New data shows Tyrod/the offense was better than you thought

[John from Riverside]

It's how the insecure ones justify their position.

Try to stay on topic sir.....didnt you read that the nasty retorts were not wanted?

[Eric Moulds on my A**]

Factor in the recievers he had to work with and I think that's even more impressive.

 

It sounds like McCoy and the tight ends are going to be involved much heavier in the passing game this year which will only serve to help him this season having some designated safety valves when thinks break down.

 

I'm not saying playoffs or anything but I think there's enough to believe our offense could take a step forward under the new regime.

If our offense takes a step forward and our defense returns from mediocrity.. we gotta real team folks.

[transplantbillsfan]

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.

Yeah I'm happy you posted that... it provides some validity at least to when I broke down Taylor's scrambles as separate from his designed runs.

 

Looks like our OL was a big issue

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 !

 

Seasons over, Bills sucked again, thanks to Jacoby Brissett for the 1.

 

Show me the money in 2017.

Whatever happened to you being done with all the Tyrod discussion?

Let's go back 2 years to find positives. Nice.

 

Beating Fitz and Hoyer is quite a feather in the cap. The colts win was something, it felt like we didn't suck for a solid few weeks

It's pretty dumb to not examine the Seattle game or 2nd Miami game this year as positives and proof a Taylor led team is capable of doing serious damage against good teams.

 

It's like you're incapable of saying anything positive.

 

Instead, you resort to "pantsed" as your go-to...

 

How old are you?

 

You keep jumping into these threads and saying you're done with this discussion, without prompting by anyone.

 

Dude, are you bipolar?

 

Clearly you're the one who needs Dr. Phil

Edited June 21, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[transplantbillsfan]

I just don't understand how the Bills fans are always left off the top fan articles.

 

I just don't get it.

 

Oh... Well it might be because some fans call our qb a "turd" and others go into threads they don't have anything constructive to say to call people deciding to be positive about our qb situation "insecure".

 

I mean, we could just be having a conversation. Don't like the topic? Stay out of the thread. Easy.

 

Insecure to talk about the qb of your football team? Yikes. I feel bad for anyone in your life that doesn't feel exactly as you do about things.

 

Differing opinion = insecurity? Wow.

Clearly that's simply not the way some people operate

 

 

Hap, I'm sorry for being a part of potentially derailing this thread. It's interesting and new stuff and worth at least a discussion.

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.

Exactly!

 

Talk about a handful who lack any restraint.

Safe space. I'm gonna stand by the door and keep old school out too.

Sorry... I can't resist, but DUDE!!!!!

 

How many times are you gonna say you're going to stop posting on this subject only to keep posting on the subject?!?!

ahaahahaaaaa.

 

the only problem i can see with this, is that the truth of this post will fly over the head of quite a number of those in the Tyrod Camp.

 

i was gonna start a thread on the over/under number of days before another Tyrod thread would pop up after the last one got locked down. but i figured it would be sooner rather than later.....

 

Yeah a buncha douchebags flooded the thread starting **** just hurling insults rather than remotely talking about the subject.

 

Why shouldn't there always be a thread on page 1 to discuss the starting QB of our favorite football team?

Lolz those 70 yards passing through 3 qtrs really had Big Ben shook. Congrats for tooting that garbage time horn.

 

This TT biasness and excusemaking is top notch. I can't even anymore.

 

Enjoy your offseason sir. I'm out of the qb talk/delusion game Til winter.

Edited June 21, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[Thurman#1]

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:

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/19/15829060/buffalo-bills-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy-highest-first-down-conversion-rate-after-sack-in-2016

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

 

ARGUMENT ONE:

 

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.

 

 

Whether or not a sack destroys a drive is dependent on a lot of things that don't especially say much about a QB. A sack on first down, for instance is a lot less likely to destroy a drive than a sack on third down. Does it make a QB better that he got a sack on first down rather than third? A ten yard sack is more likely to destroy a drive than a one-yard sack. Does it say anything better about a QB that he gets sacked for one instead of ten yards? Or did he just have a more convenient escape route in that direction? I don't think that's even slightly clear.

 

This article is slightly interesting for it's own sake - in terms of what Klassen is saying about sacks and how they affect drives - but it doesn't say much that helps evaluate QBs or boosts Tyrod's evaluation upwards either.

 

I'm not a big Trapasso fan, honestly. But here's his conclusion to the whole article, "While Tyrod will probably always be near the top of the league in sacks, a proven track record of being able to rebound from those quarterback takedowns better than any team in the league is vital. Technically, it means a sack isn’t as damaging to the Bills as it is for other teams, which gives Buffalo’s offense a clear leg up on the rest of the NFL."

 

Hunh? So Tyrod gets sacked near the top of the league and probably always will be up there? So his 42 sacks are OK, but we're supposed to be happy that the Bills very small percentage of converting on sacks is three or four plays higher than the other NFL teams? That's the big conclusion?

 

What that is saying is that Tyrod gets sacked a lot more than other QBs but that the Bills do good things anyway on a larger percentage of those drives. And that gives us a leg up? That's very questionable.

 

First, these stats were team stats, not QB stats and Tyrod's sack percentage (8.8%) was quite a bit worse than the percentage for Bills QBs (7.09%, 4th-worst in the league) and around 10% worse than any total team (ARIZ was worst with 8.08%).

 

Put another way, Tyrod had 42 sacks while the 16th-rated QB had 33 and the 17th had 31. So Tyrod had about 9 more than average even though he didn't play all 16 games. Assuming the Bills had converted at a league average rate (16.01% according to the Klassen article) rather than our very fine rate, how many fewer conversions would we have had? Around nine. Not a lot positive there in terms of improvement of results.

 

It's an interesting article about how sacks kill drives. Doesn't make Tyrod look better at all.

 

 

ARGUMENT TWO:

 

 

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.

 

This seems to me to show that Tyrod was very good at running the ball. And that that is also true when he's under pressure.

 

I would have guessed that.

 

The stat addresses the fact that if you include scrambles past the LOS, the DVOA (really a whole offense stat, not an individual player stat, as Football Outsiders not just admits but publicizes) improves. Yeah, I would have expected that. I've never ever been concerned about his scrambles once he gets past the LOS.

 

I'm worried about his pass game. Not Tyrod's run game. I know that's excellent, and I think we all do.

 

This also doesn't change anything for me.

 

 

ARGUMENT THREE:

 

 

 

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!

 

 

Yeah, it's a new article but that stat has been around a while now and we've been arguing it for months.

 

It's great that he threw 10 TDs under pressure. But that means he only threw 7 when he wasn't. Seventeen total.

 

It's great that he (the offense, really, in the scheme, with the play calls, yadda yadda yadda) performed so well when under pressure. But that's only part of the game.

 

Agreed that RT was a real weakness, but these days very few teams have as many as four good OLs, as we do. I'm hoping that things improve at RT this year, however that happens.

 

I don't see how this puts any dent whatsoever in the criticisms that running isn't as important as passing.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Thurman#1

[transplantbillsfan]

 

 

This seems to me to show that Tyrod was very good at running the ball. And that that is also true when he's under pressure.

 

I would have guessed that.

 

The stat addresses the fact that if you include scrambles past the LOS, the DVOA (really a whole offense stat, not an individual player stat, as Football Outsiders not just admits but publicizes) improves. Yeah, I would have expected that. I've never ever been concerned about his scrambles once he gets past the LOS.

 

I'm worried about his pass game. Not Tyrod's run game. I know that's excellent, and I think we all do.

 

This also doesn't change anything for me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016

Instead, this rating represents team offensive DVOA with this quarterback either passing (including sacks) or scrambling.

 

Ummm... what?

 

This icreased DVOA (and he jumps all the way up to #2, so far from an insignificant jump) doesn't only consider his scrambles (as you imply in your utterly dismissive attitude), it considers passing, sacks, AND scrambles...

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

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:

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/19/15829060/buffalo-bills-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy-highest-first-down-conversion-rate-after-sack-in-2016

 

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!

Thanks op, one of the more well thought out posts I've seen around here.

 

What the analysis props up, is the hope that TT can run a good offense.

 

Some People kill him here, but he made a lot of high quality throws and I believe aside from McCoy who is an absolute elite talent and Sammy who was intermittent TT was seemingly at times on his own. Can he carry an offense with a bunch of no names to the promised land.. doubt it. Can he captain a talented offense with a solid supporting defense into playoff contention...

 

That's the hope.

[H2o]

Tyrod has had moments where he performed well. He has also had many moment where he has not. Overall he is the best we have right now.

 

He could have balked at the notion of restructuring his contract as the ball was really in his court. He held all of the chips and folded rather than forcing us to release him. If his market was that strong, if he was this QB that some of you try to portray him as, then why take a pay cut? We all know how much his agent was after that $.

 

I will give you my assessment of Tyrod. He throws one heck of a deep ball, reminiscent of JP Losman. He is a tremendous athlete at the position and can stretch plays with his legs or get huge chunks of yardage on the ground, a true dual threat. This quality makes him hard to defend and it also opens things up a little more for our RB's as Tyrod always has to be accounted for. He does struggle moving the offense and throwing the ball at times. He either does not see the whole field or he is too eager to run around, but he misses open guys. Wide open guys at that and even when he has a clean pocket. It shows up in some instances like he os holding the ball too long. I'm not sure if he is focused on the rush or he just doesn't see his guys. There are other times where he sees the open guy, but misses on what should be a routine 5-10 yard throw. A throw that could have kept the offense moving and the defense off of the field. Then you have the games where the ball was in Tyrod's hands with a chance to be clutch, but he has never risen to the moment outside of the one Miami game that some people will try to base his whole career off of.

 

Tyrod is the best we have had in years and I do believe we can win with him at QB. If our defense gets back to top 5 then we can make some noise. I have said this from the beginning. You can talk QB's all you want, but defense wins championships. Baltimore and Tampa are perfect examples. Even the teams with these "great" QB's have the defense behind them. Pittsburgh, Denver, Seattle, all top tier defenses. Hell, even the Pats defense had a huge hand in their SB victories. We can win with Tyrod, but the defense has to be on top of their game.

[Thurman#1]

If our offense takes a step forward and our defense returns from mediocrity.. we gotta real team folks.

 

 

 

Heh heh.

 

If America eats less and exercises more, we gotta real shot at losing weight.

 

Yeah, um.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016

Instead, this rating represents team offensive DVOA with this quarterback either passing (including sacks) or scrambling.

 

Ummm... what?

 

This icreased DVOA (and he jumps all the way up to #2, so far from an insignificant jump) doesn't only consider his scrambles (as you imply in your utterly dismissive attitude), it considers passing, sacks, AND scrambles...

 

 

Dude, I wasn't implying that or anything like that. You didn't just miss the point, you selected a new point out of thin air and assumed it was mine.

 

Of course it considers passing, sacks AND scrambles. That's what I said. Take a look:

 

 

The stat addresses the fact that if you include scrambles past the LOS, the DVOA (really a whole offense stat, not an individual player stat, as Football Outsiders not just admits but publicizes) improves. Yeah, I would have expected that. I've never ever been concerned about his scrambles once he gets past the LOS.

 

I'm worried about his pass game. Not Tyrod's run game. I know that's excellent, and I think we all do.

 

This also doesn't change anything for me.

 

 

Get it?

 

Since passing DVOA already includes sacks ... when I was talking about their adjustments and said "if you include scrambles past the LOS" I was of course pointing out that the second stat includes passes, sacks and scrambles.

 

So -for the second time - of course adding Tyrod's scrambles to his passing DVOA is going to make him look better than it makes most NFL QBs look. We all know that's the strong part of his game.

 

Whyncha try reading carefully next time before you get your panties all sweaty and in a bunch.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Chandler#81]

 

FYI, the hijacking of this thread, insults and name calling is threatening its longevity and that of some posters.

 

Keep it civil.

[Rochesterfan]

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:https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/19/15829060/buffalo-bills-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy-highest-first-down-conversion-rate-after-sack-in-2016http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016https://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!

God - I try to stay out, but it just keeps coming back and I am sure like all of the other TT threads - we will have the exact same groups on both sides calling each other names and complaining about being insulted - such fun, but I digress.

 

Thanks Happy - I like the thought, but I am not sure what it really tells us. 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.

 

What to me is truly scary is his TDs - well over half of his TD throws by this were under pressure - yet he was under pressure about 1/3 of the time. He needs to get much, much better in the flow of a game.

 

Overall the combination of articles tell me 2 things - 1 Tyrod's legs are a huge part of his game and really helps with his play under pressure to escape and both run and throw. 2 - 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.

 

He is an improviser and his legs are a major part of his game, but the 2/3 of a time that teams did not pressure him and force him to make a play - his play tailed off. We will see what happens next - I will let you get back to insulting each other now.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Rochesterfan

[#34fan]

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:

 

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/19/15829060/buffalo-bills-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy-highest-first-down-conversion-rate-after-sack-in-2016

 

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!

 

The OP accomplishes nothing by posting this type of puff-piecework... Least of all, exonerating Tyrod for deficiencies in his game... These threads would have you believe TT was scrambling all over the field running, gunning, and scoring when the truth is that the Bills were dead last in passing attempt out of 32 teams, -dead last in completions per game, and dead last in passing touchdown percentage...

 

This first-down-after-sack stat doesn't pass the sniff test.... How did those drives end? What were the average losses of the sacks he took in the first place?

 

He may be our best option at the moment, but I think what Dennison decides will be very telling... TT excels at certain aspects of the passing game... IF Dennison makes a change at starter, TT will be the Maybach of backups in this league.

[racketmaster]

Tyrod and the offense were solid last year, especially considering all the injuries at wr last year. If you throw out the last game of the year when Manuel played, Bills averaged 25.93 points a game which put them 7th in the NFL in scoring. Take out the week one stinker at Baltimore and the Bills offense averaged 27.29 per game from week 2 thru week 16. During that portion of the schedule the Bills were 4th in scoring in the NFL. Taylor is a playmaker and the Bills can score with the top teams in the NFL with him at qb. The offense should be even more productive this year with the Shanahan/Kubiak scheme.

[Rochesterfan]

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.

 

 

ARGUMENT ONE:

 

 

 

 

Whether or not a sack destroys a drive is dependent on a lot of things that don't especially say much about a QB. A sack on first down, for instance is a lot less likely to destroy a drive than a sack on third down. Does it make a QB better that he got a sack on first down rather than third? A ten yard sack is more likely to destroy a drive than a one-yard sack. Does it say anything better about a QB that he gets sacked for one instead of ten yards? Or did he just have a more convenient escape route in that direction? I don't think that's even slightly clear.

 

This article is slightly interesting for it's own sake - in terms of what Klassen is saying about sacks and how they affect drives - but it doesn't say much that helps evaluate QBs or boosts Tyrod's evaluation upwards either.

 

I'm not a big Trapasso fan, honestly. But here's his conclusion to the whole article, "While Tyrod will probably always be near the top of the league in sacks, a proven track record of being able to rebound from those quarterback takedowns better than any team in the league is vital. Technically, it means a sack isn’t as damaging to the Bills as it is for other teams, which gives Buffalo’s offense a clear leg up on the rest of the NFL."

 

Hunh? So Tyrod gets sacked near the top of the league and probably always will be up there? So his 42 sacks are OK, but we're supposed to be happy that the Bills very small percentage of converting on sacks is three or four plays higher than the other NFL teams? That's the big conclusion?

 

What that is saying is that Tyrod gets sacked a lot more than other QBs but that the Bills do good things anyway on a larger percentage of those drives. And that gives us a leg up? That's very questionable.

 

First, these stats were team stats, not QB stats and Tyrod's sack percentage (8.8%) was quite a bit worse than the percentage for Bills QBs (7.09%, 4th-worst in the league) and around 10% worse than any total team (ARIZ was worst with 8.08%).

 

Put another way, Tyrod had 42 sacks while the 16th-rated QB had 33 and the 17th had 31. So Tyrod had about 9 more than average even though he didn't play all 16 games. Assuming the Bills had converted at a league average rate (16.01% according to the Klassen article) rather than our very fine rate, how many fewer conversions would we have had? Around nine. Not a lot positive there in terms of improvement of results.

 

It's an interesting article about how sacks kill drives. Doesn't make Tyrod look better at all.

 

 

ARGUMENT TWO:

 

 

 

 

This seems to me to show that Tyrod was very good at running the ball. And that that is also true when he's under pressure.

 

I would have guessed that.

 

The stat addresses the fact that if you include scrambles past the LOS, the DVOA (really a whole offense stat, not an individual player stat, as Football Outsiders not just admits but publicizes) improves. Yeah, I would have expected that. I've never ever been concerned about his scrambles once he gets past the LOS.

 

I'm worried about his pass game. Not Tyrod's run game. I know that's excellent, and I think we all do.

 

This also doesn't change anything for me.

 

 

ARGUMENT THREE:

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, it's a new article but that stat has been around a while now and we've been arguing it for months.

 

It's great that he threw 10 TDs under pressure. But that means he only threw 7 when he wasn't. Seventeen total.

 

It's great that he (the offense, really, in the scheme, with the play calls, yadda yadda yadda) performed so well when under pressure. But that's only part of the game.

 

Agreed that RT was a real weakness, but these days very few teams have as many as four good OLs, as we do. I'm hoping that things improve at RT this year, however that happens.

 

I don't see how this puts any dent whatsoever in the criticisms that running isn't as important as passing.

 

Well thought out and well reasoned- I think I agree for the most part.

 

You read it the same way I did - nothing was unexpected because these articles play into what was already his known strength.

 

It also made me wonder about the rest of his game as he was so much better under pressure and he was under pressure % wise more than any QBs - so his overall QBing the rest of the time was even worse than the average numbers project.

 

We will see how he does in a new offense with a new staff, but he has to get better in the normal aspects of the game and maybe some of that is designed rolls with out a lot of thought - just get rid of the ball. Time and space is his enemy - he needs to be instinctive and just make plays and that is part of the reason his timing was off, he struggled with throws to the middle of the field, and throwing timing routes to moving receivers. I have stated I do not think a lot of that was coaching - I think a lot of that was TT overthinking.

[BringBackOrton]

Don't they all?

The ones that are Tyrod thread are batting 1.000 at being Tyrod threads.

Yeah I'm happy you posted that... it provides some validity at least to when I broke down Taylor's scrambles as separate from his designed runs.

 

Looks like our OL was a big issue

Whatever happened to you being done with all the Tyrod discussion?

It's pretty dumb to not examine the Seattle game or 2nd Miami game this year as positives and proof a Taylor led team is capable of doing serious damage against good teams.

 

It's like you're incapable of saying anything positive.

 

Instead, you resort to "pantsed" as your go-to...

 

How old are you?

 

You keep jumping into these threads and saying you're done with this discussion, without prompting by anyone.

 

Dude, are you bipolar?

 

Clearly you're the one who needs Dr. Phil

Our OL was not a big issue.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

I think our offense falls off a bit this year.... There's no question the offense was a good unit last season despite people wanting to consistently bash Tyrod.

 

Romans run scheme designs are the best in the league. Great pick up for Baltimore.

 

I only hope Dennison uses his run concepts A LOT this season.

a) If Tom Brady says he needs to do better, is he saying he bashing himself?

 

Or is he saying that one always needs to improve?

 

b) the Shanahan-Kubiak-Dennison offense first emphasizes the (zone) running game. It features a relatively high frequency of play-action, bootlegs, and the quarterback under center.

 

Easy, short completions are prioritized, as are yards after the catch. It’s a system predicated on precise timing and more “horizontal” passing than “vertical” passing, although deep shots are built in, typically off a play-action fake.

 

It’s a West Coast Offense.

 

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/football/nfl/bills/2017/05/19/bills-offensive-coordinator-rick-dennison/101882932/

ORCHARD PARK — New Buffalo offensive coordinator Rick Dennison let it be known Thursday that he isn’t the least bit interested in what the Bills did last year on offense.

 

“He’s a good player,” said Dennison. “He throws the ball well, he’s athletic so he can do some of the stuff we want to do when we move him out of the pocket. With the guys we have up front, and LeSean, we can run the ball pretty doggone good and they’ll have to defend the entire field.”

[hemma]

What was the Average Time to Sack and how did that compare to other QBs?

Edited June 21, 2017 by hemma

[Crusher]

Just read through this thread, and clearly Thurman and Rochesterfan had the best and most accurate posts.

 

This thread kind of piggybacks off of the last Tyrod thread and Transplants post near the end about Tyrod and how he fares under pressure, and at that time I argued how that was not surprising because of his mobility and ability to make things happen. It was met with opposition from a certain pro Tyrod poster who challenged this assertion with inadequate information. I'm glad to see this brought back up so that we can get more answers on it.

 

It all boils down to this for me...Tyrod seems to do his best when he's not operating within the system. He is not very good or effective inside the system. He can manage the game and limit turnovers behind a strong ground game in a simplistic pass offense, but when relied upon for anything more, he struggles. When he is not thinking and just looking to make something happen, he's much more successful. This means he's a gamer that has a knack for making plays. The drawback is that he's not that much of a QB in terms of understanding and executing an offensive gameplan. It's a true quandary IMO because you can imagine what type of player he could become if the light came on in terms of understanding and executing within a more complex passing scheme...the problem is that it may never happen, and how long do you give the keys to the car to a guy who hasn't shown to master the most important aspects of being a QB?

 

That's where I'm at on this whole thing.

[JM2009]

The ones that are Tyrod thread are batting 1.000 at being Tyrod threads.

 

Our OL was not a big issue.

The right side was. What were you watching?