehow... but i'd be using metrics much more in things like play selection where there is an absolute 1st and 10, 3rd and 1 etc. and game philosophy stuff. trying to compare players using it is nearly useless in my opinion. Ryan Tannehill is like the most accurate qb of all time and barely has a .500 winning percentage.

then you have to incorporate sample size and in football the sample is so small that the data is almost always skewed or incomplete. then you have to incorporate what a backup has in terms of prep work throughout a week vs a starter. an offense is like a well rehearsed dance choreography and if you haven't been practicing with the rest of the team the chances are you're going to be off on timing. in other sports, baseball/basketball you don't get those types of moving part issues that you do in football, i could go pitch in the MLB tomorrow and if i've been training my body you can analyze my performance against Kershaw and it'd be pretty fair (with fip data of course )

Dave vs. Kershaw
Nick vs. Tebow

Double feature made for TV event! Make it happen America!

Dave making calls using the eye test from the Donors Club seats!

Shame on you Dave.

Cnasty wrote:Dave making calls using the eye test from the Donors Club seats!

Shame on you Dave.

i never said Moore was good, which you earlier insinuated i did.
i never said my eyes knew more than anyone elses. i'm not foolish enough to think i know more than anyone.

all i said was i don't think Tannehill is good (personal opinion) and i don't have any idea if Moore is that much worse and from what i've seen of him i'd venture to say he isn't THAT much worse than Tannehill ( if he's worse at all) and he likely will take more chances rather than crumble into a ball every time pressure comes at him or throw to the check down 1 second into his progressions on an important play.

one data point i know to be true is that on 'clean pocket' plays RT is near the top of the league in terms of his efficiency and in 'rush situation' he's near the bottom. thats about the last quality i want in my QB. all the top guys in the league (Brady, Ben, Rodgers, Brees, etc) are really good in rush situations which is more reflective (in my mind) of their skill level. in a league where most games come down to 1 possession, i want guys who are play makers, not guys who need everything lined up for them to be successful.

DRiccio21 wrote:all i said was i don't think Tannehill is good (personal opinion) and i don't have any idea if Moore is that much worse and from what i've seen of him i'd venture to say he isn't THAT much worse than Tannehill

Riccio is walking his original opinion back.

Cracks in the armor!!!!

I know he was out late but this is a little embarrassing considering his track record of utilizing data, metrics, and avoiding emotions and eye tests.

Cnasty wrote:I know he was out late but this is a little embarrassing considering his track record of utilizing data, metrics, and avoiding emotions and eye tests.

i've been 100% consistent in my lack of interest in football analytics.

its a big money thing so a lot of the saber world tries to fit the square peg in round hole (aka PFF using subjective data to try to be objective)

i think there are places to use some analytics, just player evaluation i think is difficult compared to other sports... testing players heart rates/tracking reps and seeing where their optimal levels are and where they drop off, which players perform best in 3rd and short or 3rd and long or in open field situations, etc . those are all things teams track that can be identified as 'advanced metrics'. i'm all for trying to use them to offset human flaws. i just don't think statistical analysis in its more generic form in football is that great to track like it is in hoops/baseball.

listen, this is coming from the guy who's been screaming to stop having opinions for the last 10 years on here when you were gung ho guys and glory guy. i'm not jumping ship by any means. i'm just not steadfast on defending analytics just because i'm the 'analytics guy' like some people in the world do.

shel311 wrote:

DRiccio21 wrote:all i said was i don't think Tannehill is good (personal opinion) and i don't have any idea if Moore is that much worse and from what i've seen of him i'd venture to say he isn't THAT much worse than Tannehill

Riccio is walking his original opinion back.

Cracks in the armor!!!!

i'm not sure i backtracked. i would happily engage in this debate tho to see where i changed my course.

i said i think the Dolphins could be better without RT. i said that last year when RT got hurt too. I think giving Moore a full training camp and letting him play with the starters and having the full playbook designed for him will make him even better. i've been consistent in saying i think the Dolphins have been really underachieving the last couple years and most of that falls on RT. they've had a really good D and some capable playmakers and never even flashed a second of excellence (except of course when they dick stomped the Steelers with me in attendance)

My favorite debates are shel vs Riccio debates. They haven't happened much lately. Don't disappoint me guys!

Wasted Memory wrote:My favorite debates are shel vs Riccio debates. They haven't happened much lately. Don't disappoint me guys!

shel plays the same game, looking for flaws in consistency. i'm pretty consistent in thought so its typically boring semantics that we come down to in the end.

Tanny sux but he's still better than Matty Moore. But it's moreso Gase is a great coach

Cutler wants in on the Miami circus

I could see Cutler going to Miami, I know Matt and him have hung out in the off season in the past and he is close with the Dolphins head coach obviously.

Tannehill has intangibles Moore doesn't possess (running ability, ability to avoid getting crushed, etc) but Moore is seasoned. Just because a guy is a lifelong backup doesn't mean he isn't better than some starters in the league. I can guarantee he is better than any Bills starter, Jets starter, Browns starter, etc.

packsyd2284 wrote:Just because a guy is a lifelong backup doesn't mean he isn't better than some starters in the league. I can guarantee he is better than any Bills starter, Jets starter, Browns starter, etc.

Ok, again I am going to lean with the entire cast of NFL professionals that have deemed Matt Moore a lifetime backup and not showing enough to ever hold down a starting position in his life.

I get he's your boy and all but come on.

Cnasty wrote:

packsyd2284 wrote:Just because a guy is a lifelong backup doesn't mean he isn't better than some starters in the league. I can guarantee he is better than any Bills starter, Jets starter, Browns starter, etc.

Ok, again I am going to lean with the entire cast of NFL professionals that have deemed Matt Moore a lifetime backup and not showing enough to ever hold down a starting position in his life.

I get he's your boy and all but come on.

eye test etc alone you honestly can sit here and say Moore is not as good or better right now than:

Tyrod Taylor
Josh McCown
Jared Goff
Brian Hoyer
Cody Kessler

There were a few others with my bias I wanted to name, but lets just start with these guys.

Goff is better than Moore. Rest.. eh.

nick wrote:Goff is better than Moore. Rest.. eh.

are you sticking with the Rams as your team?

hell ya

I dont think Goffs gonna be a world changer but I also think Jeff Fisher was past his prime when it came to being an NFL coach. Gotta assume/hope McVay will make our offense better - Goff included.

nick wrote:Goff is better than Moore. Rest.. eh.

I think goff is the worst one on my list......

Also obviously Trabisky from Chicago could go on there but it's too early for that....