Surprises on PFF

[leoram]

NFL Rewind.

I have it too. But I'm not going to rewind each play a minimum of 22 times. I already spend too much time at this than a family man should.

 

[jrry32]

I have it too. But I'm not going to rewind each play a minimum of 22 times. I already spend too much time at this than a family man should.

Don't. You don't need to know about every single player in the NFL. The guys you're curious about that you want to judge for yourself, just pop on a few games with coach's film and you're set.

 

[Alan]

You don't throw out the good for want of the perfect.

 

[junkman]

You don't throw out the good for want of the perfect.

And the reality is that there are no such things as perfect stats. QB rating doesn't consider quality of opposition, quality of teammates, garbage time or not... same problems as PFF. For a rb, the same problems exist with ypc, ypg. Whatever flaw one might claim exists with PFF numbers, the same problems exist (and perhaps more so) in the other stats.

 

[blue4]

Maybe I am a simpleton, but stats for the most part are better left to baseball. Each position has a few key stats that are useful to look at, but as someone stated before the eye test is king. Looking at the "stats" one would guess James L isn't all worthy of the hype he sometimes gets. But stats can't grade how he went toe to toe with Manning on the line of scrimmage and outsmarted him to the benefit of the entire defense. IMO PFF is more useful for the football industry then actual football games. However it is far better than ESPN's QBR.

 

[junkman]

Don't. You don't need to know about every single player in the NFL. The guys you're curious about that you want to judge for yourself, just pop on a few games with coach's film and you're set.

Not all questions are formatted that way. Somebody posted a 20/20 hindsight draft redo thread. How does one even start to answer a question like that?

Well, it's easy to see which WRs are lighting it up. But what about OL? It's really easy to say we should have taken Zach Martin, but he was a high pick. PFF suggests that Bitonio is having a better year and he was picked in the 2nd. Linder is having just as good of a year and he was picked in the third. All three are having great rookie years, so to me, Linder is the best pick, freeing up higher picks for other players.

PFF also suggests that Lindsey from the Packers is having a great year at C and he was picked in the 5th.

Seeing these guys bubble up on PFF helps figure out where to focus attention.

 

[blue4]

When we do the "What insert teams fans are saying" threads, there's always a fan who says "Player X isn't all that good, he only has X for X amount of yards or he has only 2 sacks". Something along those lines. And then we say

"Obviously this guy has never watched us play"
"This is what happens when you get your info off of ESPN."
"Has this guy even looked up from the stats sheet?"

When it comes to players we watch every week, the stats stop telling a lot of the story and we go by the eye test. You'd think if these advanced stats were so useful, people would make better picks or bets. Instead they download 5 gigs worth of data and then lose the office pool to the semi retired lady at the front desk who uses her foolproof blue beats white, black beats red, orange beats green picking system. To me, football is a game where some of the stats are useless without the context gained from actually watching the team play.

 

[junkman]

PFF also suggests that Lindsey from the Packers is having a great year at C and he was picked in the 5th.

Linsley. I was close. PFF rates Linsley as the #3 C in the NFL, a starter since day 1 that has taken every snap. I wouldn't even know to look at him if not for PFF.

For the draft redo, it's easy to say we should have taken Garoppolo instead of Joyner in the 2nd. But what to do with the 5th? PFF gives us Linsley as an obvious answer, would have saved us a full season of whining about Wells and his funky snaps and his matador blocking and his bloated contract.

http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/hind-sight-draft.33543/page-2

 

[Alan]

blue4 not thinking things through:
When it comes to players we watch every week, the stats stop telling a lot of the story and we go by the eye test.

You'd think if these advanced stats were so useful, people would make better picks or bets.

As I've already said in this thread, stats are useful in conjunction with more hands on sources like your eyeballs. Not all of us have the time and resources to more than pay lip service to "watching players we like every week" to make that endeavor more than a mockery of what you're really talking about. Even if we knew what we were looking at. Did you even know who Linder was before he was mentioned by junkman? I know I hadn't ever heard of him.

Tell me blue, how is it that when you watch those "players" you know exactly what they were supposed to be doing every play? How is it that you are able to do all the things you don't think PFF does? I understand that you come up with your own "subjective" analysis of those players that you think is spot on but how is that analysis any better than the "subjective" analysis given by PFF?

And last but not least, let me address your last comment. Stats and math in general, have enabled me to make better picks and bets my whole life. Sometimes that's all I have to go by and yet I think I do pretty well in that department. Far far better than I would without them.

I am reassured that, as evidenced by this "stop telling a lot of the story", that you do utilize them too. I think that's smart of you and I also think it's smart of you to limit how much they affect your opinions.

 

[Fatbot]

There is a huge grey area between perfect and worthless.

I concede this and your other excellent points. I hope my blathering didn't make it seem like I think anyone here blindly follows PFF like gospel. I respect the knowledge of the folks here too much to think that.

It just bugs me how PFF's use has grown in the media and that it's having very real world effects in free agency, contracts, Pro Bowl selections (which then feeds back into contract incentives, free agency...), etc... And PFF is a huge reason the 49ers keep getting 200 free draft picks every year -- their overrated players like Dashan Goldson (laughably ranked 10th in coverage by PFF with the 49ers) gets overpaid by stupid teams like Tampa Bay that justify the pick with his PFF grade. The result is the guy (shocker!) sucks on Tampa and SF gets a 3rd round pick gift-wrapped from the NFL based on his overrated value then, instead of his value now as a dead money worthless player they will cut.

So I tend to spout off when I see anything PFF, but I should remember it's not needed here.

 

[Fatbot]

And this is why I prefer to discuss football with knowledgeable fans of other teams. Yes, they're going to have some bias but they also are going to be able to give you better insight than PFF or just about any non-football mind out there on what players are worth a damn, what players aren't worth a damn, and what players might be about to turn that proverbial corner.

This exactly!

 

[Yamahopper]

As long as they are consistent in the grading then it's correct.
No two people will grade a player the same, it's subjective. The only valid assessment is by the players team be cause they know the intent and result of the action.
If grading players was a science a draft bust would be a rare thing.

 

[blue4]

As I've already said in this thread, stats are useful in conjunction with more hands on sources like your eyeballs. Not all of us have the time and resources to more than pay lip service to "watching players we like every week" to make that endeavor more than a mockery of what you're really talking about. Even if we knew what we were looking at. Did you even know who Linder was before he was mentioned by junkman? I know I hadn't ever heard of him.

Tell me blue, how is it that when you watch those "players" you know exactly what they were supposed to be doing every play? How is it that you are able to do all the things you don't think PFF does? I understand that you come up with your own "subjective" analysis of those players that you think is spot on but how is that analysis any better than the "subjective" analysis given by PFF?

And last but not least, let me address your last comment. Stats and math in general, have enabled me to make better picks and bets my whole life. Sometimes that's all I have to go by and yet I think I do pretty well in that department. Far far better than I would without them.

I am reassured that, as evidenced by this "stop telling a lot of the story", that you do utilize them too. I think that's smart of you and I also think it's smart of you to limit how much they affect your opinions.

It doesn't really matter who Linder is. He's not Wells, who I can see sucks by watching him play. Now if we play Linder I would know to watch for him. I don't know the play or plan he is supposed to run, but neither does PFF so what's the difference? It's not they aren't useful, it's just that they aren't as useful as some make them out to be. Again, why would you trust them to give you all you need to know about an opponent, yet challenge opposing fans who spout PFF numbers at our team? Because you have context when it comes to the Rams. Without that, it's just a who's who list of players people think are good. Useful at times, but hardly required. Without at least some knowledge of the teams players, staff, and philosophy all it really does is help you put together your office fantasy league.

Oh and PFF should be destroyed anyway for making casual fans think that they deeply understand football, and are qualified to "teach" us in the break room about how that Hill guy may have struggled last game.

 

[Alan]

blue4 finding the crux:
I don't know the play or plan he is supposed to run, but neither does PFF so what's the difference?

Exactly blue. Good thing, outside of maybe your wife (if she's anything like mine ), no one thinks your analysis/opinion is worthless eh? Because that would be very shortsighted of them wouldn't it?

 

[jrry32]

Not all questions are formatted that way. Somebody posted a 20/20 hindsight draft redo thread. How does one even start to answer a question like that?

Well, it's easy to see which WRs are lighting it up. But what about OL? It's really easy to say we should have taken Zach Martin, but he was a high pick. PFF suggests that Bitonio is having a better year and he was picked in the 2nd. Linder is having just as good of a year and he was picked in the third. All three are having great rookie years, so to me, Linder is the best pick, freeing up higher picks for other players.

PFF also suggests that Lindsey from the Packers is having a great year at C and he was picked in the 5th.

Seeing these guys bubble up on PFF helps figure out where to focus attention.

Yea, Linder definitely isn't the best pick. Linsley has been good for the Packers but I wouldn't take him either. Think you'd have to go with Martin...Bitonio would be #2 for me.

 

[jrry32]

You don't throw out the good for want of the perfect.

You do when the good isn't good enough.

 

[Alan]

jrry32 with this cryptic remark:
You do when the good isn't good enough.

I'm not sure what "good enough" even means here but if it's good then it's well... still good right?
Maybe you come from the school of "No thanks, I don't want any acetaminophen because I'll still feel some pain. It's morphine or go away and let me suffer in silence cause that's just how I swing." :shades: :bow:

How about if I word that a little differently.

You don't throw out the good unless you have the better.

How's that.

 

[junkman]

Yea, Linder definitely isn't the best pick. Linsley has been good for the Packers but I wouldn't take him either. Think you'd have to go with Martin...Bitonio would be #2 for me.

I probably didn't make my point clearly enough. With the 20/20 hindsight draft, I can take Linder in the 3rd round or Martin in the 1st round. Taking Linder in the 3rd lets me take Mack as the 2nd overall pick. Knowing Linsley is available in the 5th round is as big of a bargain as can be found, the perfect marriage of value meeting need for the Rams who otherwise have Scarlett Wells playing Center.

That said, if EVERY team had the opportunity to re-do the draft, both Linder nor Linsley would be taken before the end of the 2nd round. Similarly, Aaron Donald would not be available at 13.

 

[jrry32]

I probably didn't make my point clearly enough. With the 20/20 hindsight draft, I can take Linder in the 3rd round or Martin in the 1st round. Taking Linder in the 3rd lets me take Mack as the 2nd overall pick. Knowing Linsley is available in the 5th round is as big of a bargain as can be found, the perfect marriage of value meeting need for the Rams who otherwise have Scarlett Wells playing Center.

That said, if EVERY team had the opportunity to re-do the draft, both Linder nor Linsley would be taken before the end of the 2nd round. Similarly, Aaron Donald would not be available at 13.

If your 20/20 hindsight is based off of PFF's ratings, sure. If, like me, you watch the Jaguars often, you wouldn't. Linder isn't bad but he's nowhere near as good as PFF rates him.