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.