Mythbusters: PFF Edition

[Solar7]

Would you take Kyler over Cousins right now?

In a heartbeat, yes.

 

[Krangodnzr]

All I know is that I stopped believing in PFF when they gave David Johnson like a 79 for his over 200 yard and 3 TD performance against the Eagles.

It was one of the best rushing games I've ever seen.

PFF routinely grades Chandler Jones low.

In 2018, they said Patrick Peterson would have a higher grade but teams didnt throw at him enough! What a stupid, asinine comment.

 

[DVontel]

In a heartbeat, yes.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Jetstream Green]

And there were a lot of sacks he saved them from allowing, so...

So, for an accurate reading which also involves the pros as well as the cons for the variables it does not take into account, it even further endorses my stance that you cannot fully trust those ratings

 

[TheCardFan]

Excellent post/topic @BritCard!

Really appreciate your insightful perpective.

I personally see value in PFF grading but it doesn't account for potential. A 66 6th year QB is not necessarily the same value of a 66 rookie QB.

They are tough graders but I think it reflects the fact that there arent many superstars in the league (compared to total number of players).

 

[TheCardFan]

All I know is that I stopped believing in PFF when they gave David Johnson like a 79 for his over 200 yard and 3 TD performance against the Eagles.

TBF...how many blitz pick-ups did he miss? I think the point is you get a grade for all 40 plays...5 maybe were excellent but maybe several more sucked. Its not a Madden rating and not just based on big plays/stats.

 

[Krangodnzr]

TBF...how many blitz pick-ups did he miss? I think the point is you get a grade for all 40 plays...5 maybe were excellent but maybe several more sucked. Its not a Madden rating and not just based on big plays/stats.

5 missed blitz pickups compared with a jaw dropping 50 yard run and 3 TDs? Sorry that's a bunk idea.

I bet they gave Chandler Jones a 75 when he got 4 sacks.

 

[BritCard]

The League (teams) buy their game logs (stats) not their interpretation, which is what they market to fans like you.

Did I say teams use them? Teams accept them as accurate as evidenced by a long line of players and coaches that have changed thier tune after seeing the process.

The evidence is right there for you to see in the 95% of grades fans agree on. You look at a player everyone knows is great or good and you will find a great or good grade. Look at a player everyone knows is poor and you will find a a poor grade.

The whole "PFF is crap" things comes from fans who's favorite guy got a 60 after scoring 2 TDs and can't accept it because "he passed my eye test".

I'll take the system honed over many years that's processed by 3 experienced analysts and checked by a supervisor over the eyes of an insurance salesman from Des Moine.

 

[BritCard]

Exactly. So any grade is still just a barometer of performance. I was thinking more in the line of college linemen. There is definitely a difference with level of opponents. So I would lean forward a player with a lower grade playing in the SCC as opposed to a player with a higher grade from a player in the mountain west.

HEY! Maybe that’s Keims problem! Lol!

The point of the post is the grades are accurate. They know the assignments and they accurately assess plays. There's no evidence otherwise and coaches and players that see the process agree.

You can argue about context, quality of opponent, the way they grade but I don't think you can argue they don't know what they are doing.

 

[BritCard]

Excellent post/topic @BritCard!

Really appreciate your insightful perpective.

I personally see value in PFF grading but it doesn't account for potential. A 66 6th year QB is not necessarily the same value of a 66 rookie QB.

They are tough graders but I think it reflects the fact that there arent many superstars in the league (compared to total number of players).

PFF is simply a measure of performance. Not talent or potential. You can find players with 8 years experience with grades that go something like 65, 78, 61, 85, 69, 78, 57, 80.

Its up to people to interpret why that is. It can be different schemes or coordinators, being given roles that suit them better or worse or given assignments that don't suit thier skill set.

Its also only assessing them on what they are asked to do. So you can have a TE who's asked to block 95% of the time who very good at it and has an 89 grade. And another TE who has 700 receiving yards and 5 TDs who has a 76 grade.

Its ridiculous to say teams don't use PFF grades when they use all the data that results in those grades. The data and grades are one in the same.

 

[BritCard]

5 missed blitz pickups compared with a jaw dropping 50 yard run and 3 TDs? Sorry that's a bunk idea.

I bet they gave Chandler Jones a 75 when he got 4 sacks.

So if you have one great play you can take the rest of the game off?

If your a TE and you make a great 30 yard TD catch that wipes out the 6 poor blocks that resulted in busted runs or sacks?

Negative plays are just as important as positive plays.

 

[DVontel]

All of this because of your DJ Humphries vendetta huh?

 

[TheCardFan]

All of this because of your DJ Humphries vendetta huh?

I don't think anyone dislikes Humphries but to say he is even in the top 15 of LT's is false.

He has also only played 1 full season out of 5 and some people want to pay him top 5 LT money. That is the problem.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Did I say teams use them? Teams accept them as accurate as evidenced by a long line of players and coaches that have changed thier tune after seeing the process.

The evidence is right there for you to see in the 95% of grades fans agree on. You look at a player everyone knows is great or good and you will find a great or good grade. Look at a player everyone knows is poor and you will find a a poor grade.

The whole "PFF is crap" things comes from fans who's favorite guy got a 60 after scoring 2 TDs and can't accept it because "he passed my eye test".

I'll take the system honed over many years that's processed by 3 experienced analysts and checked by a supervisor over the eyes of an insurance salesman from Des Moine.

Don't be disingenuous!

You were at least implying that teams used their grades, not simply their logs.

And I'll take my eye test after reviewing tape over a lecture from you.

 

[GuernseyCard]

PFF is simply a measure of performance. Not talent or potential. You can find players with 8 years experience with grades that go something like 65, 78, 61, 85, 69, 78, 57, 80.

Its up to people to interpret why that is. It can be different schemes or coordinators, being given roles that suit them better or worse or given assignments that don't suit thier skill set.

Its also only assessing them on what they are asked to do. So you can have a TE who's asked to block 95% of the time who very good at it and has an 89 grade. And another TE who has 700 receiving yards and 5 TDs who has a 76 grade.

Its ridiculous to say teams don't use PFF grades when they use all the data that results in those grades. The data and grades are one in the same.

The Quality Control Coach who simply recycles PFF logs and grades is a guy who'll soon be out of job.

Whose grade on Humphrey matters most to Keim and MB - PFF or Kugler's?

 

[slanidrac16]

The point of the post is the grades are accurate. They know the assignments and they accurately assess plays. There's no evidence otherwise and coaches and players that see the process agree.

You can argue about context, quality of opponent, the way they grade but I don't think you can argue they don't know what they are doing.

Trust me when I say this. I’m not knocking pff or any grading evaluation out there. What I’m saying is no matter the grade it doesn’t guarantee success.

So what would be more important to you? Hypothetically, the cards staff is grading o- linemen. The top guy grades out at 91.1, the second guy 90.0, the third guy 88.9 and the fourth guy 87.9. After the evaluation your o-line coach proclaims “ I want the 87.9 guy because...”.

Do you tell him too bad we are taking the 91.1 guy because his grade is higher? Or do you trust the eyes and experience your o- line coach brings to the table?

 

[TheCardFan]

The Quality Control Coach who simply recycles PFF logs and grades is a guy who'll soon be out of job.

Whose grade on Humphrey matters most to Keim and MB - PFF or Kugler's?

Doesn't Keim use PFF for drafting?

That might be part of your answer.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Doesn't Keim use PFF for drafting?

That might be part of your answer.

Again... there's a difference between buying data, throwing it into the mix, and accepting the grades.

Guess, if that's simply the case, MB can save a lot of money closing down the scouting department and turning things over to PFF.

 

[BritCard]

All of this because of your DJ Humphries vendetta huh?

I don't have a DJ Humphries vendetta. I just think he's a poor player.

And no, it's because I often see fans ragging on PFF which I find a bit hilarious to be honest. Like said Insurance salesman from Des Moine has eyes that should be trusted more than 4 analysts, 3 of which watch every single play. While the guy from Des Moines is only watching the ball while eating Doritos and flicking through Twitter.

 

[BritCard]

Trust me when I say this. I’m not knocking pff or any grading evaluation out there. What I’m saying is no matter the grade it doesn’t guarantee success.

So what would be more important to you? Hypothetically, the cards staff is grading o- linemen. The top guy grades out at 91.1, the second guy 90.0, the third guy 88.9 and the fourth guy 87.9. After the evaluation your o-line coach proclaims “ I want the 87.9 guy because...”.

Do you tell him too bad we are taking the 91.1 guy because his grade is higher? Or do you trust the eyes and experience your o- line coach brings to the table?

I think I've been quite clear that PFF only grade performance but performance can be effected by what you are asked to do. So an O linemen graded 67 might not be worse than a guy graded 75, be he performed worse because he was asked to do things that weren't his strengths. For example, maybe he's being asked to zone block when he's a power guy. Maybe he's being asked to pull when it's not his strength.

It's still up to scouts and GM's to interpret the data. You certainly can't say that X guy is better than Y guy based on one years worth of grades. But if a guy has similar grades over a number of years in different schemes you can be pretty sure its an accurate measure.

PFF also provide all the data and video to back it up. If a scout or GM wants to see every pass blocking snap by Tyler Lockett then PFF can give it them at the touch of a button. If they want to see every George Kittle pass pro rep out of I formation on 3rd down they can do that too.

It's also worth remembering that as cheapskates that won't subscribe we only see the overall grade. If we could see the broken down grades that lead to the overall number we would probably be more understanding.

PFF is not a replacement for scouting. Their grades are an accurate measure of performance only. Not talent. It's still up to experts to interpret the data in the same way stats don't always equal an accurate measure of performance.

 

[WildBB]

I disagree about the quality of opponent argument. It can easily be looked at in the opposite manner. Sometimes these big school players look better because of the qualify of talent around them. I think it is a big reason a lot of these big school high draft picks end up being busts once they go to a team drafting high. There's plenty of examples of Mountain West players (or other smaller conferences) that have out produced higher drafted big name players. You can't just make that statement in a vacuum.

Then theres the Eric Swanns. 1/1m.

It happens but it's not the norm. That's why you have 4th-UDFA'S. Sometimes they work out, when they go to an established vet team and are coached and brought along within a viable successfuly run system. Many don't get that luxury or are thrown in due to injury. There's no simple formula on who succeeds at this level. There are always exceptions.

 

[GuernseyCard]

I don't have a DJ Humphries vendetta. I just think he's a poor player.

And no, it's because I often see fans ragging on PFF which I find a bit hilarious to be honest. Like said Insurance salesman from Des Moine has eyes that should be trusted more than 4 analysts, 3 of which watch every single play. While the guy from Des Moines is only watching the ball while eating Doritos and flicking through Twitter.

Your condescension is duly noted.

 

[TheCardFan]

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Jetstream Green]

I don't think anyone dislikes Humphries but to say he is even in the top 15 of LT's is false.

He has also only played 1 full season out of 5 and some people want to pay him top 5 LT money. That is the problem.

If he plays another full season, and yeah that might be a big if, then I think he just might be a top 15 tackle. This is how I see this though, even a average to above average LT is hard to find and the nature of the beast and free agency sets the price tag regardless if they are worthy or not

 

[TheCardFan]

If he plays another full season, and yeah that might be a big if, then I think he just might be a top 15 tackle. This is how I see this though, even a average to above average LT is hard to find and the nature of the beast and free agency sets the price tag regardless if they are worthy or not

Shouldn't we be able to replace a top 15 LT with the 8th pick in the draft and spend that extra money on the defense?