QB comparative data for Tyrod from Cian Fahey to discuss

[Shaw66]

Well this is about the most interesting thing I've heard on Tyrod's contract situation... Thanks for the input Shaw.

It's not the first time you've heard it. I've been saying since the day the terms of Tyrod's new deal came out. After a while I thought I was losing my mind because everyone on these boards was telling me I was wrong. So I finally asked my friend. He said it was a no brainer. Here's why:

 

By ordinary human being standards, Tyrod made a lot of money in 2016. Under his old contract he was guaranteed $40 million more, and under his new deal he was guaranteed $30 million more. So that means either way, he's set for life if he manages his money reasonably well, because after taxes and current living expenses, he's going to have north of $10 million put away. So either way he's okay.

 

Next, he's almost certain to play for the Bills through 2018, because even if some QB, like Peterman, takes his job, the Bills are better off keeping Taylor as the backup than cutting him to save some cap money, because they can't get as good a backup for the money they save.

 

Okay, so where is Taylor at the end of 2018, assuming someone has taken his job? He's a free agent, and he almost certainly gets a new deal somewhere for $10 million, because he was an NFL starter who lost his job to a better player. He wasn't a stiff. He had good numbers, Bills just found someone better. So Taylor isn't really giving up the $10 million guaranteed. Granted, it isn't guaranteed, but absent injury, he's almost certain to earn that extra $10 million, and probably more after that.

 

But what did Taylor get? Taylor got all the upside if he has a good year in 2017. If he's a top 10 passer in 2017 and/or the Bills go the playoffs, the Bills will renegotiate with Taylor after 2017 because they don't want him to become a free agent in 2018. When he renegotiates, Taylor will get $20 million a year (better than the $16 he would have gotten on the deal he gave up), and he'll get another $50 million guaranteed.

 

So the chances are good that Taylor gave up little or no money to do the new deal, and he put himself in position for a much bigger payday than he had under the old deal.

 

As my friend said, it was a no brainer for Taylor.

[HappyDays]

It's not the first time you've heard it. I've been saying since the day the terms of Tyrod's new deal came out. After a while I thought I was losing my mind because everyone on these boards was telling me I was wrong. So I finally asked my friend. He said it was a no brainer. Here's why:

 

By ordinary human being standards, Tyrod made a lot of money in 2016. Under his old contract he was guaranteed $40 million more, and under his new deal he was guaranteed $30 million more. So that means either way, he's set for life if he manages his money reasonably well, because after taxes and current living expenses, he's going to have north of $10 million put away. So either way he's okay.

 

Next, he's almost certain to play for the Bills through 2018, because even if some QB, like Peterman, takes his job, the Bills are better off keeping Taylor as the backup than cutting him to save some cap money, because they can't get as good a backup for the money they save.

 

Okay, so where is Taylor at the end of 2018, assuming someone has taken his job? He's a free agent, and he almost certainly gets a new deal somewhere for $10 million, because he was an NFL starter who lost his job to a better player. He wasn't a stiff. He had good numbers, Bills just found someone better. So Taylor isn't really giving up the $10 million guaranteed. Granted, it isn't guaranteed, but absent injury, he's almost certain to earn that extra $10 million, and probably more after that.

 

But what did Taylor get? Taylor got all the upside if he has a good year in 2017. If he's a top 10 passer in 2017 and/or the Bills go the playoffs, the Bills will renegotiate with Taylor after 2017 because they don't want him to become a free agent in 2018. When he renegotiates, Taylor will get $20 million a year (better than the $16 he would have gotten on the deal he gave up), and he'll get another $50 million guaranteed.

 

So the chances are good that Taylor gave up little or no money to do the new deal, and he put himself in position for a much bigger payday than he had under the old deal.

 

As my friend said, it was a no brainer for Taylor.

This is really good info. The only wrinkle I can think of is that Tyrod did sign that contract extension himself last year. So why is his agent having him give up guaranteed money this year for a chance at a better contract in a couple years, while last year he made seemingly the opposite choice? That might be another question for your friend.

[AdamK]

I'm not buying it. until Taylor can throw the ball to his receiver who's not open and then throw it before his reciever makes his cut, I will then get on the Taylor train. I'm tired of watching all these other QB's do that in the NFL. Also this whole problem could have been solved by Drafting Mahomes or Watson with our 10th pick. So now we wait yet another year to get to drafting a franchise QB and getting him reps and learning the offense. Taylor is a bridge QB. I like him he's pretty good. But he won't win you any playoff games or Super Bowls with him. You can't play QB like he does and win tuff games against good opponents. Give me a QB that can throw the ball with anticipation and before the receiver makes his cut and then you will see some great wins. Taylor holds the ball the longest. He will only throw it unless he see's his guy is wide open, he does not throw over the middle very much. No anticipation at all, except throwing it out there on deep ball shots. Peterman might be that guy. I don't know enough about him. But what I seen on film is really good. Let's see how he looks in the preseason games.

 

"Also this whole problem could have been solved by Drafting Mahomes or Watson with our 10th pick."

 

"Taylor is a bridge QB. I like him he's pretty good. But he won't win you any playoff games or Super Bowls with him."

 

"You can't play QB like he does and win tuff games against good opponents."

 

"Taylor holds the ball the longest."

 

***WARNING: THOSE ARE ALL OPINIONS. Those are NOT facts.

I tend to believe the data, since Fahey did some actual research and compiled the data on 33 different QBs. That information has substance and/or value. You are trying to pass off your opinions as facts, which seems to be a common problem these days. Would you be willing to provide some value for your claims by backing them up with examples or facts? By the way, the first one (about future events) is going to be tough.

Edited May 2, 2017 by AdamK

[buffaloboyinATL]

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

Damage control by who? This is an independent research project and not one that was put out by the bills.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

In god we trust

shouldn't that be

 

In Tygod we trust? I keed keed

 

sorry, slow day at work so I'm trolling here for the next hour

[transplantbillsfan]

 

Interesting data, but I'm not sure I trust it. Taylor holds the ball longer than any other QB in the league.

 

As for the other QB's, I'm sure they do have an issue with either progression speed or pocket awareness. They have other strengths that make up for it - just like Taylor does.

 

If you don't trust the data, why don't you just go through and rewatch the 39 sacks as objectively as you can and categorize them yourself?

 

I understand skepticism of subjectivity. But if you can use the same subjective criteria to evaluate QBs across the NFL comparatively and come up with numbers using a generally consistent evaluation criteria, it'd be pretty valuable, albeit not absolutely perfect. Considering Fahey's reputation and the fact that he makes his living doing this, I think it's fair to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's doing this.

 

 

And by the way, I feel like some folks think Fahey is a Taylor homer, but this catalogue is almost 200 pages and outside of Taylor's own chapter and the actual data itself, he doesn't even mention Taylor in the introductory chapters.

Edited May 2, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[Shaw66]

This is really good info. The only wrinkle I can think of is that Tyrod did sign that contract extension himself last year. So why is his agent having him give up guaranteed money this year for a chance at a better contract in a couple years, while last year he made seemingly the opposite choice? That might be another question for your friend.

It all makes sense when you think about it. It's all about who has the right to make the player a free agent, when he has the right, and guaranteed money.

 

Tyrod was making peanuts. He'd never made any real money in the NFL. Tyrod had a great 2015. He had the option to become a free agent at the end of 2016. The Bills wanted to be able to to look at him in 2016 without fear of losing him. So the Bills went to him and asked him to give up his option to become a free agent after 2016. Tyrod said he'd give up the option to become a free agent, but only for real guaranteed money, like $50 million. Bills said if they were going to give him big guaranteed money, they wanted him for the long term (in other words, they wanted to take the decision as to when Tyrod was next a free agent away from Tyrod and keep it for themselves). Tyrod said okay to the long-term deal. Why? Because he was getting big guaranteed money. The guarantee is what was different between the 2016 negotiation and the 2017 negotiation. Tyrod went into the 2016 negotiation with pretty much NO guaranteed money. He was at risk. When the Bills put a big guarantee on the table, he took it and gave up his right to become a free agent. .

 

However, when Tyrod came to the table in 2017, things were different; he had the guarantee. He had $40 million plus the money he made in 2016 on the renegotiated contract. That $40 million was in his pocket. The Bills, for the second year in a row, were asking for a favor. Tyrod said I'll give you your favor if you give me my freedom back. The 2017 deal was essentially that Tyrod gave the Bills $10 million back in exchange for getting back the right to become a free agent while he was still in the prime of his career. From Tyrod's perspective, his future was in good shape even with the smaller guarantee; he'd rather bet on himself to be a winner and get a really big payday than worry about failing and getting stuck with a nice, but relatively smaller payday.

 

Did I ask my friend? Yes, sort of. I posed him this question: It's March of 2016. Tyrod had a good year in 2015 and he can become a free agent at the end of 2016. The Bills put two offers on the table. One is for six years, the deal Tyrod took. The other deal is the same for 2016 and then it's $30 million guaranteed for the next two years, then free agency. In other words, the second deal they offer is the same first year plus the contract he renegotiated in 2017. I asked which deal he'd tell his client to take. He said the the deal with free agency after 2018, in a heartbeat. His client still is getting a lot of guaranteed money, as much as he'll need for the rest of his life, AND he's getting the opportunity to negotiate for a new contract in a couple of years. My friend said the opportunity to renegotiate is really valuable, especially in a league where the salary cap keeps going up.

 

So why didn't he take that deal in 2016? BECAUSE IT WASN'T OFFERED. Except for the fact that they were forced to make a decision about Tyrod in 2017, the Bills liked the 2016 deal better than the 2017 deal. The $10 million they got back is nothing compared to what they're going to have to pay Tyrod next year if he has a good year.

[transplantbillsfan]

What do all the ACCURACY categories mean? How is he evaluating "accuracy." Many fans complain that Tyrod doesn't throw the ball into tight windows, doesn't lead receivers well, etc. I've never been sure they're right, but there certainly are plenty of replays supporting the claim. I also don't trust fan analysis on a category like that. So how is Fahey measuring accuracy?

 

Is he third best or third worst in interceptable passes?

 

Finally, avoidable sacks isn't a useful number on its own. Taylor has a lot of sacks because he scrambles and he tries to keep pass plays alive. If he stays behind the line of scrimmage and gets sacked instead of giving up on the play and gaining 1 yard, yes it's an avoidable sack, but it might have been the right decision, because keeping the play alive may result, on average, in gains instead of losses. Plus, some of his avoidable sacks are plays where Taylor was trying to escape and got caught when he could have thrown the ball away. I want Taylor to try to escape in those situations, because when he does escape he often runs for a first down or more. In other words, the important stat is net yards in sack situations. That is, look at all the plays where the QB should be sacked and net all the yards lost to sacks, yards gained because the QB escaped and completed a pass and yards gain because the QB ran. If my QB has a high net, I don't care that he took more sacks than some guy who threw the ball away every time. I'd bet that if someone generated THAT stat, Taylor would be way up in the rankings. And, by the way, in doing that ranking, you have to determine avoidability objectively. That is, when the tackler is running at x miles an hour, he's 4 yards from the QB and the QB has Y room to maneuver, how many times does he avoid the sack? I guarantee you Taylor is way up on that list. That is, what's avoidable can't vary because the nature of the QB. In one sense, Eli has more or less no avoidable sacks, because he just isn't able to avoid any.

 

 

Shaw, Fahey explains everything in good detail, but he categorizes accuracy % along with failed receptions and created receptions.

 

So, essentially, passes by Taylor that fall in the "failed receptions" category qualify positively towards accuracy % while "created receptions" qualify negatively towards accuracy %.

 

In other words, accuracy % is very simply how accurate the pass is. An accurate pass by a QB that results in an incompletion because a defender makes an exceptional play on the ball would qualify positively towards accuracy %.

 

Taylor is the 3rd best in the NFL in interceptable pass %, according to Fahey.

 

He also breaks avoidable sacks into 3 categories : missed read, ran into sack, and process in the pocket

 

He breaks unavoidable sacks into 4 categories: beaten blocker, blown assignment, coverage, botched snap

 

According to Fahey, 4 of Taylor's 7 avoidable sacks were "missed reads" and 3 were "ran into sack."

[Crusher]

 

Shaw, Fahey explains everything in good detail, but he categorizes accuracy % along with failed receptions and created receptions.

 

So, essentially, passes by Taylor that fall in the "failed receptions" category qualify positively towards accuracy % while "created receptions" qualify negatively towards accuracy %.

 

In other words, accuracy % is very simply how accurate the pass is. An accurate pass by a QB that results in an incompletion because a defender makes an exceptional play on the ball would qualify positively towards accuracy %.

 

Taylor is the 3rd best in the NFL in interceptable pass %, according to Fahey.

 

He also breaks avoidable sacks into 3 categories : missed read, ran into sack, and process in the pocket

 

He breaks unavoidable sacks into 4 categories: beaten blocker, blown assignment, coverage, botched snap

 

According to Fahey, 4 of Taylor's 7 avoidable sacks were "missed reads" and 3 were "ran into sack."

Passes that aren't likely to be intercepted are Tyrods specialty...mainly because he doesn't make tough throws in traffic or anticipate his receivers. It's get open, and I'll throw it to you.

 

I'm glad that you are still trying here, but everyone knows that Tyrods low INT's are due to his penchant for not attempting the tougher throws. It has hurt this team as much as it's helped IMO.

 

He needs to do better...plain and simple.

[Domdab99]

 

AGAIN, *with* all due respect, I strongly disagree. You don't have to agree, but your final word or anyone else's for that matter does not invalidate my opinion.

 

Just curious, what are your thoughts on climate change: happening or a liberal con?

[HappyDays]

 

Shaw, Fahey explains everything in good detail, but he categorizes accuracy % along with failed receptions and created receptions.

 

So, essentially, passes by Taylor that fall in the "failed receptions" category qualify positively towards accuracy % while "created receptions" qualify negatively towards accuracy %.

 

In other words, accuracy % is very simply how accurate the pass is. An accurate pass by a QB that results in an incompletion because a defender makes an exceptional play on the ball would qualify positively towards accuracy %.

 

Taylor is the 3rd best in the NFL in interceptable pass %, according to Fahey.

 

He also breaks avoidable sacks into 3 categories : missed read, ran into sack, and process in the pocket

 

He breaks unavoidable sacks into 4 categories: beaten blocker, blown assignment, coverage, botched snap

 

According to Fahey, 4 of Taylor's 7 avoidable sacks were "missed reads" and 3 were "ran into sack."

I wish someone other than Fahey would go through the film independently and come up with their own numbers. It would make the analysis stronger as a whole if 2 separate people posted what they found. As it stands it's good data to have though. It won't convince anyone because of its subjectivity but it is good data.

[GoBills808]

Boy you make a lot of assumptions. How do you know Taylor's numbers look better than Rodgers? Or Brady? Or whoever you want to throw in there? Did you buy the catalogue and look? I never said who was above or below Taylor in any category. If not, what you're doing is just sad.

 

And why the WRs don't get YAC you claim is Taylor's fault for where he chooses to throw the football...? How do you know how much choice the offensive system gave him in where he threw the football?

 

Do you truly believe it's everyone who's credible?

 

Or do they lose credibility if they disagree?

This is my opinion, obviously, but anyone studying QBs and concluding that Taylor is a superior quarterback to Cousins loses credibility.

 

So no. I disagree, and they lose credibility with me. One man's opinion.

[HappyDays]

Did I ask my friend? Yes, sort of. I posed him this question: It's March of 2016. Tyrod had a good year in 2015 and he can become a free agent at the end of 2016. The Bills put two offers on the table. One is for six years, the deal Tyrod took. The other deal is the same for 2016 and then it's $30 million guaranteed for the next two years, then free agency. In other words, the second deal they offer is the same first year plus the contract he renegotiated in 2017. I asked which deal he'd tell his client to take. He said the the deal with free agency after 2018, in a heartbeat. His client still is getting a lot of guaranteed money, as much as he'll need for the rest of his life, AND he's getting the opportunity to negotiate for a new contract in a couple of years. My friend said the opportunity to renegotiate is really valuable, especially in a league where the salary cap keeps going up.

If I'm being honest Shaw a lot of this is over my head. I'll defer to your friend the expert. At the very least I am convinced that the "Tyrod took a pay cut" narrative is speculation at best. As I've said Tyrod wins the restructure if he performs to the level he believes he is capable of. I'm shocked anyone could turn that into "Tyrod took a pay cut because he sucks." I've always thought he was simply re-betting on himself and thinks he can make more.

[ko12010]

 

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.

It's obvious you disagree, but maybe you're wrong. That's what he's saying--it's not likely something you'll even be able to acknowledge.

[transplantbillsfan]

Passes that aren't likely to be intercepted are Tyrods specialty...mainly because he doesn't make tough throws in traffic or anticipate his receivers. It's get open, and I'll throw it to you.

 

I'm glad that you are still trying here, but everyone knows that Tyrods low INT's are due to his penchant for not attempting the tougher throws. It has hurt this team as much as it's helped IMO.

 

He needs to do better...plain and simple.

 

First of all, why do you say "I'm glad that you are still trying" ...?

 

I'm just relaying Fahey's findings.

 

And yeah, I think you're right to a degree; consistently making those tough throws in traffic and the anticipation throws are things that Taylor needs to work to do more consistently. Fahey acknowledges this, himself.

 

But regarding Taylor's 2016 season, while Fahey says there was certainly bad with Taylor, "the good severely overshadowed the bad."

 

But I think his last words in Taylor's chapter ultimately sum up his feelings:

 

"You could ignore all the context. You could just point to the missed throws. It'd be about as rational as throwing out a four-course meal because your fork was bent. A four-course meal that you ordered for a fast food price."

I wish someone other than Fahey would go through the film independently and come up with their own numbers. It would make the analysis stronger as a whole if 2 separate people posted what they found. As it stands it's good data to have though. It won't convince anyone because of its subjectivity but it is good data.

 

I agree. I wish more than just Fahey did this. I think this is why PFF can be so invaluable.

[34-78-83]

 

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.

That's actually a great point. Was there. We all felt it. As did the players.

[transplantbillsfan]

This is my opinion, obviously, but anyone studying QBs and concluding that Taylor is a superior quarterback to Cousins loses credibility.

 

So no. I disagree, and they lose credibility with me. One man's opinion.

 

Fine by me. Seems like a really narrow-minded way to go through life, though.

[mannc]

That's actually a great point. Was there. We all felt it. As did the players.

Well, if momentum was the deciding factor in that game, what happened to the momentum that the Oilers must have had after taking 35-3 lead on the first play of the second half? Shouldn't that momentum have carried them to an overwhelming victory? And what about when the Oilers tied the game at 38 and sent it to OT after the Bills had taken the lead? Didn't that mean that they seized the momentum back again? If so, why didn't that momentum carry the Oilers to victory in OT?

Edited May 2, 2017 by mannc

[Punching Bag]

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.

 

It is what Jerry Sullivan fans have in abundance. Chuck Dickerson had his disciples reciting his lines in the old days.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/confirmation_bias.htm

 

In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias (or confirmatory bias) is a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions, leading to statistical errors.

[Domdab99]

Well, if momentum was the deciding factor in that game, what happened to the momentum that the Oilers must have had after taking 35-3 lead on the first play of the second half? Shouldn't that momentum have carried them to an overwhelming victory? And what about when the Oilers tied the game at 38 and sent it to OT after the Bills had taken the lead? Didn't that mean that they seized the momentum back again? If so, why didn't that momentum carry the Oilers to victory in OT?

 

lol forget it, they'll never understand. these are the same people who would always argueto kick the FG because "you gotta take the points," or to punt on the opponent's 38 on 4th and 4.