transplantbillsfan
-
Posts
10,892 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by transplantbillsfan
-
-
If I may ... he (and any QB one should want leading the offense) should get these kinds of numbers when it matters most. Yes, he needs more consistency. But more importantly, to me, he needs to be clutch. He's been anything but clutch. Pretty stats at the wrong times. For two years straight.
Clutch is overblown and overrated. It's great to have, but you don't need to have it to be great.
See Aaron Rodgers.
And I bet after I just posted his name you're immediately jumping to a single pass or a single play like the third down beauty that one the Dallas game in the playoffs. But the simple fact is, Aaron Rodgers really doesn't come from behind in the fourth quarter, with the game-winning drives. He's done it about as much as Taylor over the span of their careers, by percentage.
And now someone's going to assume I'm comparing Taylor to Rogers and sayings somehow that Taylor is comparable in terms of how good he is.
oh my...
At least he used the quote function correctly there, right?
-
First of all, how did you get those numbers? Did you take both 2015 and 2016 and do math to come up with numbers he'd get with 35 passes per game? Or did you just take one of those years, and if so which one?I think that the irony in all of this is that Tyrod is going to be the same pretty good starting QB that he has been for the last 2 years and the Bills will be around .500 again. I don't see him taking a big step up or a big step down. His gross numbers are going to go up because the attempts are going to increase. Those numbers are irrelevant anyways. If we use 35 throws a game (based on what Denver did last year) and apply his career averages it is: 349 for 560, 62.3% completion, 4,144 yards, 24 TD passes, 8 INTs. That is where I am setting my expectation (if he starts all 16 games). I expect about 35 attempts a game but I don't expect him to perform differently than who he has been.
Secondly, if he has those numbers I also assume he's going to get about the 500 yards and for the six rushing touchdowns he's gotten over the last two years as well? Those numbers could be a little higher or a little lower, but we all know Taylor is going to get a good amount of yards and at least a few touchdowns on the ground.
If he starts all 16 games and get those Numbers and the team has a competent defense, I expect we'll make the playoffs and Taylor will be re-signed to a long term more stable deal.
-
Here's a cute stat: 7 wins out of 16 games.
The team sucked. Including Tyrod Taylor.
LeSean McCoy and the O-line are the only ones who didn't suck.
Source: my own two !@#$ing eyes.
I guess you think Philip Rivers and Drew Brees suck also?
-
Ok thanks. I guess I wasted some time. No biggie.
Sorry, I really wasn't trying to be a buzz kill. I discovered that website last year when I was curious about the same subject. I think they just go through all of the ESPN sports and aggregate the data. There's other interesting stuff in there, too.
-
It breaks it down into less than 3 yards, 3 to 7 yards, 8+ yards. Taylor ranks as followson those passing plays where he does not scramble (which in all probability would actually increase his percentage since he such an effective scrambler... he was 10/16 on such plays on 3rd down in 2015):I did not but that's going by 8+ yards and I'm going by 5+. I don't view 5 yards as third and short. Maybe it is in today's world?
3rd and short- 10th (16 plays)
3rd and medium-27th (51 plays)
3rd and long- 8th (51 plays)
-
So some people were wondering how the Bills rank on 3rd down and distance. I decided to put the work in to figure this out. Going through game logs for 32 teams is going to take a really long time. I am starting with Buffalo for obvious reasons. Thus far I went through the first 3 games.
What I did was take a look at the distance on every third down play and then divide by the number of 3rd down attempts. This gives me the average down and distance. I am also going to list how many times out of how many third downs the Bills were at 3rd and 5 or greater.
First 3 games
Average distance on 3rd down: 8.83 yards
3rd down attempts: 37
Number of times 3rd and 5 or longer: 24
Percent of time Bills are in 3rd and 5 or longer: 65%
Doesn't look so good so far.
After I finish the Bills entire season I will likely make a new thread for it since this isn't really the topic of this thread. Sorry Transplant.
You know the work is already done, right?
http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=047&type=Passing&year=
-
Taylor was 8th in the NFL in third and long conversion percentage on passing plays in 2016.We've seen him do it, so I wouldn't rule out converting 3rd and long completely, but "confident" is probably a bit generous. Some of those were with his legs, and Woods was a nice blocking WR. But I agree with you.
Bills were 13th last season in 3rd down conversion percentage, so they weren't terrible. I'd like to see the 3rd and short rankings. You would think the better rushing teams in the league are at the top of that list.
http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=047&type=Passing&year=
I can't find the numbers for 2015 at the moment, but I remember distinctly that in 2015 his numbers were even better. That website had the same numbers for 2015, but I can't find a link to those numbers for that year anymore. I probably have it somewhere, but if I recall correctly I think he was about fifth or sixth and third and long conversion percentage on passing plays in 2015.
Just think, for example, of that third and 24 or whatever yardage it was against Seattle with Taylor throwing a beauty to Robert Woods on the sideline for a conversion. Taylor is actually a QB you do want on third and long, probably because of the threat of him running as well. In 2015, I know that on passing plays where Taylor tucked the ball and ran (aka: scrambled) he converted 10 out of 16 of those third downs, which would actually increase his third down percentage in 2015 by more than 3% alone if those plays were factored in.
It's weird the way perception very often does not match reality when it comes to what Taylor has accomplished or even what he's good at.
-
Kind of funny you ask this question because Taylor has been one of the best QBs on third and long over the last two years. That's actually a statistical fact.Overall, I agree. I'd also guess the best qbs have the best 3rd down %. That's money time.
I would bet the Bills have one of the shortest yards to convert on 3rd downs because of their game plans. Does anyone feel comfortable about Tyrod converting a 3rd and long?
-
I disagree about the first two weeks. I'm not saying that they should be disregarded completely, but Roman was fired after a game where the team put up yards and points. The problem in those first two games was that the offense couldn't stay on the field. And yes, Taylor was a part of that for sure. But it's pretty telling that the offense of coordinator was fired, again , After a game where the team put up yards in points.Roman is the best run game coordinator in the National Football League. I agree his pass concepts are what might be termed "basic" and it lacks, to my eye, a bit of cohesion in devising a passing game that builds off the run game success. I am not sure whether that helped Tyrod or hindered him.... I suspect we will soon find out. But to throw out 2 games because a different man was calling plays off the same play sheet? That makes no sense objectively to me. I am with you - discount the 2nd Jets game when discussing Tyrod.... that is obvious.... but don't discount the first two weeks.
The bills had a 39% three and out percentage in those first two games. And one of those other drives that wasn't a three and out was an interception thrown on third down in Romans "all or nothing" offensive playcalling mentality. It's third and one and in typical Roman fashion he calls it down field throw rather than moving the chains. It's great when it works, but a low percentage play and it turns the ball over to the other team. That was as bad as a three and out if not worse. And that's Roman.
All that changed once Lynn came in as the offense of coordinator. And back to the promise of the original post, that's why I believe there's a lot of optimism and Taylor thriving and this West Coast offense.
-
This simply isn't how this works.
How what works? Math?
And Tyrod fans need to be careful trying to throw Roman under a bus. It is Roman's offense that has allowed Tyrod to post the numbers he has and the offense to have the success it had.
There was no such thing in Buffalo as an "Anthony Lynn offense". There was a Lynn called offense but the plays and the design was still Greg Romans. Lynn changed the way he called the run game in live action and supposedly slimmed down the weekly gameplans from where Roman had them but it was all Roman's offense.
I agree. Roman's offense was never a problem. It was his game preparation/planning and play calling. I'm sure that's why he was fired.
-
Are you drunk?He has not shown anything.But athletism. He can't throw with pressure. The Miami game we should have won regardless. He was running and not hitting open receivers. Wood was mad most of the time last year. Our TE position regressed because of him. He holds on too long and when he throw it it's a 1-10 chance at best. I don't think any good team is afraid of him.
Cardale will play this year. He will light it up in camp. He will get his chance. I personally don't think Yates it the rook can actually beat him out. He is more athletic than they are. OTAs are just the beginning when pads go on he is a gamer. I just have that feeling.
We'll see, but one thing's clear You sure aren't having the first laughAre you trying to make a comparison to this two QBs???
I will have the last laugh....
-
They were 25th in the league in 3 and out percentage. That no es bueno.
Subtract the last game where he didn't play along with the first two games where an offensive coordinator who would be fired (and apparently the team wanted to fire him as early as the summer) call the plays and the bills were 14th in the NFL and three and out percentage.
-
These discussions are only fun as long as you are grounded and some sort of reality, which you are no longer a part of.Yup, I've seen that chart and the article many times before. They're interesting and really do show a lot of fascinating data.
But as to the specifics of our argument here, they have a major problem. "In the cases of out-of-bounds throwaways, those dots are placed at the sideline near where the ball went out of bounds." This of course inflates the sideline numbers, as the writers readily admit. "Remember, the sideline data here are "polluted by those out-of-bounds throwaways that count as incompletions. As a result, the completion percentages near the edges of the field might be lower than you expect. It turns out the sideline is very important to the NFL quarterback, both for targeting receivers and for getting rid of the football."
They also mislead a bit about the frequency of passes to the middle, saying about passes of twenty yards or more that, "only 9 percent target the area between the hashes." Wow, sounds like almost nothing. But when you realize that between the hashes is only 11.5625% of the width of the field, seeing only 9% of throws there is not at all surprising.
Still, it was a fascinating article and I welcome the chance to read it again.
Right now you should go take a look at that chart. If 69% of the passes thrown in 2012 were outside the numbers that means that 31% were "inside the numbers." I don't know if those middle numbers of 31% start from the outer or inner edge of the numbers, but 31% is less than 1/3rd already.
Look at all those passes that come into your beloved 1/3 of the field just inside those numbers. There are a lot!
What percentage of those sideline throws do you honestly think or throwaways? Furthermore, what percentage of those sideline throwaways were plays that were not designed to go to the sidelines anyway?
If you honestly think that those sideline throwaways combined with those passes inside the numbers that equate to your outer 1/3 of the field still somehow translate into an even distribution across the deep portion of the field, you're in fantasyland.
This is fun and all, but it's clear even with evidence right in front of you, you'll fight with all of your might just so you can be right.
Sounds like a good nursery rhyme with you as the main character
-
He should not worry about the other side he needs to keep the other side off the field more regularly defenses get tired of 3 and outs. That makes the defense look like dirt.
The Bills don't get very many three and outs with Taylor at the helm and an offense of coordinator focus on moving the chains rather than all or nothing plays the way Roman was. They were 14th in the league and three and out percentage in the 13 games Taylor was running Lynn's offense.
-
Yup, Scott, that's one of the charts that Transplant has tried to use.
The problem is that as you can see at the top it's not dividing the field into thirds. It is dividing them by the numbers. The same old problem.
Which means that you're looking at charts where the field is divided this way:
The left side: 22.5% of the field
The right side: 22.5% of the field
The middle: 55% of the field
Even a guy who throws very little to the middle will look like he's throwing a lot there if you divide the field up that way. More, Tyrod threw often and well in 2015 to the area just inside the numbers, which is still the outer third of the field. Very well indeed, it was striking. So those stats are including in "the middle" all of those passes to the area he threw well and often to. Which drowns the numbers from the middle third.
This is just what I keep telling Transplant. Those numbers don't reveal what goes on in the middle third, the area Tyrod has problems in. They actually are constructed very well to hide, not reveal.
Here's a pretty good example of you guessing or twisting numbers to fit into your own narrative. I assume that you came up with those numbers because you went outside of the numbers and assumed that pro football focus was Considering the middle of the field everything from the sideline edge of the numbers all the way to the middle of the field. If that were the case your percentages would be accurate, but more than likely the left and right sides include the numbers themselves. and if that's the case, the numbers are actually this:
The left side: 26.3% of the field
The right side : 26.3% of the field
The Middle: 47.5% of the field
-
So I posted this one on bbbmb about two years ago. It's the chart from 2012 but I can't find anybody that charts out the league as a whole anymore
Also a really good article or about it
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/pass-atlas-a-map-of-where-nfl-quarterbacks-throw-the-ball/
Hmmm... fascinating...
The chart also immediately reveals the importance of the sideline, particularly downfield. Of passes thrown more than 20 yards, 69 percent are directed between the numbers and the sideline, while only 9 percent target the area between the hashes.
Whoa...
and,
Although at first glance the pattern may appear mostly symmetric, NFL quarterbacks target receivers on the right side (46 percent) of the field more than the left side (41 percent).
So given this article with this chart and data along with the 2013 chart that looks about the same, it sure seems like QBs don't throw to the deep middle (especially if we were to divide the field in thirds
) nearly as much as they throw to the deep side sidelines.Found my keys, they were right here under the streetlightwhere things are well lit, after all. I'm going to the store to get some Scotch, you guys want some?
-
I don't think Taylor would improve no matter what you do. Once again he is to inconsistent. It is still the NFL defenses are going to adjust an will make you beat them with the passing game.
Yes, but he still has to deliver in the clutch. End of game clutch. Not just a half.
Every time we need to come back and win or get a key first down we fail and loose. Like always thanks to TT.
That's what happened with JP Losman. We failed.
Except for his game winning drives against Tennessee and Houston last year and Jacksonville this year. So 3 games is "never?"
And "like always thanks to TT"? Seriously?
Did you watch the last Game he played in or the game against Seattle?
Cardale Jones... Cardale Jones... Cardale Jones...
Wow I forgot that you were the guy that was banned in record time on this board for pushing a guy who might be on another teams practice squad this year.
Bravo!
This statement, along with the formatting of your post tells me everything I need to know.
Sounds like a previously band troll under many different names on multiple boards.
-
Every pass in the NFL 2013. Not so evenly spread beyond 20 yards
#gogetThurmunderthestreetlight
-
Oh, so Gillman, a coach 70 years ago, divided the field up into five? Wow, well when you have to go that far out of relevancy to find an example, that says a lot about your argument right there. But what says more is that you don't know how Gillman's results turned out in terms of dividing up the field in threes. Gillman was doing exactly what I'm saying everyone should do, spread things out and challenge every area across the field. Which Tyrod doesn't do.
As for more recent examples, yet again, Brady and Rivers spread their deep and intermediate attempts evenly across the thirds. Tyrod doesn't.
As for your hashmarks thing there you're yet again looking under the streetlights because it's easier to look rather than where you lost the keys. Yet again, Tyrod throws very well and very often across the middle in the first ten yards. And between the hashes would also include behind the line of scrimmage, things like shovel passes or middle screens ... Nobody says Tyrod doesn't throw well in the middle in the short area, because he does. And you're including those stats here, yet again throwing in areas of strength and prolific throwing with his areas of weakness. Which does indeed cover up the problems in the deep and intermediate middle third, but doesn't do a single thing to prove they don't exist.
It's like a guy who wants to examine screen passes and can only find stats that combine screen passes and go routes together and so he thinks he's proven that that team's screen passes have a surprisingly high YPA.
The problem is isolated in one area. When you throw stats from other areas in with the problem areas, sure, you can make things look much better. But you're missing the problem because it's over in the dark area a few blocks over while you yet again look under the streetlight.
Yeah, it's a thing. That's why Roman talked about needing him to throw more and better to middle and the QB coach also talked about the same problem. But it's not a thing that you can find if you look in the wrong place, and that's what you're doing, looking at stat tables that don't isolate the problem but instead lump it in with areas of strength.
Wow You're living in your own world aren't you? Coach mentions middle of the field and clearly he's talking about the deep portion of the field but clearly he's not talking about the short portion of the field because that's where Taylor is good?
Are you making this up as you go along? That sure is what it seems like.
Gilman was considered the father of the passing offense. The West Coast offense and other offenses have come down from that. Where is there a reference to dividing the field in three? These are conclusions your drawing in your own fantasy land. You have it right there, essentially saying that the father of the modern passing game divided the field horizontally and five, and yet you are so arrogantly saying that obviously the offensive masterminds who followed figured out that they needed to narrow that down to three, rather than five. The problem is, you don't have any evidence. and if the field were divided in three, don't you think coaches would be wiser to use the landmarks like numbers and sidelines rather than subjective vision?
Thurm, You've been very entertaining with your snide street light remarks and the arrogance of your posts directed at me, but maybe for once you should just admit that an argument you're making is your own, and one you made up, and not something that clearly and obviously shared by everyone in the NFL.
-
Why would I care whether the coaches specifically mention the middle third?
Coaches avoid talking about what specific problems are for millions of reasons, spin, wanting to keep being positive, not wanting to point out weaknesses ... a million reasons. Have the coaches ever admitted that the players didn't understand the defense last year, have they ever said those words? Nope. But one of the biggest problems on the defense appears to have been that ... well, they didn't fully understand the defense.
The idea that something isn't real unless the coaches specifically admit it to the world is flat-out stupid.
It's plenty that they said he had problems in the middle. When you look, though, you see it's the middle third. That's the point. As you know, I analyzed every single pass of the 2015 season and discovered that the problem was the deep ... and intermediate ... middle third of the field. You look at the dot chart and it stood out like a twenty-foot great white shark in a thirty-foot wide goldfish pond. That's where the problem has been. The deep and intermediate middle third.
Which is why, by the way, everyone knows the Bills have a problem going there and you can't find any trace of the problem using the stats that don't just cover the area that he doesn't throw to but also throws in a ton of passes in an area of strength. You're looking where the light is better, not where the problem is.
So the coaches talk about the middle of the field and we are required to believe that it's not just the middle, but it has to be the middle one third rather than the middle area that coaches can easily and clearly see in game film and on the field, all those passes between the numbers or between the hashmarks?
Apparently you think coaches care about geometry? And remember, you're the one saying the coaches made the statements about the middle of the field. There has never been anything said about the deep middle. There has never been anything said about the middle one third. You're just arbitrarily choosing something based on watching film of one player who you are clearly biased against, which is fine because we are all biased in someway as human beings. However, it would've been relatively easy to show that you have some level of credibility when it comes to this by looking comparatively at the other quarterbacks across the NFL.
Instead, you refuse to do this and continue to latch onto what you witnessed in a vacuum with your own biased eyes. And what's funny here is that I've never said after 2015 that Taylor didn't need to work on the intermediate middle portion of the field. This whole discussion continues because your absolute an incredible obsession with the deep portion of the field. And you've been proven wrong, time and time and time and time again. Apparently your latching onto two passing charts by two of the best quarterbacks in the NFL, one of them being probably the greatest quarterback in NFL history, and that was only one chart from one year, and somehow you think that's definitive proof that all QBs spread the ball exactly evenly or even close to it to the deep portion of the field.
It's ridiculous.
Middle third is not a thing, Thurm. no one uses it other than you, which is why I suspect you've come back here trying to give the runaround.
Couldn't find a single quote from a coach or NFL GM or anyone regarding the middle third of the field, could you?
Now, as far as the 2016 season goes, Taylor has clearly improved as far as effectiveness when throwing across the middle of the field. Middle third. Middle fifth. Middle middle. Whatever the hell you want to call it.
All I can say is that I'm sorry but my numbers are gone. Hundreds of people saw them, as I published them on buffalobills.com. There were 2015 dot charts for Rivers, Brady and Tyrod. And I went back and watched every single pass in the 2015 season, and put up game by game compilations with every single pass that came anywhere close to being in the deep and intermediate middle third, and my comments.
And not a single person challenged me on my interpretation of a single play, on where the ball was being caught. Not a single person, including Transplant himself.
That site disappeared, without warning. The numbers are gone.
And again, the reason why those numbers are important are simple. Deep and intermediate throws matter. They're where you get chunk plays, they're a way to pressure the defense to cover the whole length of the field instead of being able to step up, fill up the box and make your run game and short pass game more difficult. And if you're throwing about a third of your deep passes to the left third, a third to the right third and a third to the middle, third, you're unpredictable and you make the defense's job tougher. Which is what Brady and Rivers were both doing. But if you throw roughly 40% of your deep passes to the left third, 40% to the right third and below 20% to the middle third, you're saying to the defense, "don't worry about that area, we rarely use it, go ahead and put more pressure on the areas we use more." Which is what Tyrod did.
And I didn't take the QB figures and divide by three. There were dot charts showing where every pass went. Brady and Rivers had a relatively even distribution. Tyrod had an extremely visible gap in the deep and intermediate middle third. I then went and checked pass by pass and confirmed that it really was a distribution problem for the Bills passing game and that that was where the problem was.
Again, with whatever two charts you use for Brady and rivers, there were at least a dozen more from other quarterbacks and even Brady and Rivers from different years that blatantly demonstrate that quarterbacks simply don't go to the deep middle that much. By percentage, deep middle throws are the smallest percentage that a QB makes.
For whatever amount of work you put into watching Taylor make every throw and charting all of those middle thirds to the deep and intermediate sections of the field, your conclusions are questionable at best, simply because you didn't put the rest of the necessary work and to draw those conclusions. You even said when you presented this initially that the problem with Taylor throwing to the deep middle portion of the field had more to do with frequency than anything else because frequency was what made him predictable. I don't think that anyone really would've disputed that Taylor needed to be better throwing to the deep middle portion of the field when he threw there. The big issue that you hold so strongly to is the fact that frequency was the issue, when it's clearly not.
-
Taylor finishes with 4000 yards passing and 30 passing touchdowns.
The bills win a playoff game.
You said bold, right?
Bold predictions are bold because they're likely to be wrong.
I'm interested in trying to be right. I don't generally have bold predictions. Instead, I expect what's likely.
But have fun, folks. It's an interesting idea. I'll come back and read, but I don't expect to have anything to contribute.
Ever the buzzkill aren't we Thurm?
-
With respect to the bolded, I disagree. Players will follow the money because they have a very short window to do so and they sacrifice a lot to do it.
The rest of your post only enforces this. If Tyrod could have gotten a better deal, with a better situation, elsewhere, he would have taken it. He doesn't have any roots here with respect to family, and he is definitely the type of guy to want to prove his mettle.
But the fact remains that he is still hovering around the bottom of the league in terms of passing. We know it. The coaches know it. And Tyrod and his agent know it.
I really like Tyrod and his overall performance in Buffalo, but a quarterback will never be able to break the bank unless he has proven he can win big games.
The people who say, "Tyrod isn't a real NFL QB," are short-sighted in my opinion, but they have a very valid point when it comes to compensation. Although, one could argue that the reason McCoy wasn't ranked a top-10 player and the reason he doesn't get the respect he deserves is because he has benefited immensely from the presence that Tyrod brings in every. single. play.
Phew! That was too long and probably didn't get my point across very well, but as they say "nothing good happens after 2am"
And this is why we will never know.
You said Taylor not having any family roots makes it so that it's more likely he would leave. I say it makes it so his family becomes more of his team. These are the guys he's grown close to and become friends with over the last two years. And like I said before, in the end will never know, but I remember how I was when I was single and I stayed in my job not for money but for lifestyle. Lack of a family makes settled lot easier to be persuaded by friends and teammates. You think going somewhere else is the way he would prove his mettle. I say staying in Buffalo, finishing what he started and trying to end his career as a successful QB with one team would be the best thing for him, I think leaving Buffalo would have been like tucking his tail between his legs and realizing he failed even if he made more money elsewhere.
-
It would be hard to go backwards.
Hey... welcome back
-
You have NFL game pass? I feel like those of us who post here this much might find it worth itMaybe but I haven't gone back to watch the last 2 seasons to know for myself.
Though I'm lucky if I make one game a year, so anyone who forks out the cash to go to several games a year, it's understandable if not
Article on why 2017 passing game can make giant leap forward
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!