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

[transplantbillsfan]

No one cares about your petty bbmb beefs. We get it, we got it 5,000 posts ago.

 

Both of you attack all who don't love Tyrod in a passive aggressive manner.

 

Just PM each other.

You really should find a way to unwind... you're always so incredibly wound up.

 

I asked that poster a pretty direct question.

 

Why you always so mad?

Edited June 22, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[HappyDays]

Tyrod was below league average when not under pressure.

 

You said he was even better with time to throw, and he is not...that came from an article Transplant posted himself.

"Below league average" is not the same as worse. Our DVOA when not under pressure was 46.4%. Our DVOA when under pressure was -21.3%. The offense was much better when Tyrod was not under pressure and I'm not understanding where you're seeing something else.

 

And this goes back to the sack/conversion study. The DVOA rankings here include sacks. Obviously every single sack, including drive-killing ones, take place in an "under pressure" play. So the conventional wisdom is that Tyrod takes too many sacks. But the truth is that when Tyrod is under pressure, overall he is outstanding, the best of every other QB in that situation outside of Rodgers. Even if he takes too many sacks, he more than makes up for it with his other abilities. The data shows that.

 

But we need to have Tyrod under less pressure overall because our offense performs better when he isn't. That can happen with quicker developing routes, better line play, and Tyrod himself getting rid of the ball quicker. That is easily the most feasible way for our offense to improve next year.

Edited June 22, 2017 by HappyDays

[Kirby Jackson]

What level did Atlantas defense play at? What level did Atlantas QB play at?

Atlanta had the 22nd DVOA defense, Bills were 28th and the Falcons had the league MVP at QB.

 

I can't believe that the Bills never thought about that!! They should just get the league MVP to play QB. That's why Whaley got fired.

[JM2009]

So I was on my way to the popcorn store and I see that this has no longer become a "safe" place and probably subject to being mod closed soon.

 

Hugs to you all

Good advice.

[26CornerBlitz]

@nflnetwork

"@TyrodTaylor can jump from the middle of the pack to top 10. I look forward to watching him" -@Nate13Burleson http://on.nfl.com/fPjW5A

[John from Riverside]

 

@nflnetwork

"@TyrodTaylor can jump from the middle of the pack to top 10. I look forward to watching him" -@Nate13Burleson http://on.nfl.com/fPjW5A

 

I wonder what the general response of the board would be if this happens

[transplantbillsfan]

It's not wrong. You just might disagree with their methodology.

 

First of all, it's considering entire offensive DVOA on passing plays, so positive yards, whether via Taylor scrambling or passing, would factor positively towards offensive DVOA. And the opposite would also be true.

 

Knowing that Footballoutsiders overall DVOA of Taylor the Passer is #19, I'd suspect that one of the reasons those "plays with no pressure" are average (16) is partially the same reason the plays with pressure jump to #2: they're factoring scrambles into that equation, whereas with their typical DVOA to end the year when they rank team offense in both the passing and running game, they lump scrambles in with the running DVOA, despite the fact that sacks are still part of the passing DVOA.

 

So really it's not wrong. You just don't agree with it, which is to be expected considering your criticisms of when I broke down his scrambles from his designed runs and considered them part of the overall passing game.

 

Hey, looks like others are catching on.

 

 

This is true.

 

I'm glad I've been able to sit back and watch these posters continue to conduct themselves in the manner they are.

 

I'm hoping many here (including the MODS) are taking note and realizing that these posters aren't what they claim to be.

 

Crusher, rather than acting holier than thou, why don't you talk football and respond to my football post responding to a misconception of yours?

 

We're here to talk football.

 

If you enjoy sitting back and watching vitriolic posts unfold, I'm sure there are better message boards to see those train wrecks happen. I bet a political message board would be a great place to get what you seem to want if you need some guidance

How many close games did we lose last year by 6 points or less ? Many here blame the defense or praise TT for keeping us in the game by NOT turning the ball over , what bothers me is that TT was incapable ( beside the Titans game ) of putting together a game winning drive , so forgive me for not buying ( TT is better then we think ) he' is who think he is ( backup QB )

 

Game winning drives against the Texans in 2015 and Jags in 2016, so this isn't accurate.

 

And although this will sound pretty much like a broken record, the 2nd Miami game this year demonstrated maybe the best example of TT being able to put together a game winning drive. Argue semantics about it being a loss all you want, but those are just flimsy semantics if what truly concerns you is how capable Taylor is of putting together a drive late in a game in a real pressure situation and coming through with a go-ahead score.

[87168]

I wonder what the general response of the board would be if this happens

they'll attribute his success to factors, such as defense (if they vastly improve) or coaching. you know, the same factors that played zero role in the team's losses...

Edited June 22, 2017 by 87168

[Bangarang]

I wonder what the general response of the board would be if this happens

Do you really need to ask? The vocal minority don't speak for everyone and I'd imagine most people would be very happy if Tyrod had a great year.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

I wonder what the general response of the board would be if this happens

is there a playoff win involved or not?

I know one or two who would still complain no matter what

This is season 3 in Buffalo. imo Season 3 is usually the make or break season.

Edited June 22, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[John from Riverside]

is there a playoff win involved or not?

I know one or two who would still complain no matter what

This is season 3 in Buffalo. imo Season 3 is usually the make or break season.

I think we all pretty much agree with that and frankly I would STILL draft a qb high

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

I think we all pretty much agree with that and frankly I would STILL draft a qb high

If the 2018 crop of QB's is as good as the "experts' say. It would seem the right thing to do.

[Tenhigh]

Atlanta had the 22nd DVOA defense, Bills were 28th and the Falcons had the league MVP at QB.

 

I can't believe that the Bills never thought about that!! They should just get the league MVP to play QB. That's why Whaley got fired.

You sir, are a GENIUS!

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

Okay but you do understand Tyrod isn't playing alone, yes? Just like Brees, Luck, and Rivers. Of course Tyrod isn't as good as those guys, and their defenses were worse than his were. But you do understand there's a connection there, yes? I wish we had a QB capable of propping up a below average defense but we don't and we aren't likely to find one anytime soon.

And you need to stop saying things like "he's not good enough to beat a .500 team" which is clearly factually wrong. Outside of the ones he literally has beat, he was obviously good enough to win against Miami and Seattle. He performed better against both of their defenses than the large majority of QBs did last year (if I'm remembering correctly he had the best passer rating against Seattle last year, I might be wrong and I can't find that data). So of course Tyrod is good enough to beat playoff teams. He isn't good enough to beat playoff teams when his defense doesn't show up but that's a different qualification entirely.

First of all, thanks for posting this thread and the data. Obviously not the "end all, be all" on Taylor and/or the offense, but interesting to say the least. It's obviously not news to anyone that Taylor's speed and elusiveness has helped extend drives and makes the offense much more difficult for defenses to contain.

 

But this last post perfectly elaborates on a common theme I see from several people that love to hate on the QB alone. "He's not good enough to beat xxxxxx". In some cases, that may be true, but these people seem to conveniently forget to mention the fact that football is a team sport, and half of the game being played is out of his, and the offense's hands entirely. Andrew Luck was mentioned in the stats in the OP, and he has a similar problem as Taylor. His offense puts up plenty of points, but his defense gives up plenty as well, often times, more. So I guess by using their logic, Andrew Luck "isn't good enough to beat .500 teams" as well...I think most people would disagree with that idea. His team hasn't been good enough to beat .500 teams, but he's certainly done his part more often than he's given credit for.

 

Everyone knows our defense has been mediocre these last two years, but when it comes to criticizing Taylor, people like to mention the lack of success as a team as an indictment of the QB, but that's not fair. He's a piece of the puzzle. A big piece, but the defense as a whole is just as big.

[Bills757]

First of all, thanks for posting this thread and the data. Obviously not the "end all, be all" on Taylor and/or the offense, but interesting to say the least. It's obviously not news to anyone that Taylor's speed and elusiveness has helped extend drives and makes the offense much more difficult for defenses to contain.

 

But this last post perfectly elaborates on a common theme I see from several people that love to hate on the QB alone. "He's not good enough to beat xxxxxx". In some cases, that may be true, but these people seem to conveniently forget to mention the fact that football is a team sport, and half of the game being played is out of his, and the offense's hands entirely. Andrew Luck was mentioned in the stats in the OP, and he has a similar problem as Taylor. His offense puts up plenty of points, but his defense gives up plenty as well, often times, more. So I guess by using their logic, Andrew Luck "isn't good enough to beat .500 teams" as well...I think most people would disagree with that idea. His team hasn't been good enough to beat .500 teams, but he's certainly done his part more often than he's given credit for.

 

Everyone knows our defense has been mediocre these last two years, but when it comes to criticizing Taylor, people like to mention the lack of success as a team as an indictment of the QB, but that's not fair. He's a piece of the puzzle. A big piece, but the defense as a whole is just as big.

 

 

Add in the fact the Bills had a clown running the show the last two years........that right there handicapped the team big time. He was no match for any competent NFL HC. It only made matters worse when he hired his brother. Now I know where the term "oh brother" came from.

Taylor has his faults, no question about it. But it seems some people on this board want his running ability with Tom Brady/Aaron Rodgers-esque experience and saavy. It just doesn't happen that way. I feel like this is the first year where the team (and Taylor) have a chance to flourish. Common sense would tell you it's gonna take a few years to make any marked improvement. But IMO, with a disciplined HC, an OC who knows how to use his weapons and a defensive minded HC, I think the Bills will be in a much better position to succeed....something that wasn't the case over the past two years.

Edited June 23, 2017 by Bills757

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

TT's a good player, an above average QB. The issue is, can he be a guy who can win you 10+ games. We shall see. He seems like Fitz to me. Competes hard, good for the program, but just deficient enough to lose you a few games you really need to get to the playoffs.

 

....definitely incumbent on Dennison to create an offensive plan that exploits his strengths and hide his weaknesses.....he still struggles with ability to scan and process entire field in <5 seconds (many do)...top 10 stats alone won't do it and neither will TT alone.....a properly designed offense, hopefully yielding top 10-12 offensive stats AND return to pre-Wrecks defense has the potential for 10 wins despite tough schedule IMO....would be an interesting project for a stat rat to compare PRE-season strength of schedule assessments versus END of season comparatives......

[Marty McFly]

Okay but you do understand Tyrod isn't playing alone, yes? Just like Brees, Luck, and Rivers. Of course Tyrod isn't as good as those guys, and their defenses were worse than his were. But you do understand there's a connection there, yes? I wish we had a QB capable of propping up a below average defense but we don't and we aren't likely to find one anytime soon.

And you need to stop saying things like "he's not good enough to beat a .500 team" which is clearly factually wrong. Outside of the ones he literally has beat, he was obviously good enough to win against Miami and Seattle. He performed better against both of their defenses than the large majority of QBs did last year (if I'm remembering correctly he had the best passer rating against Seattle last year, I might be wrong and I can't find that data). So of course Tyrod is good enough to beat playoff teams. He isn't good enough to beat playoff teams when his defense doesn't show up but that's a different qualification entirely.

 

Nice work on the thread with source material breh. Nevermind the negative nancy cheerleaders.

Dope avi. Happy Madison Films is def one of the GOAT production companies.

Should be an entertaining season jus gotta stay as healthy as possible.

[Putin]

 

 

 

Crusher, rather than acting holier than thou, why don't you talk football and respond to my football post responding to a misconception of yours?

 

We're here to talk football.

 

If you enjoy sitting back and watching vitriolic posts unfold, I'm sure there are better message boards to see those train wrecks happen. I bet a political message board would be a great place to get what you seem to want if you need some guidance

 

 

Game winning drives against the Texans in 2015 and Jags in 2016, so this isn't accurate.

 

And although this will sound pretty much like a broken record, the 2nd Miami game this year demonstrated maybe the best example of TT being able to put together a game winning drive. Argue semantics about it being a loss all you want, but those are just flimsy semantics if what truly concerns you is how capable Taylor is of putting together a drive late in a game in a real pressure situation and coming through with a go-ahead score.

Exactly this ^ , like the game in Seattle which IMO was his best so far , it's too bad we couldn't get a TD on that last drive

[Rochesterfan]

Roch - thanks for the detailed response.

What I copied and pasted from your post is really a misinterpretation of the data. Tyrod is absolutely not "better" when under pressure. Our offense's DVOA, like every offense except for the Packers, was negative when Tyrod was under pressure.

Tyrod is really great under pressure relative to every other QB in the league but he still isn't playing at his best. Tyrod is at his best, like all QBs, when he has time in the pocket to evaluate the field and throw the ball. A defense that gets pressure on Tyrod should still expect on average to have a positive play.

If our pass protection improves in 2017, our offense should be better overall. How much better also depends on if the rest of our offense can keep their other measures where they were. If for example our run game declines we will need the pass protection and/or Tyrod to be that much better.

 

I don't have anything to add but thank you for running this data. It is very illuminating.

Happy - we will have to disagree about that. If you look at absolute numbers of course being under pressure makes a DVOA go way down. The DVOA is affected by negative plays and it is very hard to take a sack when you are not under pressure. So the biggest negative play with no pressure is an Int and these are professionals the number of Ints should go up with pressure.

 

The number of positive plays should also go down under pressure, but for TT they did not. His TD % per attempt goes up when he is under pressure. He threw more TDs under pressure in fewer attempts than when not under pressure.

 

In addition - as we already knew his athletic nature allowed him to avoid sacks and escape the pocket and scramble for first downs - one of his major positives as a QB. Therefore we know he avoided a number of sacks and his unique athletic ability allowed him to convert first downs that his QB ability would not have converted.

 

If Tyrod is left alone in the pocket and allowed to scan the field his DVOA is higher only because you eliminate the sack. His overall play as how he compares to other QBs in that situation drops from nearly the best to middle of the pack. It is why teams like Baltimore and the Jets talk about keeping him in the pocket and making him beat you as a QB.

 

They are not afraid of how he plays as a QB throwing the ball from the pocket because in those situations he is average and much less likely to make a big play - either a long scramble or a TD pass than he is when you get pressure and he escapes the pocket and throws on the run or takes off with your DBs in man coverage.

 

My main point being that these numbers presented make sense in the context of what we already knew about TT. They do not make me think the offense was better - they confirm what we knew. We knew that under pressure TT does a nice job of escaping pressure and making a positive play - that is one of his best attributes.

 

What we need to see going forward is can he translate that playmaking ability to times he is not under pressure. Can he get his DVOA without pressure above the top 10 while still keeping his under pressure DVOA higher. Over 60% of the time there is not pressure on the QB and getting that DVOA up into the top 10 makes you a better QB and those are the areas he is average and why we as a fan base are split.

 

The takeaway that I have and why I am ready to move on is that if we had to face a TT lead team and he was not on the Bills - that is a game I am thinking I can win. It is the same reason fan bases in places like Miami are split- you can do worse that either of those guys, but neither are the answer. They are the placeholders until you find the answer and maybe they get hot and you make a playoff run, but long term they are not the answer you need to win consistently in this league.

Edited June 24, 2017 by Rochesterfan

[Rochesterfan]

I don't think anyone is debating the strengths and weaknesses as much as the role that perception plays in all of this. If the defense didn't allow those 30.5 points a loss and it resulted in a couple more wins the narrative would be different. We would be talking about a 27 year-old (or whatever he is) QB with 47 TDs and 12 INTs in 29 starts and one or two playoff appearances. Would he be a better or different player? Nope, but the perception and narrative would certainly be different. The strengths and weaknesses wouldn't change though. The data says that the Bills offense had to do more than other offenses because of Rex's failings.

I agree with this - I also think that if TT performed better in several late game drives and looked better in the fast paced 2 minute offense and we won a few games because of last drive throws the narrative would change also. His best games - Miami and Seattle he did just that - he moved them down the field with chances to win. Seattle he did not make a play at the end - I don't think that was all on him - the Refs gave him no help. Miami he made enough plays and special teams missed the kick.

 

The problem is there were other games that he had that chances against Baltimore, NYJs, Miami, Pittsburgh, heck even Oakland to lead drives to change the game. Yes the defense was an issue, but other playoff teams overcame that. A tighter and better defense helps, but there were still issues that TT needs to improve significantly to change that narrative.