Tyrod Taylor: I still feel that I’d done more than enough to stay

[twoandfourteen]

11 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

Im just going to point out that your search showed 13 games where a qb reached the statistical benchmark that you cited as desiring in a Bills starter (375 yards and 4TDs) over the span of 3 years. So, out of the 768 games played in total over that time span, a starting qb met your standard 0.0196 per cent of the time. So yeah, I think your standard is too high. And yeah, Im done with looking at your shoddy stat work.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I never said that was a "benchmark". I said it was something a DC would have to account for from a good QB. It's something that could happen if the guy goes off. 

 

If Tyrod "goes off", he's not getting you anywhere near 375 -- even if you add in his rushing yards. 

 

 

[Tcali]

while not a big TT fan ..they grossly misued his talents. The guy shoulda been running 15x per game.Would have opened things up and kept the D from bullrushing.

Trying to make him a pocket guy was a huge mistake....Just a shame all the runs he didnt make for the bills.

If you play against TT what would you fear?? Him RUNNING THE DAMN BALL of course.Woulda kept the D line tired and on its heels. And woulda opened up the passing attack for bigger yardage.

Edited June 5, 2018 by Tcali

[twoandfourteen]

58 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

If you want a reasonable expectation for quality of qb play you have to compare his performances to every qb who played. You cant just isolate 44 TT games and form an opinion based on QBs you think are better. You have to consider the entire sample of NFL QB play over the same period to have any boderline reliable idea of what is above or below average. Otherwise you are  just cherry picking numbers to assert your opinions.

 

Tyrod's numbers are bad enough to stand on their own. There's really no need to take the fact that in 7 out of every 10 games the guy is giving you less than 230 yards passing and compare it to Tom Brady to realize that Taylor is not a very good NFL QB. 

 

But, since you asked so nicely, here's a comparison to Andy Dalton for perspective. (TT in parentheses)

 

45 Games - 2015-2017

 

9 games over 300 -  20%  (1 - 2.2%)

36 games under 300 - 80%  (43 - 97.7%)

32 games under 280 - 71.1%  (38 - 86.3%)

20 games under 230 - 43.4%  (30 - 68.1%)

10 games under 200 - 30.4%  (23 - 52.2%)

9 games under 180 - 19.5%  (16 - 36.3%)

2 games under 130 - 4.3%  (7 - 15.9%)

1 game under 100 - 2.2%*  (2 - 4.4%)

*Only completed 3 of 5 passes for 59 yds. AD might have been injured in that game? 

 

2 games with 4 pass TD - 4.3%  (0 - 0%)

3 games with 3 pass TD - 6.5%  (6 - 13.6%)

12 games with 2 pass TD - 26.0%  (7 - 15.9%)

20 games with 1 pass TD - 43.4%  (19 - 43.1%)

8 games with 0 pass TD - 17.7%  (12 - 27.2%)

 

Total Games with less than 230 yds passing & 1 or 0 passing TDs:

Tyrod Taylor - 24 (54.4%)

Andy Dalton - 12 (26.6%)

 

Even by Daltonian standards, Taylor falls short. 

31 minutes ago, Tcali said:

while not a big TT fan ..they grossly misued his talents. The guy shoulda been running 15x per game.Would have opened things up and kept the D from bullrushing.

Trying to make him a pocket guy was a huge mistake....Just a shame all the runs he didnt make for the bills.

If you play against TT what would you fear?? Him RUNNING THE DAMN BALL of course.Woulda kept the D line tired and on its heels. And woulda opened up the passing attack for bigger yardage.

 

They could have run him 15x per game. 

 

Of course, he'd probably end up playing in only 3 or 4 of them all season if they did that. 

[xxxxxxxx]

2 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I never said that was a "benchmark". I said it was something a DC would have to account for from a good QB. It's something that could happen if the guy goes off. 

 

If Tyrod "goes off", he's not getting you anywhere near 375 -- even if you add in his rushing yards. 

 

 

I will admit to being confused by your statistical arguments; they are sloppy, poorly coomunicated, and nothing more than silly, NFL talking head ideas, that you are getting wrong, for the most part, but are trying to pass of as your own. There is no Dalton line, thats just a B.S NFL network columnists idea, and not an accepted fact amongst the hard stats crowd (all of whom actually know what a sample size is BTW).

 

But you may be on to something with regards to Defensive coordinators haveing to gameplan (every game) in order to prevent your hypothetical ceiling performance that has not occured in 98% of games played. I'm sure coordinators spend lots of time trying to prevent things that arent statistically likely to happen from happening.Thats using stats to win ball games!

AND NO TAYLORS STATS DO NOT SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. They only aquire meaning when compared to every other QB who played the game during the same time period. Statistics are fundamentally comparative, and to assert that they are not is to fail to understand a fundamental tenet which underlies their usefullness. You sir, are the one who is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

Edited June 5, 2018 by MURPHD6

[row_33]

2 hours ago, Tcali said:

while not a big TT fan ..they grossly misued his talents. The guy shoulda been running 15x per game.Would have opened things up and kept the D from bullrushing.

Trying to make him a pocket guy was a huge mistake....Just a shame all the runs he didnt make for the bills.

If you play against TT what would you fear?? Him RUNNING THE DAMN BALL of course.Woulda kept the D line tired and on its heels. And woulda opened up the passing attack for bigger yardage.

 

We have said that about misusing talent for dozens of players the last 20 years.

 

 

 

We watched greats bend the game to their will during the peak Kelly seasons.

 

[HOUSE]

Nobody can knock his effort. Class act

[YoloinOhio]

7 hours ago, Tcali said:

while not a big TT fan ..they grossly misued his talents. The guy shoulda been running 15x per game.Would have opened things up and kept the D from bullrushing.

Trying to make him a pocket guy was a huge mistake....Just a shame all the runs he didnt make for the bills.

If you play against TT what would you fear?? Him RUNNING THE DAMN BALL of course.Woulda kept the D line tired and on its heels. And woulda opened up the passing attack for bigger yardage.

You can’t run a QB that much in the nfl. He will get injured. You can have some designed run plays weaved in, but there is a reason teams don’t commit to One dimensional running QBs. They don’t last long, and you eventually need a balanced offense to win games regardless of how good your rushing stats look.

Edited June 5, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

13 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:

There was really no need for all this. You said 200 yds was a “very good” day for him while trying to reinforce a point. That was false. 200 yds a game was his average in Buffalo. I’m not happy with that. I’m totally fine with moving on from Tyrod. That doesn’t change what you said from being wrong... and sorta stupid. Sorry.  Good talk, bruh. 

You said peoples opinions were warped.  what other kind of response did you expect?

 

The man in question did not play well enough to remain the starter in Buffalo.  There is not way to spin that.  

 

I've said TT wasn't enough for over 2 1/2 seasons.   It seems McDermott and Beane though the same thing.  He's gone. Can we move on now? 

 

And before someone accuses me of constantly talking about him, we speak only of Tyrod because of threads like this.   

 

 

FTR 

 

I had said that people say 200 is good for  TT a 7 year vet, but not good enough for AJ in his sophomore season. 

 

Who knows what AJ will do? I don't, but I know the other guy's abilities and inabilities. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan

[twoandfourteen]

6 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

I will admit to being confused by your statistical arguments; they are sloppy, poorly coomunicated, and nothing more than silly, NFL talking head ideas, that you are getting wrong, for the most part, but are trying to pass of as your own. There is no Dalton line, thats just a B.S NFL network columnists idea, and not an accepted fact amongst the hard stats crowd (all of whom actually know what a sample size is BTW).

 

But you may be on to something with regards to Defensive coordinators haveing to gameplan (every game) in order to prevent your hypothetical ceiling performance that has not occured in 98% of games played. I'm sure coordinators spend lots of time trying to prevent things that arent statistically likely to happen from happening.Thats using stats to win ball games!

AND NO TAYLORS STATS DO NOT SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. They only aquire meaning when compared to every other QB who played the game during the same time period. Statistics are fundamentally comparative, and to assert that they are not is to fail to understand a fundamental tenet which underlies their usefullness. You sir, are the one who is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

 

 

ATTENTION TBD FORUM MEMBERS: IMPORTANT POLICY CHANGE

 

FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, ANY & ALL PLAYER EVALUATIONS - GOOD OR BAD - WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE FUNDAMENTALLY DETERMINED TO BE NULL & VOID UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY APPROPRIATE FUNDAMENTAL STATISTICAL COMPARISONS TO EVERY SINGLE PLAYER TO HAVE PLAYED THAT POSITION. 

 

For example, the statement "Peyton Manning was a great QB because he passed for 71,940 yds in his career" is fundamentally meaningless unless the fundamental corresponding career passing yardage numbers is included for every NFL QB to have played between 1999 through 2015, while excluding any & all yardage fundamentally accumulated in 2011.

 

Thank you for your cooperation with this fundamentally important matter. Pope Murph VI, of the "hard stats crowd" has spoken. 

 

-----

 

Do you see how absolutely ridiculous your argument is now? 

 

I have to admit, the incredible feats of mental gymnastics performed by the #TeamTyrod guys still fascinates me. It truly takes some special bending & twisting of reality, reasoning, & logic to legitimately attempt to argue things like "Passing yards are irrelevant when evaluating a QB" or "44 games isn't a large enough sample size" or "Defensive Coordinators don't waste time game planning to prevent guys like Ben Roethlisberger from throwing for lots of yards." 

 

Simply beautiful. 

 

Stuff like that is my favorite part of the ongoing Tyrod discussion. It's probably why I keep coming back to talk about it. I guess that's what happens when guys like you continue to argue the inarguable and defend the indefensible. Never change, boys. 

 

As for you claiming my statistical evidence is "sloppy & poorly communicated", well -- that is your personal opinion. Maybe you need to look at the passing data of every single NFL QB to determine if a throwing for less than 230 yards & 1 or 0 TDs over half the time is good or not. I've watched enough bad Bills offensive football to know that it's not. 

 

I am sorry if a basic breakdown of the number of games that a guy hits a certain level of production is confusing for you. I did try to make it as clear and easy to understand as possible, but perhaps I could have done a better job and it could be communicated better. Why don't you take the information about Tyrod's career as the Bills QB and come up with a better way to present it? 

 

Also, the "Dalton Line" was my own point of reference for the purposes of this exercise. He's a good-not-great, basic starting NFL QB. 

 

Tyrod is a class act and a great human being, but is nothing more than a high-end backup QB. 

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by twoandfourteen

[colin]

tyrod being a running qb who can't read the d well or throw with anticipation means there is one blueprint to defend him -- like the man said "make him be a quarterback".

 

if the opposing d plays conservative (defending more of the pitch) then TT and a sick run game can make some money, but once coaches figured out they don't need to you saw tyrod end up as the 31st qb in the NFL in terms of production.  new england started out blitzing him in the shoot out loss in tyrod's second start (and our D pulled the greatest rex ryan disappearing act ever that game) and tyrod was able to make huge plays (with better weapons).  after that game, NE played us much better by keeping a spy or two, and clogging up lanes to defend pass and run at the same time.  any good nfl qb would carve that up by throwing over the linebackers, but tyrod just never did.

 

about production -- how can anyone say it doesn't matter?  of course yards matter, it's football for crying out loud.  if you are on your own 10, with 2 mins left, not getting yards not only means you can't sneak in a quick 3 or a glorious 7, but you punt the ball away and give the other team another shot.  3 and outs (but not turnovers, tyrod gets big credit for that) set our d up to fail over and over again.  a lack of "meaningless" yards also meant we got pinned back in our own end (since the prior possession we punted from our 31 or whatever) so the OC had to be more risk averse than usual.

 

i remember a quote from a power running back who said "if you need 1 yard, i'll get you 3, if you need 5, i'll get you 3".  Tyrod is the qb equivalent to that.

[grb]

So much babbling, but it's really not that complicated :

• 2015 : Taylor was on a team with a good (not great) offensive cast. He was a little raw but played well, with a passer rating ranked 7th in the NFL, an average of 8yds an attempt, low interception rate, excellent deep ball, and over 500yds on the ground. If you look at Taylor's games when he actually had Watkins and Woods playing, his numbers become stellar : 63.6% comp. 8.25 ypa 27 td passes. 6 ints in fifteen games over two years. That's his ceiling with good (not elite) offense support coupled with a mediocre to bad defense. People come up with their loonnngggggg lists of TT's crippling flaws, but somehow never explain the simplest of facts : When the Bills put a decent level of talent on the field with Taylor, he played well.
• 2016/2017 : Each successive year the Bills gave Taylor less to work with. Granted, much of it was injuries; but some was front office priorities. Taylor's passing rating reduced to 17th/18th with one of the worse receiver situations in the league, no deep threat, spotty (at best) pass protection, and a running game which declined from '16 to '17. Given that mess, isn't it amazing the worst quarterback in the entire history of the universe only fell to the middle of the pack? That apparently is his floor. The two QBs immediately under Taylor's rating last season were Matt Ryan and Jameis Winston. Imagine what Taylor could do with the weapons either of them have, huh?

 

[The Red King]

6 minutes ago, grb said:

So much babbling, but it's really not that complicated :

• 2015 : Taylor was on a team with a good (not great) offensive cast. He was a little raw but played well, with a passer rating ranked 7th in the NFL, an average of 8yds an attempt, low interception rate, excellent deep ball, and over 500yds on the ground. If you look at Taylor's games when he actually had Watkins and Woods playing, his numbers become stellar : 63.6% comp. 8.25 ypa 27 td passes. 6 ints in fifteen games over two years. That's his ceiling with good (not elite) offense support coupled with a mediocre to bad defense. People come up with their loonnngggggg lists of TT's crippling flaws, but somehow never explain the simplest of facts : When the Bills put a decent level of talent on the field with Taylor, he played well.
• 2016/2017 : Each successive year the Bills gave Taylor less to work with. Granted, much of it was injuries; but some was front office priorities. Taylor's passing rating reduced to 17th/18th with one of the worse receiver situations in the league, no deep threat, spotty (at best) pass protection, and a running game which declined from '16 to '17. Given that mess, isn't it amazing the worst quarterback in the entire history of the universe only fell to the middle of the pack? That apparently is his floor. The two QBs immediately under Taylor's rating last season were Matt Ryan and Jameis Winston. Imagine what Taylor could do with the weapons either of them have, huh?

 

 

It doesn't matter what receivers he would have had if he never threw to them.  He didn't have the best receivers last season, true, but even when they did get open he'd often still fail to throw it.  Unless his receiver was 100% open, in the clear, he wouldn't throw to them.  It's a fear/limitation I hope he overcomes in his time with Cleveland, as that fear played a large part in his ineffectiveness last season.

[row_33]

It was like in hoops where it's the last shot and the coach asks "who wants to take it" and Tyrod yells out "I want it, coach!!" and the coach asks (and the team nods) "anyone else?"

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

14 hours ago, The Red King said:

Not everyone is polorized.  I'm quite the opposite.  TT was the ultimate baseline.  He never took a risk.  Ever.  Not taking risks kept him from losing game through mistakes, but kept him from winning games with big plays.  He was able to do enough to get us to the playoffs, and not enough to win a playoff game where the opposing team scored just 10 points.  TT elevates bad teams and drags good teams down.  Last season the Bills finally outgrew him.  However, the 1-31 Browns are the perfect team for him.  He can elevate them to mediocrity, and by the time the Browns outgrow him, their rookie should be ready to go.

 

That lack of risk-taking did catch up to him, though.  When time is almost expired and you need a comeback, a winning drive, well...you have to bite the bullet and take chances.  TT couldn't, or wouldn't, and that's why his 4th quarter comeback numbers are so terrible.

 

good post

[John from Riverside]

4 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

 

ATTENTION TBD FORUM MEMBERS: IMPORTANT POLICY CHANGE

 

FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, ANY & ALL PLAYER EVALUATIONS - GOOD OR BAD - WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE FUNDAMENTALLY DETERMINED TO BE NULL & VOID UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY APPROPRIATE FUNDAMENTAL STATISTICAL COMPARISONS TO EVERY SINGLE PLAYER TO HAVE PLAYED THAT POSITION. 

 

For example, the statement "Peyton Manning was a great QB because he passed for 71,940 yds in his career" is fundamentally meaningless unless the fundamental corresponding career passing yardage numbers is included for every NFL QB to have played between 1999 through 2015, while excluding any & all yardage fundamentally accumulated in 2011.

 

Thank you for your cooperation with this fundamentally important matter. Pope Murph VI, of the "hard stats crowd" has spoken. 

 

-----

 

Do you see how absolutely ridiculous your argument is now? 

 

I have to admit, the incredible feats of mental gymnastics performed by the #TeamTyrod guys still fascinates me. It truly takes some special bending & twisting of reality, reasoning, & logic to legitimately attempt to argue things like "Passing yards are irrelevant when evaluating a QB" or "44 games isn't a large enough sample size" or "Defensive Coordinators don't waste time game planning to prevent guys like Ben Roethlisberger from throwing for lots of yards." 

 

Simply beautiful. 

 

Stuff like that is my favorite part of the ongoing Tyrod discussion. It's probably why I keep coming back to talk about it. I guess that's what happens when guys like you continue to argue the inarguable and defend the indefensible. Never change, boys. 

 

As for you claiming my statistical evidence is "sloppy & poorly communicated", well -- that is your personal opinion. Maybe you need to look at the passing data of every single NFL QB to determine if a throwing for less than 230 yards & 1 or 0 TDs over half the time is good or not. I've watched enough bad Bills offensive football to know that it's not. 

 

I am sorry if a basic breakdown of the number of games that a guy hits a certain level of production is confusing for you. I did try to make it as clear and easy to understand as possible, but perhaps I could have done a better job and it could be communicated better. Why don't you take the information about Tyrod's career as the Bills QB and come up with a better way to present it? 

 

Also, the "Dalton Line" was my own point of reference for the purposes of this exercise. He's a good-not-great, basic starting NFL QB. 

 

Tyrod is a class act and a great human being, but is nothing more than a high-end backup QB.  

 

I am actually agreeing with this at this point....except to say that your high end quality backup QBs are usually not holding a clip board...they are usually starting for some team as they try to figure out how to get better at the position.

 

I have been a long time defender of Tyrod Taylor (still like him to be honest in a scenario where he is used correctly and the team is loaded with talent...this is not an easy thing to do) but there was a game where I was watching Tyrod on the side line with his OC...I think this was shortly before he was benched for the Chargers game where I just got this impression he was being told to do something......and he either was not capable of it or silently telling the OC that it wasnt going to work.

 

I firmly believe the search for the new QB began not even then but at draft time before that when they started accumulating picks....Tyrod was simply a place holder while McD and Beane evaluated their roster.....knowing that this last draft was the QB draft to pluck one from.

 

Tyrod was on borrowed time....even the most stanch supporters of his had to know this.

[Gugny]

4 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

Tyrod is a class act and a great human being, but is nothing more than a high-end backup QB. 

 

I'll agree with you on the high-end backup QB part.  But great human beings don't whip out the race card.

[BillsBytheBay]

20 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

What do you think will happen if AJ or Nasty Nate throw an ill advised pick with Josh grooming on the sidelines?

 

Besides, a.Coach that listens to the fans is soon sitting with them. 

 

i like Coach McDermott but don't want to sit with him.  I hope he's not making his decisions based on what he thinks I want.

I'm not talking about fans only. Locker room too

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

The man is question did not play well enough to remain the starter in Buffalo.  There is not way to spin that.  

 

At the risk of what I say being "spun" here, I think the fundamental paradox some of us see is we think TT, properly supported, has a shot to exceed the likely output of AJ McCarron - he didn't play "well enough" to be seen as the franchise guy or long term answer, no, but he might have played well enough to exceed McCarron's offensive output (passing + run threat). In which case it's a fair question to ask "why not keep TT another year then?". 

 

I think Gunner pretty well nailed it - we didn't want the "locker room baggage" that comes with maneuvering a rookie into the starting lineup in the face of an entrenched starter, and we possibly wanted a guy who was more of a pocket passer as a mentor/example for Allen.

 

Quote

I had said that people say 200 is good for  TT a 7 year vet, but not good enough for AJ in his sophomore season. 

 

You said that, but what "people" say what you're saying?  The football scoreboard doesn't care about vested seasons.  It only cares about points and offensive output.

The point is that TT and AJ McCarron, to this point, have demonstrated similar passing output.  If McCarron can do "more with less" (more with a worse OL and worse WR), Great! but the smart betting looks at past performance.

 

5 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

ATTENTION TBD FORUM MEMBERS: IMPORTANT POLICY CHANGE

 

FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, ANY & ALL PLAYER EVALUATIONS - GOOD OR BAD - WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE FUNDAMENTALLY DETERMINED TO BE NULL & VOID UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY APPROPRIATE FUNDAMENTAL STATISTICAL COMPARISONS TO EVERY SINGLE PLAYER TO HAVE PLAYED THAT POSITION. 

 

For example, the statement "Peyton Manning was a great QB because he passed for 71,940 yds in his career" is fundamentally meaningless unless the fundamental corresponding career passing yardage numbers is included for every NFL QB to have played between 1999 through 2015, while excluding any & all yardage fundamentally accumulated in 2011.

 

Thank you for your cooperation with this fundamentally important matter. Pope Murph VI, of the "hard stats crowd" has spoken.

 

Dude, I don't think the 'hard stats crowd', of which I am certainly one, owns this guy.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

14 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

If you want a reasonable expectation for quality of qb play you have to compare his performances to every qb who played. You cant just isolate 44 TT games and form an opinion based on QBs you think are better. You have to consider the entire sample of NFL QB play over the same period to have any boderline reliable idea of what is above or below average. Otherwise you are  just cherry picking numbers to assert your opinions.

 

Statistically, this is not quite right.  The basic idea that we need statistical context is correect.  But it certainly isn't necessary to compare TT's performances to "every QB who played" during that time period.  For example, one can simply look at the average or median performance and then perhaps look the range of game stats for a couple above-average QB and a couple QB who fall near the mean, to get an idea of where Taylor's performance slots in.

 

The idea of comparison as integral to statistical analysis is correct, but so is the idea of 'representative sample'.

[Foxx]

spinners being potentailly spun. 

overzealous zeal.

watching with interest these days.

[Gugny]

2 minutes ago, Foxx said:

spinners being potentailly spun. 

overzealous zeal.

watching with interest these days.

 

Not quite a haiku.

[BuffaloHokie13]

14 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

If you want a reasonable expectation for quality of qb play you have to compare his performances to every qb who played. You cant just isolate 44 TT games and form an opinion based on QBs you think are better. You have to consider the entire sample of NFL QB play over the same period to have any boderline reliable idea of what is above or below average. Otherwise you are  just cherry picking numbers to assert your opinions.

[BringBackOrton]

24 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

While I enjoy your independent rankings, I quibble with Winston being less than TT.

 

I also think that snapshots miss trends, which matter.

 

JMO.

Edited June 5, 2018 by BringBackOrton

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

I firmly believe the search for the new QB began not even then but at draft time before that when they started accumulating picks....Tyrod was simply a place holder while McD and Beane evaluated their roster.....knowing that this last draft was the QB draft to pluck one from.

 

Tyrod was on borrowed time....even the most stanch supporters of his had to know this.

 

Agree

[BuffaloHokie13]

18 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

While I enjoy your independent rankings, I quibble with Winston being less than TT.

 

I also think that snapshots miss trends, which matter.

 

JMO.

I can help a little with that.

 

2015:

2016:

2017:

 

As for Winston, I'm not trading 12 TDs for 39 TOs.

[BringBackOrton]

So TT sunk down the list.  Makes sense to me.  Meanwhile Jameis hung around 18-19.

 

Thanks.

Edited June 5, 2018 by BringBackOrton

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

I can help a little with that.

 

2015:

2016:

2017:

 

As for Winston, I'm not trading 12 TDs for 39 TOs.

 

Now here is a Stats-Meister!

[3rdand12]

On 6/4/2018 at 6:00 PM, John from Riverside said:

Im sure it is...they throw it in there with you know actually WINNING.

 

There are also lots of passing yards thrown by QBs.....in losses.

 

My point here is there are other things that are real things you can bash Tyrod over and be legit.....but passing yards on a team that runs the ball a ton?  

 

 

He simply wasnt a franchise QB....he could not put the team on his shoulders....and he didnt improve even though he was given years to do it.

 

I still say he was not a "sucky" qb......just not what we needed if we wanted to be a real playoff team.

He is a different animal. Some of his run plays were just incredible and thrilling !
But the Offense would need to be designed around Him for any hope of success further than a playoff berth.
 

When you get a franchise QB life becomes sooo much easier for everyone on the Team. Especially Coaches.

[3rdand12]

7 hours ago, grb said:

So much babbling, but it's really not that complicated :

• 2015 : Taylor was on a team with a good (not great) offensive cast. He was a little raw but played well, with a passer rating ranked 7th in the NFL, an average of 8yds an attempt, low interception rate, excellent deep ball, and over 500yds on the ground. If you look at Taylor's games when he actually had Watkins and Woods playing, his numbers become stellar : 63.6% comp. 8.25 ypa 27 td passes. 6 ints in fifteen games over two years. That's his ceiling with good (not elite) offense support coupled with a mediocre to bad defense. People come up with their loonnngggggg lists of TT's crippling flaws, but somehow never explain the simplest of facts : When the Bills put a decent level of talent on the field with Taylor, he played well.
• 2016/2017 : Each successive year the Bills gave Taylor less to work with. Granted, much of it was injuries; but some was front office priorities. Taylor's passing rating reduced to 17th/18th with one of the worse receiver situations in the league, no deep threat, spotty (at best) pass protection, and a running game which declined from '16 to '17. Given that mess, isn't it amazing the worst quarterback in the entire history of the universe only fell to the middle of the pack? That apparently is his floor. The two QBs immediately under Taylor's rating last season were Matt Ryan and Jameis Winston. Imagine what Taylor could do with the weapons either of them have, huh?

 

I am delighted to read someone that noticed what his timeline really looked like in Buffalo.
Coaching changes and losing his trusted receivers was significant. Environment does matter , no question in my mind.

 Recall when Tyrod actually just started chucking the ball at Sammy ? And Sammy would catch most any of it ? That was fun as heck. 

  Tyrod got began trending down quickly after that season and last year he appeared a bit lost. no confidence no trust.
I am not defending him. just reminding folks as  grb has so eloquently done. context matters when reviewing seasons past.

6 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

good post

 

7 hours ago, The Red King said:

 

It doesn't matter what receivers he would have had if he never threw to them.  He didn't have the best receivers last season, true, but even when they did get open he'd often still fail to throw it.  Unless his receiver was 100% open, in the clear, he wouldn't throw to them.  It's a fear/limitation I hope he overcomes in his time with Cleveland, as that fear played a large part in his ineffectiveness last season.

He threw to Benjamin in the End Zone for what would have been a TD. It was the right throw. Till Benjamin needlessly and blatantly pushed off.

I hate him for that BS. But Tyrod did not run , he could have, and waited for the play to open up. and it did. he threw the ball slightly behind into the safe smart spot. KB overran his spot and knew it. Tried to use leverage to get back.
 Tyrod did take a shot to win that game for us.

Edited June 5, 2018 by 3rdand12

[xxxxxxxx]

5 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Statistically, this is not quite right.  The basic idea that we need statistical context is correect.  But it certainly isn't necessary to compare TT's performances to "every QB who played" during that time period.  For example, one can simply look at the average or median performance and then perhaps look the range of game stats for a couple above-average QB and a couple QB who fall near the mean, to get an idea of where Taylor's performance slots in.

 

The idea of comparison as integral to statistical analysis is correct, but so is the idea of 'representative sample'.

 That is true. There are quibbles about what is representative and what is not, though most stat folk will agree with what the OP is saying .And Taylors performance ranking is quite different based upon whom you chose to include in the comparison. You can compare Taylor to every QB who has a starting job in the league, which is what alot of people do, or compare him to every QB that made a start or an appearance in a game. And that difference matters if your going to try to determine whether he's above or below average or not.

And to deserve to keep a starting job you don't even have to be an average or  above average QB, you just have to be better than all of the backups. I know that is a low bar for most, and its why Im ok with the organization moving on.

 

And I do apologise for the language. I really hate it when people use shoddy stat work to justify  opinions, or what is often described as lying with stats, especially when those folk are being arrogant with someone who is trying to actually teach them something.

Edited June 5, 2018 by MURPHD6

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

5 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

At the risk of what I say being "spun" here, I think the fundamental paradox some of us see is we think TT, properly supported, has a shot to exceed the likely output of AJ McCarron - he didn't play "well enough" to be seen as the franchise guy or long term answer, no, but he might have played well enough to exceed McCarron's offensive output (passing + run threat). In which case it's a fair question to ask "why not keep TT another year then?". 

 

I think Gunner pretty well nailed it - we didn't want the "locker room baggage" that comes with maneuvering a rookie into the starting lineup in the face of an entrenched starter, and we possibly wanted a guy who was more of a pocket passer as a mentor/example for Allen.

The Bills now have 3 QB’s in the roster that the FO “hopes” can run the offense they want to install and not have to deal with “two” separate styles, one of a pocket passer and that of the sandlot variety.   

 

Which equates to what you pasted WRT gunners comments.  

 

Also what McDermott has been saying.  Steel sharpens steel.  

 

[xxxxxxxx]

5 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

While I enjoy your independent rankings, I quibble with Winston being less than TT.

 

I also think that snapshots miss trends, which matter.

 

JMO.

No 1 WR for Taylor for most of 2017. But with that added context its not unreasonable to assume that his numbers will bounce back in Cleveland. 

[BringBackOrton]

2 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

No 1 WR for Taylor for most of 2017. But with that added context its not unreasonable to assume that his numbers will bounce back in Cleveland. 

Taylor will be lucky to make it to week 8.

[3rdand12]

59 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

The Bills now have 3 QB’s in the roster that the FO “hopes” can run the offense they want to install and not have to deal with “two” separate styles, one of a pocket passer and that of the sandlot variety.   

 

Which equates to what you pasted WRT gunners comments.  

 

Also what McDermott has been saying.  Steel sharpens steel.  

 

I had mentioned that bringing in McCarron unifies the O play design/calling et al. down to blocking of course.
settles the room and levels  the table for how they develop the Offense to some degree. Tyrod is an outlier. make what you will of that.

16 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

No 1 WR for Taylor for most of 2017. But with that added context its not unreasonable to assume that his numbers will bounce back in Cleveland. 

hell of a Ball  Catcher group in Cleveland actually by now.

[twoandfourteen]

9 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I'll agree with you on the high-end backup QB part.  But great human beings don't whip out the race card.

 

I'll admit I was really disappointed when that article came out in the Buffalo News, too. It's not like he had been lighting the world on fire and people were calling for him to be replaced. 

 

However, outside of that he's been a model for how a professional athlete should carry himself and represent his city. Had the on-field production been there, he would have been a perfect face of the franchise.

[twoandfourteen]

8 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Statistically, this is not quite right.  The basic idea that we need statistical context is correect.  But it certainly isn't necessary to compare TT's performances to "every QB who played" during that time period.  For example, one can simply look at the average or median performance and then perhaps look the range of game stats for a couple above-average QB and a couple QB who fall near the mean, to get an idea of where Taylor's performance slots in.

 

The idea of comparison as integral to statistical analysis is correct, but so is the idea of 'representative sample'.

 

You explained this one far better than I could have. Nice post. 

3 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

 That is true. There are quibbles about what is representative and what is not, though most stat folk will agree with what the OP is saying .And Taylors performance ranking is quite different based upon whom you chose to include in the comparison. You can compare Taylor to every QB who has a starting job in the league, which is what alot of people do, or compare him to every QB that made a start or an appearance in a game. And that difference matters if your going to try to determine whether he's above or below average or not.

And to deserve to keep a starting job you don't even have to be an average or  above average QB, you just have to be better than all of the backups. I know that is a low bar for most, and its why Im ok with the organization moving on.

 

And I do apologise for the language. I really hate it when people use shoddy stat work to justify  opinions, or what is often described as lying with stats, especially when those folk are being arrogant with someone who is trying to actually teach them something.

 

Do carry on, Professor. 

 

 

[billsfan89]

Tyrod was a starting caliber QB in the NFL, There aren't 32 QB's I would rather trot out than Tyrod. I think you can make an argument there are much more than 20 QB's one would take over Tyrod. But Tyrod is also not a top 16 QB, I think it would be a hard argument to say Tyrod is a top 20 QB. Tyrod was also on a very friendly deal. The Browns offered up a low-end premium draft pick for him and the Bills took good value for him. 

 

The Bills wanted a longer-term answer at QB and The Browns needed someone that could play well in front of a rookie for a year. The Browns were willing to spend the 65th pick in order to get competent QB play to avoid having to force in their top draft pick. The Bills got a good pick for a QB that wasn't going to be here past 2018, the Browns got a solid QB that gives them the luxery to not have to start a rookie. 

 

Both teams won, the trade isn't a reflection of how bad Tyrod is more so two teams needs lining up. 

[xxxxxxxx]

1 hour ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

You explained this one far better than I could have. Nice post. 

 

Do carry on, Professor. 

 

 

Your remarks have been proven wrong by more than one poster, and you are the one who started criticizing me BTW. I never wanted to discuss this topic with you, all I did was respond to your criticisms.

 

I apologise to other folk who think I may have responsed harshly, but I was already warned about your maturity level from others, and they were clearly correct. 

 

A post like the one above displays no interest in advancing conversation, its just trying to upset someone who disagreed with you. Someone who you picked a fight with, initially.

Edited June 6, 2018 by MURPHD6

[xxxxxxxx]

5 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

I had mentioned that bringing in McCarron unifies the O play design/calling et al. down to blocking of course.
settles the room and levels  the table for how they develop the Offense to some degree. Tyrod is an outlier. make what you will of that.

hell of a Ball  Catcher group in Cleveland actually by now.

 

2 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

Tyrod was a starting caliber QB in the NFL, There aren't 32 QB's I would rather trot out than Tyrod. I think you can make an argument there are much more than 20 QB's one would take over Tyrod. But Tyrod is also not a top 16 QB, I think it would be a hard argument to say Tyrod is a top 20 QB. Tyrod was also on a very friendly deal. The Browns offered up a low-end premium draft pick for him and the Bills took good value for him. 

 

The Bills wanted a longer-term answer at QB and The Browns needed someone that could play well in front of a rookie for a year. The Browns were willing to spend the 65th pick in order to get competent QB play to avoid having to force in their top draft pick. The Bills got a good pick for a QB that wasn't going to be here past 2018, the Browns got a solid QB that gives them the luxery to not have to start a rookie. 

 

Both teams won, the trade isn't a reflection of how bad Tyrod is more so two teams needs lining up. 

Absolutely. Mayfield is coming from a spread based system, so rushing him onto the field is not advisable ( the Browns need to start winning soon). And if Tyrod plays well enough, Cleveland can always deal him during the offseason. It might not happen, but its not as far beyond the realm of possibility as the Tyrod sucks crowd thinks.

And with regard to your ranking, I think he was a top 15 QB in 2015 and 2016, and I dont think the argument is hard to make. He slipped this year,  that is true, but if he stays healthy he wil have better recievers to throw to next year.

Edited June 6, 2018 by MURPHD6

[transplantbillsfan]

11 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

I firmly believe the search for the new QB began not even then but at draft time before that when they started accumulating picks....Tyrod was simply a place holder while McD and Beane evaluated their roster.....knowing that this last draft was the QB draft to pluck one from.

 

Tyrod was on borrowed time....even the most stanch supporters of his had to know this.

 

This is all that needs to be said with regards to Tyrod Taylor and the 2017 Buffalo Bills.

 

It became 100% obvious the moment the bills traded down in the 2017 draft and acquired a 2018 first round draft pick that we were going to be finding our franchise QB in the 2018 draft. It was absolutely obvious at that point. I don't think you would find anyone who didn't say it was absolutely obvious. And it became more obvious every time we acquired a new draft pick.

 

"Ya know, the Bills might draft Watson or Mahomes in this draft... we hear they REALLY like Trubisky."

 

...

 

"Oh, they traded down, didn't take a QB in the 1st, and acquired a 1st round pick in next year's class, which we already think will be pretty strong???"

 

 

Traded Sammy acquired a 2nd.

 

 

Traded Darby acquired a 3rd.

 

 

 

Traded Glenn to move from 21 to 12.

 

 

 

Taylor isn't a Bill in 2019, and the primary isn't his play, which was good enough for a team drowning in the longest playoff drought in sports (and yes, Taylor was undeniably an important contributor to that playoff run), it's the fact that the Bills got an offer they couldn't refuse, an offer that would ultimately catapult them into even stronger contention to trade up in an upcoming draft to get a QB in a class that, over almost a year of playing out at that point, was turning out to be as strong, if not stronger than it appeared it would be a year ago when the 2017 draft happened and we made an obvious long-game decision.

 

Taylor is gone because the 2018 QB class was stronger than expected and, more importantly, the Bills got a REALLY valuable pick for him.

 

Otherwise, he's still in Buffalo.