QB comparative data for Tyrod from Cian Fahey to discuss

[mannc]

 

I'm sorry, but I disagree whole-heartedly. Baseball and football are extremely different sports and while it quite obviously works in baseball across the board, I think in football you have to use the metrics and analytics carefully and sparingly. With lineman and linebackers based on their assignments and how they execute the plays, the analytics seem to me to have more value. But with a QB, there are just so many variables including how a game "feels" or "flows", also known as momentum that cannot be easily quantified in metrics that impact how a QB performs that it is a position that is much more about evaluating the QB by sight and what he accomplishes in the MANNER in which he accomplishes it or fails to do so, than any amount of metrics or analytics can provide. JMO, but it's not about dismissing the analytics as it is being quite cautious in their use.

Football analytics are certainly more complicated than they are in baseball, where the numbers are much less subjective and require less context. But that doesn't mean football analytics aren't meaningful, especially when it comes to quarterbacking, and many teams are buying in (including the Bills, apparently). And by the way, the idea that "momentum" is an important factor in football has been thoroughly de-bunked by statistical analysis and is a good example of the type of superstitious nonsense that should play no part in a coach's or an organization's decision making.

[transplantbillsfan]

Thank you for putting this out there OP, and I appreciate another person / professional is does their best to comb through stats and digest them to some degree for us casual readers or observers. However, while the stats are basic math regarding percentages - and I trust the man to have a calculator to do the percentage for him and that he's not "lying" - I disagree with the other statement or conclusion of this information that leads to believing Tyrod is a "good" QB.

 

To me, finding a good QB is much like what the Supreme Court referred to pornography, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it"....a really good to great QB is similar. I don't necessarily that works counter toward a poor QB, for that I think only time and experience truly show, unless they were really bad in college, which makes me think they didn't even get a look to come to the NFL. Bottom line for me: Tyrod doesn't pass the eye test. I don't watch the All-22 and from what people say, Tyrod does a fine job, but I watch the games and I watch many, many other NFL and college games, and Tyrod routinely throws the ball high, low, wide or behind a receiver. He misses open receivers in the middle of the field and he gets antsy feet in the pocket. To me, he is not Russ Wilson 2.0, he is just an incredible athlete with a penchant for the deep ball.

 

IMHO, a true NFL QB stands in the pocket, takes the hits and delivers, commands the Offense with precision and accuracy, and has the ability to take what the Defense gives him bit by bit and chew up the yardage as well as making good audible calls at the line, not just making plays after the snap with his running or elusive ability, which to Tyrod's credit he does as well as anyone in the league. Tyrod was probably the best option for this year, but he is NOT a good NFL QB, he's just better than what we've had for so very long. Sometimes, desperation makes it hard to tell the difference.

Completely fair opinion and well stated, even if I disagree, though not strongly

[BringBackOrton]

Some questions I have below in bold

 

So what this seems to be saying is that our WR were not very good about catching? And Taylor could be taking far fewer sacks?

 

I think it's pretty clear to say we had no screen plays (really strange) in our game, and that perhaps our WR were not very good at making catches happen or making YAC happen. Which matches my eyeballs. I would watch other teams and go "why can't we have WR who make plays like that?"

 

I believe it's called "confirmation bias". The person accepts data that confirms their belief and rejects data or sources that might cause them to reassess or question their belief.

TT's accuracy gives them no chance at YAC, on the whole.

[KellyToughII]

You can have a thousand and one people show me how they calculate their metrics and blah blah blah.

 

I don't need a pencil pusher to tell me Tyrod is not a good QB.

 

Tyrod wasn't a good QB in college, wasn't a good QB in Baltimore and hasn't been a good QB here.

 

A heck of an athlete, sure, I'll never deny that, but the guy is not an NFL level QB.

Exactly

[transplantbillsfan]

Hahahaha, damage control because they drafted a very accurate passer in Peterman. Nervous I see!

Are you joking?

 

Yes, I'm sure Taylor's shaking in his boots because McDermott clearly plans to replace him with a guy he drafted with a 2nd 5th round pick...

[mannc]

TT's accuracy gives them no chance at YAC, on the whole.

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters. Edited May 1, 2017 by mannc

[transplantbillsfan]

Nothing to discuss, he isn't the QB to get us where we want to go. Our long term solution is either Petterman or a 1st round pick next year.

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

[dulles]

There's an actual name for this kind of logical fallacy.

 

I can't think of the name right now, though.

 

Anyone...?

 

 

Besides, did I post an actual assessment by him of Taylor? Do you believe he skews his data because he's enamored with Taylor?

It's circular reasoning or begging the question.

 

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/begging-the-question

[BringBackOrton]

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters.

The numbers? How does Fahey get his "numbers?"

 

What was our team YAC in 2015? With a Sammy who played almost the entire season?

 

The evidence is in the game. Not only does TT throw balls that are usually inaccurate enough that WR/TE's can't turn up field, his deficits on using the middle of the field and relying too much on comebacks and outs (sideline throws) virtually ensure poor YAC numbers.

Edited May 1, 2017 by jmc12290

[Big Gun]

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

this is funny

[NewEra]

Tyrod a a decent QB. He doesn't suck. He's great at running the ball and buying time in the pocket. At times, he's really exciting to watch. He's a good guy. With an all-time type defense, he might be able to win a super bowl.

 

That's the most positive post I could put together about TT. Hopefully he can be more than that in a new system and with healthy weapons at his disposal.

[dulles]

There really is zero evidence for this statement; in fact, the numbers suggest the opposite. Fahey's statistics show that Tyrod is overall actually a pretty accurate QB, although less so on short passes. It's more likely that the lack of YAC is (1) the Bills' tendency to not throw many short passes and (2) that the Bills' receivers last year were not very good. My sense is that the cause of low (or high) YAC is complicated, and that a lot more data is needed. And since Tyrod's adjusted YPA is so high (3d best in the league), I'm not sure why YAC even matters.

Another forgotten influence was Roman's route tree which was often impugned as archaic. Modern route​ trees are designed to get guys open and to keep them running after the catch.

Evidently Roman never studied the pass game from the 1980s on. Even Lynn admitted that there were pass concepts he'd like to add, but couldn't due to limited practice time midseason.

[mannc]

The numbers? How does Fahey get his "numbers?"

 

What was our team YAC in 2015? With a Sammy who played almost the entire season?

 

The evidence is in the game. Not only does TT throw balls that are usually inaccurate enough that WR/TE's can't turn up field, his deficits on using the middle of the field and relying too much on comebacks and outs (sideline throws) virtually ensure poor YAC numbers.

The OP explained how Fahey gets his numbers. Do you have any reason to dispute them (other than your "eye test")? I don't know what the YAC was in 2015, nor do I know the reason it was low in 2016. As I suggested, there could be many reasons, but TT's supposed inaccuracy is probably not a significant factor.

[GoBills808]

Look at the new shiny object we just drafted with our 2nd pick in the 5th round!

Do you agree with Fahey's assessment that Taylor is better than Cousins?

[mannc]

Another forgotten influence was Roman's route tree which was often impugned as archaic. Modern route​ trees are designed to get guys open and to keep them running after the catch.

Evidently Roman never studied the pass game from the 1980s on. Even Lynn admitted that there were pass concepts he'd like to add, but couldn't due to limited practice time midseason.

Yes, that seems likely, but we would need to know whether the Bills' route tree favored certain types of passes over other types, and which types of passes tend to generate more or less YAC.

[Alphadawg7]

You can have a thousand and one people show me how they calculate their metrics and blah blah blah.

 

I don't need a pencil pusher to tell me Tyrod is not a good QB.

 

Tyrod wasn't a good QB in college, wasn't a good QB in Baltimore and hasn't been a good QB here.

 

A heck of an athlete, sure, I'll never deny that, but the guy is not an NFL level QB.

 

Except for those pesky facts and stats where it shows he is an NFL level QB.

 

I don't care if you don't think Taylor is good enough, but the fact that you said he is not an NFL level QB might be one of the absolute dumbest things I have read on this board since the Mario for Skelton straight up trade thread. People can disagree on how good he is or can be, I am fine with that...but to say he can't play in the NFL when he has represented the AFC 2 years in a row and was chosen by his peers (people who know football about a million times better than you) says you probably should just stop commenting on him as you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Alphadawg7

[BringBackOrton]

The OP explained how Fahey gets his numbers. Do you have any reason to dispute them (other than your "eye test")? I don't know what the YAC was in 2015, nor do I know the reason it was low in 2016. As I suggested, there could be many reasons, but TT's supposed inaccuracy is probably not a significant factor.

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

[mannc]

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

Here's what the OP said about how Fahey goes about his work:

 

"The focus is on the actual level of play of a QB on the field by attributing credit and/or blame for individual things the QB almost always gets credit (i.e.:completion %) or blame (i.e.:interceptions, sacks) for. Fahey acknowledges the inevitable subjectivity involved, but uses the same subjective criteria to chart 33 NFL QBs and every single one of their snaps. So it's pretty evenly subjective, at least."

 

That sounds a lot different than, "I know an NFL QB when I see one."

 

As to your comment about WRs and low YAC, I acknowledged that it is probably attributable to multiple factors, but the one thing that is UNLIKELY to be causing it is Tyrod's inaccuracy, since he ranks fairly high in most measures of accuracy.

 

[Alphadawg7]

He did not. He gave no criteria for determing how "by the WR" stats are even recorded. Furthermore, Fahey is clearly using his own version of the "eye test" to make his determinants. It's not like he has hard numbers. He's making his own interpretation by watching the plays, the same as me.

 

The YAC average for the Bills in 2015 was 31st. It was 30th in 2016. Unless our WR's got better in 2016, I'd say Fahey is full of it.

 

I agree YAC does need to improve...however thats also a result of the plays being called, the WR's, etc, not just all on TT. It will help TT when our WR's don't fall all the time (Woods - worst feet on a WR I have ever seen), are out hurt (Sammy, Harvin, Goodwin, Woods are perennially hurt or dinged up), guys don't dog out routes (Clay, Goodwin, etc) or when they aren't just a bunch of scrubs on the field due to injuries.

 

And more importantly, the new coaching staff and Dennison hopefully puts him in a better system too. While there were times I liked what our OC was doing, there were others where I wanted to break my TV on the dumb calls and stupid play designs.

[BigBuff423]

Football analytics are certainly more complicated than they are in baseball, where the numbers are much less subjective and require less context. But that doesn't mean football analytics aren't meaningful, especially when it comes to quarterbacking, and many teams are buying in (including the Bills, apparently). And by the way, the idea that "momentum" is an important factor in football has been thoroughly de-bunked by statistical analysis and is a good example of the type of superstitious nonsense that should play no part in a coach's or an organization's decision making.

 

And I'm not asking this to be condescending, I'm legitimately asking: did you watch the 1992 comeback win?? If you did, fair enough once again we disagree - if you did not, then you should watch it from start to finish. Because I can tell you, the momentum swing in that game was entirely real and relevant. Now, could it simply be the psychological manner in which momentum manifests itself into confidence - of course - but it doesn't change the significant at all. You'll tell me it's one game, but seeing the Bills all these years on the reverse side of that pendulum, doesn't negate it's truth either - just the taste is a bit saltier.