I know it's playoff week and all, but I think we can talk more than one thing at a time.
What do you think of PFF's grading ?
What do you think of PFF's grading ?
Views on PFF - curious what everyone thinks
- Thread starter 20hrswk
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
TSFH Fan
Epic Music Guy
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,541
TSFH Fan
Epic Music Guy
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,541
Bill Belichick admits his limitations studying film, challenges accuracy of PFF
“We get it wrong, too. We’re watching another team on film, and we’ve seen all their plays and we’re still not even sure who was supposed to do what.”
patriotswire.usatoday.com
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2013
- Messages
- 7,116
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 30,255
They don't try to account for scheme. They treat football as a game of individual matchups. But that's not what football is. You can't properly grade a player without understanding what his responsibilities are. PFF is able to pretty accurately tell you who the top guys are and the worst guys. But that's not difficult to do when you watch games. They don't do well at sorting the guys in the middle. And while I say "pretty accurately," they are sometimes wildly wrong about guys they rank very highly or very lowly.
All this to say, their grading isn't worthless, but it's not something you should hang your hat on. They provide a lot of other information that actually is quite useful. The player grades themselves are probably the least valuable thing they offer. I do sometimes take a peek at their grades, but that's generally just to see if a guy is worth watching. If they give him an awful grade, I probably won't spend the time, unless somebody I respect (who is a fan of the team that player is on) says PFF is wrong. Otherwise, I'll watch them and come to my own conclusions. (And with their college grades, if they give a player I haven't seen an awesome grade, it'll prompt me to watch their film.)
All this to say, their grading isn't worthless, but it's not something you should hang your hat on. They provide a lot of other information that actually is quite useful. The player grades themselves are probably the least valuable thing they offer. I do sometimes take a peek at their grades, but that's generally just to see if a guy is worth watching. If they give him an awful grade, I probably won't spend the time, unless somebody I respect (who is a fan of the team that player is on) says PFF is wrong. Otherwise, I'll watch them and come to my own conclusions. (And with their college grades, if they give a player I haven't seen an awesome grade, it'll prompt me to watch their film.)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,379
- Name
- Don
fearsomefour
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 17,606
I think they really struggle with line play, particularly as you said, inside.
One receiver has 8 catches for 92 yards and a TD, the other has 2 catches for 18 yards. One will have a higher grade. But as you've said, what were their roles in the routes and in the running and screen games. How were their roles/catches impacted by the defense etc.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,379
- Name
- Don
My add would be once you get a couple games of PFF grades you can start to factor in the variables such as scheme. If a player is graded lower due to assignment but is improving their PFF score it is likely that they are improving. The baseline can be affected by the scheme-assignment quotient but the grade "should" still have a serviceable foundation that allows you to measure productivity & growth.
Small sample sizes are often very misleading in their assessments.
I read it for fun and agree that very good and very bad performances are often much more accurate than middle ground
Small sample sizes are often very misleading in their assessments.
I read it for fun and agree that very good and very bad performances are often much more accurate than middle ground
TexasRam
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,057
Agree with everything already posted.
PFF has practical usage as a starting discussion point regarding a players performance, but should be always be taken with a grain of salt and open to scrutiny.
Personally, Ive seen numerous times that a player makes a highlight play or two and then get a crazy good PFF score (like 80+) even though he may have had numerous other bad plays.
Have also seen the opposite. One or two bad plays and a 40 score though the rest of the game was solid.
But they are inconsistent and sometimes the scores are generally accurate to how we would rate the player (based on our limitations of scheme). When I rated the Oline a few years ago and watched every snap, there were several weeks where the PFF score matched my score pretty close. But alas, some other games, a guy would get a pancake block and his score would blow up out of proportion.
Without knowing scheme we are limited but on the flip side, often times a block is a block, a tackle is a tackle and a bad pass or drop is just that. We can grade to some extent without knowing assignment.
PFF has practical usage as a starting discussion point regarding a players performance, but should be always be taken with a grain of salt and open to scrutiny.
Personally, Ive seen numerous times that a player makes a highlight play or two and then get a crazy good PFF score (like 80+) even though he may have had numerous other bad plays.
Have also seen the opposite. One or two bad plays and a 40 score though the rest of the game was solid.
But they are inconsistent and sometimes the scores are generally accurate to how we would rate the player (based on our limitations of scheme). When I rated the Oline a few years ago and watched every snap, there were several weeks where the PFF score matched my score pretty close. But alas, some other games, a guy would get a pancake block and his score would blow up out of proportion.
Without knowing scheme we are limited but on the flip side, often times a block is a block, a tackle is a tackle and a bad pass or drop is just that. We can grade to some extent without knowing assignment.
Londoner
Twitchy sophomore.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2023
- Messages
- 2,746
I fully agree with what’s already been said regarding schemes and assignments.
Additionally, the average game has about 150 plays. With 22 players on each of these, that’s 3,300 individual assessments to be made per game.
There’s absolutely no way that can accurately be done in the time frame they have for releasing their grades post-match.
Additionally, the average game has about 150 plays. With 22 players on each of these, that’s 3,300 individual assessments to be made per game.
There’s absolutely no way that can accurately be done in the time frame they have for releasing their grades post-match.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #13
Interesting thoughts. Thanks everyone.
Don't get me wrong, I question PFF from time to time as well, but just going with Ram players . . .
How do we explain the #2 WR in NCAA in 2022 as per PFF? - Nacua
How do we explain the #2 DI in NCAA in 2022 as per PFF? - Kobie Turner
Did anyone on this board/draft sites have Nacua and Kobie rated #2 in the country ?
Did anyone here have them as 1st round picks as it turns out they should have been?
And now 2 years removed PFF has proved exactly correct on Nacua and Turner when no one else was.
That is not a mistake. They are on to something with their grading.
How does everyone explain this?
Don't get me wrong, I question PFF from time to time as well, but just going with Ram players . . .
How do we explain the #2 WR in NCAA in 2022 as per PFF? - Nacua
How do we explain the #2 DI in NCAA in 2022 as per PFF? - Kobie Turner
Did anyone on this board/draft sites have Nacua and Kobie rated #2 in the country ?
Did anyone here have them as 1st round picks as it turns out they should have been?
And now 2 years removed PFF has proved exactly correct on Nacua and Turner when no one else was.
That is not a mistake. They are on to something with their grading.
How does everyone explain this?
Londoner
Twitchy sophomore.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2023
- Messages
- 2,746
jjab360
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2013
- Messages
- 6,767
That same system also rated Byron Murphy II (0.5 sack rookie season) as the 2nd best interior pass rusher in the country and Braden Fiske (8.5 sack rookie season) as basically undraftable. Can anyone explain this?
The even bigger head scratcher is how they still somehow have Murphy rated higher in the pros lol. I'm not saying the story is written for either one of these guys yet, but find me a single sane football fan that would be willing to say Murphy had the better rookie season between the two.
I'm not saying their grading system is completely useless but it is considerably flawed with a Madden rating system seemingly targeted for children and a database that refuses to show it's work but still wants to be treated like the football bible.
TheTackle
Pro Bowler
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,299
If you look at their NFL draft rankings each year, once you get past the top players in that draft their ranking system drops off a cliff. That pretty much sums up the science. If it worked wouldn’t they have had Puka as a first round pick? After all he was playing the same way in college barring injuries. It’s not like he learnt a whole new set of skills in one training camp!
As soon as you put a number on someone you label them and that is problematic for all kinds of reasons that extend beyond football
As soon as you put a number on someone you label them and that is problematic for all kinds of reasons that extend beyond football
Alaskan Ram
Last Frontier Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2013
- Messages
- 1,212
I prefer the Pagan Fertility Festival, Beltane over Pro Football Focus.
Lots of dancing girls.
And we can even burn a wicker Viking, which is fitting before this Monday's playoff game.
Lots of dancing girls.
And we can even burn a wicker Viking, which is fitting before this Monday's playoff game.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 24,435
Made up statistics, scoring and grades. What's not to like?
I've seen some great debates on here, and learned a lot from both sides. But IMO when a debate participant resorts to pfft... the debate is lost
I've seen some great debates on here, and learned a lot from both sides. But IMO when a debate participant resorts to pfft... the debate is lost
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 12,301
PFF is one statistic created from knowledge but also opinion. It is useful stat but doesn't tell the whole story. I would say individual game PFF grades should be taken with a huge grain of salt at times and are worth discussions but not as factual information. However, a players PFF grade for a whole season or large amount of time I think tell an appropriate picture of a players worth within a degree of error. What that degree of error is who knows... could be +/- over 10 points or even more.
At the end of the day, over time PFF's grade of a player I'd consider fairly accurate in the sense of "Does this guy suck , is he average, or is he an amazing football player?" Generally speaking, PFF will at least point you accurately to one of those three assessments.
At the end of the day, over time PFF's grade of a player I'd consider fairly accurate in the sense of "Does this guy suck , is he average, or is he an amazing football player?" Generally speaking, PFF will at least point you accurately to one of those three assessments.
