HappyDays
-
Posts
17,042 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HappyDays
-
-
First - the best part of TT's game is his mobility - so none of the stats "surprise" me. What it tells me is that under pressure - where he can't think and plays on instinct - he plays better. When he has time and an open field to read and absorb - he wants to make the perfect play and therefore is much less effective.
if I am a team playing TT - I look to what Baltimore did and I want to force him to be a QB and force him to read the field and make decisions- I think that is where TT struggles and that is why teams talk about making him be a QB.
Roch - thanks for the detailed response.
What I copied and pasted from your post is really a misinterpretation of the data. Tyrod is absolutely not "better" when under pressure. Our offense's DVOA, like every offense except for the Packers, was negative when Tyrod was under pressure.
Tyrod is really great under pressure relative to every other QB in the league but he still isn't playing at his best. Tyrod is at his best, like all QBs, when he has time in the pocket to evaluate the field and throw the ball. A defense that gets pressure on Tyrod should still expect on average to have a positive play.
If our pass protection improves in 2017, our offense should be better overall. How much better also depends on if the rest of our offense can keep their other measures where they were. If for example our run game declines we will need the pass protection and/or Tyrod to be that much better.
Finished the AFC tonight, will work on NFC tomorrow.
Over the past 2 years the Bills are 9-9 in games where we score 24+. The only AFC Teams with equal or worse win rates scoring 24+ are:
Chargers (7-7)
Jaguars (4-4)
Browns (3-6)
In that same time span the Bills also average more points per game in losses (21.9) than any other AFC team (2nd=19.6; 16th=14.2)
and in losses, the Bills average 30.5 points allowed per game, good for 2nd most in the AFC (1st=30.7; 16th=23.5)
EDIT: Ooh, and a potential correlation: 6 AFC teams have allowed 24+ points 12 times or less over the past 2 years. All 6 have made the playoffs at least once, and 4 of the 6 have made the playoffs both years!
I don't have anything to add but thank you for running this data. It is very illuminating.
-
While I understand and appreciate the data, the only statistic that matters are wins and losses. I don't care how good or bad you are, if your not getting the wins.......for better or worse every other stat does not matter.
If literally the only part of football you care to discuss is wins and losses, why would you come to this thread? Why would you even come to this forum at all between February and September? These kinds of posts make no sense to me.
-
Not really buying this much, Happy. Mostly I don't think these tell us anything we didn't already know. I'll try to be more specific.
Thanks for the response Thurman.
I have to admit I don't really think the sack/conversion rate study is all that interesting as far as it relates to the Bills. I agree that there's too many variables. The study author does break down conversion rates by what down the sack happened on:
1st down: 31.02%
2nd down: 19.35%
3rd down: 3.46%
And he breaks down by yards lost:
0-5 yard sack: 23.27%
6+ yard sack: 12.10%
But these are NFL averages and he doesn't list the Bills numbers so there's not much to be gleaned here. I still included the study for data's sake. And it does show we took less drive-killing sacks than the tots would make it seem. Either way the number needs to go down.
However, I think you're underselling the Football Outsiders data. What the data shows is that on called passing plays, the Bills offense performed exactly average. It doesn't matter if Tyrod passed or scrambled, it just doesn't. One way or another we were average. I do want a better than average passing offense, no question, but this is contrary to the common opinion that the Bills passing offense was bottom 5, or even worst in the league. It was the worst total passing yards in the league but efficiency-wise we were right in the middle.
I think people are slightly misunderstanding the second part of that data. Under no circumstances was our offense "good" when Tyrod was under pressure, it was still a negative DVOA. Tyrod isn't a great QB under pressure, he's just great relative to how other QBS perform under pressure. This is important because he minimizes the damage of the far below average pass protection we had, and also it means our offense can only get better if he is under pressure less.
Okay I need some math help with my next point because I am bad at math so if someone here knows how to figure this out I would appreciate some help. I'm trying to figure out what our offense's total DVOA would like if Tyrod was just average under pressure. And ask what it would like with Tyrod at QB but with an average "under pressure" percentage. Here's all the data I just don't know how to turn it into what I need:
-Tyrod was under pressure 35.3% of the time
-The average QB was under pressure 26.3% of the time
-Our DVOA under pressure was -21.3%
-Our DVOA without pressure was 46.4%
-Average team's DVOA under pressure was -55.5%
-Average team's DVOA without pressure was 46.4% (because we were the average)
I'm pretty sure using that data we can figure out what an average QB, or what average pass protection, would do to our total DVOA on called passing plays, I just don't know how.
-
Look I want the Bills to make the playoffs, walk before they can run and all that. Tyrod playing as he did in 2016 was not good enough to win a Super Bowl. MAYBE 2015 Tyrod with a very strong defense is a Super Bowl contender - Russell Wilson won a Super Bowl with similar stats and Peyton Manning won one playing much worse, these are 2 winners just in the last 5 years.Factually wrong ? Wrong
You're a TT guy and you want to prop him up, that doesn't change the fact he's 1-6 vs .500 teams.
I am factually right if you want to drop this biasness and deal with hard cold facts. Don't disrespect Archimedes bro with this bbmb CoT math.
Seasons over, Bills sucked again, thanks to Jacoby Brissett for the 1.
Show me the money in 2017.
But either way the truth is Tyrod was good enough both years to make the playoffs, especially 2015. I think the Bills making the playoffs will do wonders for the franchise - wipe the 17 year stink off our backs - and I believe Tyrod is easily our best chance at playoffs right now. That doesn't mean we should ignore the position (nor did we - Nate Peterman says hello). But YOUR strategy of keep trying until you hit the elite QB jackpot won't get us anywhere anytime soon. I want a 10 win season and Tyrod can get us there.
If you can't admit that Tyrod is capable of taking the Bills to the playoffs with moderate defensive improvement then I really don't know what to tell you. Like, it's an objective fact that this offense under Tyrod is good enough to take us to the playoffs, and if you can't at least admit that then you're not being fair.
The craziest of the crazy Tyrod fanatics probably thinks he's a top 12 QB. That's the fringe of the people you're talking to. Have some more respect and stop embarrassing yourself by acting like a jackass.
I wish I was, I'd automatically ban anyone that gripes about a thread being started.
It's s message board, if threads aren't started there's no conversation.
It's like whining that you're being given too many options at dinner.
Don't like it? Don't eat it.
What if it's like a Golden Corral situation where there's lot of food but it all sucks?
-
Made it just in time for this to turn into a heated Tyrod thread.
The more we ignore the dumb baiting posts the better this thread will be. I wasn't going to make another Tyrod thread ever but the Football Outsiders was genuinely surprising and interesting to me. If you had asked me where the Bills offense DVOA would be ranked on called passing plays I wouldn't have guessed 16th, I would have thought it was worse than that. And that's just our ranking when Tyrod was not under pressure. Our offense's total DVOA was brought down due the sheer number of times he was under pressure - as good as Tyrod is in that situation he still has a negative overall DVOA. Our passing game could improve just by calling plays where the routes develop quickly. Or by Dawkins improving the line. Getting the "under pressure" percentage down is a very feasible way for the offense to improve in 2017 contrary to the belief that the offense has hit its ceiling.
-
Pretty good. Just not good enough to beat any .500 teams.
It's still a no from me.
Okay but you do understand Tyrod isn't playing alone, yes? Just like Brees, Luck, and Rivers. Of course Tyrod isn't as good as those guys, and their defenses were worse than his were. But you do understand there's a connection there, yes? I wish we had a QB capable of propping up a below average defense but we don't and we aren't likely to find one anytime soon.
And you need to stop saying things like "he's not good enough to beat a .500 team" which is clearly factually wrong. Outside of the ones he literally has beat, he was obviously good enough to win against Miami and Seattle. He performed better against both of their defenses than the large majority of QBs did last year (if I'm remembering correctly he had the best passer rating against Seattle last year, I might be wrong and I can't find that data). So of course Tyrod is good enough to beat playoff teams. He isn't good enough to beat playoff teams when his defense doesn't show up but that's a different qualification entirely.
-
Whoa... good stuff! Glad you started this, Hap! Thanks
I wasn't going to with just the sack/conversion study. But then that FO article was published today and it left me no choice.
-
Yes this is a Tyrod thread. I would love if all the name calling and petty arguments could stay out of this one.
I thought I was done analyzing the Bills offense in 2016, but these three articles that were published over the past couple days changed my mind:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-hc-mcdermott-impressed-with-tyrod-taylors-leadership/
Taken together, these articles give us a lot of new information about how well Tyrod and the Bills offense fared when under pressure, or after taking a sack.
The conventional wisdom is that sacks are drive-killers. The first link is a study looking into how often a team was able to get a 1st down after taking a sack.
The average team was able to obtain a 1st down after a sack just 16.01% of the time. But the Bills converted for a 1st down 28.26% of the time after a sack. This was the highest percentage in the league (for comparison's sake, Miami was the worst in the league with a 3.33% 1st down rate).
We took 46 sacks total of which we converted 13. So in actuality we took 33 drive-killing sacks in 2016. This number needs to go down in 2017 but at least as an offense we were better able to recover after a sack than any other offense in the league.
The next two links are far more interesting to me. Football Outsiders published a study showing how often QBs were under defensive pressure on a passing play. They also calculated what the total offense's DVOA looked like when the QB was under pressure, whether the QB scrambled or threw the ball. This is really important because previously we only had good DVOA data on Tyrod's passing. Now we get a sense of how his passing and mobility can affect the entire offense's production.
The data:
-Tyrod was under pressure on 35.3% of his pass plays. Only Jared Goff was pressured more, out of 34 qualifying QBs. This obviously needs to get better, whoever you want to blame.
-Our offense's DVOA when Tyrod wasn't under pressure was 16th in the league - exactly average.
-Our offense's DVOA when Tyrod was under pressure was 2nd in the league. Only the Packers/Aaron Rodgers were better.
Finally, the last link tells us that Tyrod also had the 7th best passer rating (80.1) when under pressure. And he threw 10 TDs when under pressure which was 3rd best in the league (Luck and Rodgers were ahead of him).
So there's a lot of really great data here. IMO the data shows Tyrod was better than people give him credit for. He was under pressure way too often. I know he has a tendency to hold the ball too long but I don't believe that tendency is enough to explain our extremely low 33/34 ranking. Hopefully Dawkins helps solve this problem in 2017.
Most of all, the data shows that when you factor in Tyrod's passing and scrambling, our offense performed anywhere from average (16th) to outstanding (2nd) on called passing plays. If one of your central criticisms of Tyrod is that his scrambling isn't as important as being a good passer, this data puts a pretty big dent in that criticism IMO. Especially when you consider how often Tyrod was under pressure and therefore how often we needed this special talent of his.
Interpret and argue away!
-
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-hc-mcdermott-impressed-with-tyrod-taylors-leadership/
- Taylors passer rating in 2016 when under pressure of 80.1 was seventh best among qualifying quarterbacks, while his 10 touchdowns thrown in those circumstances was tied for third.
And anyone wondering who the 2 QBs ahead of him are, it's Aaron Rodgers with 12 TDs and Andrew Luck with 11. Russell Wilson also threw 10 TDs under pressure.
New thread incoming:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016
Lots to digest here in conjunction with the sack study from yesterday. Putting it together now.
-
Let's not pretend that you don't have an agenda going on here. It would seem less silly if you admitted that the second Miami game was on the defense and ST. or do you expect 31 points, the lead, and only a minute left not a "good offense".
It's as silly as blaming the defense for the Baltimore game. It's possible to admit the offense and Tyrod had their problems last year without going crazy in the other direction and blaming them for a game where they produced over 500 total yards.
-
Why is it so hard to grasp the simple answer?
The Bills failed to score on the first (10 play) drive, the defense held the Fins on their first (5 play) drive, the Bills failed to score on their second (8 play) drive.
Score and it is GAME OVER MAN! GAME OVER!
So you hold Drew Brees and the Saints offense responsible for all their losses? I mean you understand every offense gets chances to score right? It's usually accepted that offenses can't always score and eventually the defense needs to make some critical stops. Maybe you have a different way of seeing things.
-
Belichick is probably the most scheme-flexible coach in the NFL - the exact opposite of Doug Marrone. Belichick will take a backup, or third-string QB and do his best to come up with a game plan that will ensure victory - the exact opposite of Doug Marrone. They could not be more different, honestly.
Well I don't know how scheme flexible Marrone would have been because he didn't get much of a chance to show it. Certainly the defensive scheme was fine, it fit the players we had better than the scheme Rex ended up switching to. On offense we had EJ Manuel/Kyle Orton and CJ Spiller. Is there any offensive scheme for that situation? I don't think so. Look at Belichick with Jacoby Brissett at QB. Couldn't score a single point against us in his own house. To be scheme flexible you need talented players first.
-
I'll take that bet ANY day.
Any day. I'd bet she got in on a quota.
Would you really take that bet?
What if I told you racial quotas have been unconstitutional since 1978? What if I told you Harvard's version of affirmative action in 1978 is actually the model upon which most modern systems of affirmative action are based? I guess then you'd have to admit you don't have the slightest clue on this topic.
Under established constitutional law, going back to 1978 and reaffirmed in 2003, universities may consider an applicant's race as a factor among other factors and that is all. You can feel free to take issue with that - I for one do - but get your facts straight first or you'll sound like an idiot.
-
Those who defend Maroon as a good coach baffle me. This guy's first NFL challenge was on a NE fumble that we didn't even recover. He put players in the doghouse that performed when he was finally forced to play them. He's an idiot and a quitter, and we were well rid of him.
The very first challenge of a rookie head coach is at the bottom of the list of things that should matter. Maybe he put players in the doghouse because they deserved it? Players like Jerry Hughes and Marcel Dareus who have been problems on an off the field. Marrone came into a loser culture and was tasked with turning the whole thing around. He had no choice but to be a total hard-ass. He quit because the Pegulas didn't want to give him full control. I can't blame the Pegulas for not doing that considering he wasn't their hire, but in today's NFL it is not an unreasonable request. Marrone' biggest problem was predictable offensive play calling but he had no faith in his QBs so it was a tricky spot to be in.
Marrone is just an a-hole, plain and simple. As I said repeatedly during those years, Doug Marrone would rather lose doing things his way than win doing things any other way. He's just a jerk.
I would say this fits Belichick to a tee. Just to cut off the inevitable response I am NOT saying Marrone is Belichick. But remember when Belichick went for it on 4th down against the Colts and lost because of it? A total "I don't care what anyone thinks" move. And hey Belichick didn't find success until his 2nd gig so you never know.
-
Hap, we're nubes so I understand the hesitation for making a new thread for something like this, but I actually think this link and the 2 articles in the "study" it references actually deserves it's own thread. There are going to be a couple of the (*ahem*) usual suspects who criticize the Tyrod homers for coming out in full force, but I don't think this is a study anyone has really seen or discussed.
I'm still digesting some of it myself. I'll come back here to comment on it if you haven't started a separate thread. Thanks! Intriguing stuff
Yeah I just didn't know if the one stat was worthy of a whole new thread. I already know what the thread will become and I'm just tired of it. I'm done with the same old debates. It is interesting to me that sacks obviously did not hurt the Bills' offense as much as Tyrod's critics think they did. I've made a mental note and that's about all I feel like doing this time around!
-
Dude... look at your 2nd and especially your 3rd posts in your own thread from page 1:
You're calling yourself one of the worst posters on the board
Transplant - this is off topic but I think you'd enjoy this Chris Trapasso article:
Didn't feel like making a whole thread for it which is probably the right call.
-
And countless times we've heard this about numerous flops in the past.... How anyone(especially Bills fans given their historic playoff drought run)believes any of the fluff in the offseason is fascinating to me.
Then why visit the forum in June? This is the discussion around here in June, fluff pieces and pointless arguments. I personally prefer the fluff pieces, at least gives me something to look forward to. I don't think anyone is getting brainwashed by them.
-
You definitely can't count the Dolphins or Steelers. Both games featured a 200 yard rusher, and I looked at every game from 2013-2016 that had a 200+ yard rusher. Only found one game where a team was able to defeat an opponent with 200+ rushing yards and it was New England beating Denver 34-31 in 2013. So basically the best result against a 200 rush yard opponent was the best QB of all time beating his opponent by 3 points in a shootout. I'm gonna go ahead and say blaming the offense for any game with a 200 yard rusher is disingenuous.If you omit the Ravens, Patriots, Bengals, Dolphins 1, Oakland, and Pittsburgh games this would be true.
Here's where I got my info:
http://www.footballdb.com/stats/100-yard-rushing.html?yr=2016
I mean there's only like 10 of those games total but still (and HOW did our defense let that happen THREE TIMES last year alone??). Doing a quick skim it's pretty rare for 150+ yard rushers to lose, it does happen though. But 200+ yard rushers losing is almost impossible.
-
He can't which is why we base our offense on the run game. If we let him rip it it would be interceptions galore like he did in the probowl.
Man you could have just glanced at the stats to know this is badly wrong.
Tyrod has had 30+ pass attempts in 11 games with the Bills. In those games he has thrown 8 TOTAL interceptions, and 3 of those came in one game Week 2 in 2015.
Just looking at 2016 he had 6 games with 30+ pass attempts and only threw 3 interceptions in those games. In the other 9 games he threw another 3 interceptions. Does that sound like a QB that throws interceptions galore when the pass attempts go up? Nope.
-
Well this is too simplistic Thurman. Tyrod was responsible for 63.6% of the Bills total offensive yards. Our rushers weren't going right from our 25 to the opponent's end zone, there was plenty of ground to cover in between. Just because we chose to run more in the red zone doesn't mean the pass game wasn't also responsible for the TDs. And the Bills had the 8th best passer rating in the red zone so Tyrod was absolutely a contributor.The offense scored a lot of TDs. Because the run game was terrific and scored a bunch of TDs. Whereas the pass game was substandard and did not score a lot of TDs.
And why wouldn't we run in the red zone? The zone read option inside the 20 was as efficient as any play we ran last year (I don't have stats on this, just going off of memory).
-
That's because there is zero correlation.Forget top 3 then. Look at top 10 and bottom 10. Four out of the top ten teams made the playoffs. Not bad. But five out of the bottom 10 teams made the playoffs. That's even better. There is really zero correlation from what I can see.
Two offensive stats correlate well with making the playoffs - PPG (obviously) and interceptions. Interceptions may be less obvious but I found that they are way more important than passing yards:
2016 - 5 of the top 10 passing yard leaders made the playoffs.
7 of the top 10 interception leaders made the playoffs.
2015 - 3 of the top 10 passing yard leaders made the playoffs.
8 of the top 10 interception leaders made the playoffs.
2014 - 5 of the top 10 passing yard leaders made the playoffs.
9 of the top 12 interception leaders made the playoffs (there were 5 teams tied at 12 interceptions, so I had to expand)
So in total 13/30 top 10 passing yards leaders made the playoffs (43.3%). While 24/32 top 10 interceptions leaders made the playoffs (75.0%).
If you're scoring points and not throwing a lot of interceptions, you're probably in the playoffs. But you need a defense stopping the other team too. Technically being a top 10 passing yard leader means you're more likely than not to MISS the playoffs. Presumably because many of those teams were simply forced to pass as a result of a poor defense letting them down.
-
Desperate is you rushing defend Taylor at every turn. Starting 19 out of 23 threads on BBMB on Taylor
Did you... track this?
I think everyone in this thread could use to take a break. Training camp is going to be miserable.
-
Goddamnit when did the right wing become anti-free speech? Politics is in a worse state than ever. Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley isn't wrong, neither is burning an Obama doll in effigy, neither is Kathy Griffin holding a severed Trumo head, neither is a Julius Caesar production with Trump as Caesar. Everyone is so touchy now. We forget how lucky we are that we can say or depict any message we want without being thrown into a dark cell and tortured. That right should be celebrated.
-
That's not the way I saw it.
He had some really below average QBing while he was here. Manuel / Thad Lewis / Tuel his first year and Manuel / Orton his second and he got more out of Orton than expected.
The 2013 offensive starters looked like this: Manuel/Lewis/Tuel, Spiller, Frank Summers, Stevie Johnson, Robert Woods, Lee Smtih, Cordy Glenn, Doug Legursky, Eric Wood, Urbik and Erik Pears.
In 2014: Manuel/Orton, Fred Jackson, Watkins, Robert Woods, Lee Smith Cordy Glenn, Urbik, Wood, Pears, Seantrel Henderson.
I don't see coaching as being the problem nearly as much as personnel.
I don't know if he'll be a really good coach. Wouldn't surprise me either way.
I didn't like the way he left, but he appears to have had insoluble problems with Whaley, and isn't the only coach who felt that way when here.
Marrone got a bad rap from the fans. In retrospect going 9-7 with Manuel and Orton playing QB was nothing short of a miracle. He probably takes us to the playoffs if Bryce Brown (another horrible Whaley decision) can hold the damn ball on his way into the endzone. Maybe Marrone was too strict but I'll take that over Rex's schtick any day.
New data shows Tyrod/the offense was better than you thought
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by HappyDays
Where am I wrong? I am not sure you're really understanding how to interpret the stats I've presented. And I don't know how else to explain it. The argument you SHOULD be going with is that Tyrod is responsible for his own high under-pressure percentage since that's the only possible reasonable argument to be made. There, I just gave you a freebie.