State Of The Team

[oaken1]

I'm going to to have to invoke PFF here considering we are comparing like for like and they are graded in the exact same way.

The 2015 Cardinals O line was ranked 28th in pass blocking and 4th in run blocking for 17th overall.

Even last years line with Cole and Sweezy ranked 12th overall. They no longer split it by PB and RB sadly.

Sure some of that will be down to scheme. Kyler is mobile and we make a lot of quick passes that saves the O line sometimes. That 2015 team took a lot of intermediate shots so it's hard to directly compare.

But even being generous you would have to say they were pretty similar right?

If I recall that pass blocking score was directly related to our deep pass oriented offensive scheme

 

[BritCard]

PFF grades are overrated. No experts would rank DJ in the top 5, much less top 10. He's not bad, but it's just an overreaction to one site's grades.


When the Cardinals are tied for the longest playoff drought in the league, how is it invalid to stick to the "Cardinals suck" party line? Prove me wrong, Cardinals. Then I'll have reason to feel good.


You and I can agree that the Rams are a bit shakier and have some upcoming issues, but their coaching, and average talent/youth are much better than ours here in the moment. We don't particularly have a brighter future. About even for different reasons.


McVay consistently put Goff into positions to succeed that Stafford has more or less never had, including taking care of his pre-snap reads. Stafford has rarely had advantageous coaching, talent, or defensive help.

See this is where people get PFF wrong.

PFF don't measure ability. They measure performance, and performance is effected by a myriad of things. Ability is only a part of it.

 

[QuebecCard]

What did Kennard give us in 2020? He was basically non existent & once Golden was resigned he didn't play much so as to your question "Why"? Why pay him 6 million for that?

Kennard's playing time was impacted by the sudden emergence of Reddick more than Golden. Kennard is simply better against the run than Golden, not unimportant and he can also sub for CJ on the other side. If the Cards adjust his salary, I certainly have no issue with that but cut him at this point makes little sense/cents.

 

[juza76]

Kennard's playing time was impacted by the sudden emergence of Reddick more than Golden. Kennard is simply better against the run than Golden, not unimportant and he can also sub for CJ on the other side. If the Cards adjust his salary, I certainly have no issue with that but cut him at this point makes little sense/cents.

Yes, doesn't offer much in terms of pass rushing but he is solid against the run, but u can't pay 6 mil for that
To me both Kennard and Philips didn't put much effort last year, are players with some skillset who doesn't give a damn beside being overpaid

 

[QuebecCard]

Yes, doesn't offer much in terms of pass rushing but he is solid against the run, but u can't pay 6 mil for that
To me both Kennard and Philips didn't put much effort last year, are players with some skillset who doesn't give a damn beside being overpaid

I'll leave reading into motivations to you.

 

[Garthshort]

pff isnt everything, but, they are something. "experts" - link or it doesnt count.

NFL teams do pay for their data, unlike your (or my) opinion.

It seems that, no matter what you think of them, PFF ratings are the only ones I've seen. For posters that don't like them, do you have ratings that you do like? If so, let us know.

 

[BritCard]

For all the arguing about Kennard the truth is there no need to cut him right now while we have cap space to work with.

But his spot is extremely tenuous. If they do need more space he's the first out the door for sure.

 

[kerouac9]

pff isnt everything, but, they are something. "experts" - link or it doesnt count.

NFL teams do pay for their data, unlike your (or my) opinion.

Experts pay for their game-charting data. Not their grades. Each team used to have a group of graduate-assistant types who would count routes, personnel groupings, etc. Now teams just depend on PFF to gather that data.

See this is where people get PFF wrong.

PFF don't measure ability. They measure performance, and performance is effected by a myriad of things. Ability is only a part of it.

They JUDGE performance, not MEASURE it. And they judge it not knowing the intention of the play at the start. That’s why many OL hate the PFF grades.

Football Outsiders MEASURES performance by counting like blown blocks and tracking how many yards a RB gets before being touched, but they’re more system- and team-dependent.

 

[BritCard]

Experts pay for their game-charting data. Not their grades. Each team used to have a group of graduate-assistant types who would count routes, personnel groupings, etc. Now teams just depend on PFF to gather that data.



They JUDGE performance, not MEASURE it. And they judge it not knowing the intention of the play at the start. That’s why many OL hate the PFF grades.

Football Outsiders MEASURES performance by counting like blown blocks and tracking how many yards a RB gets before being touched, but they’re more system- and team-dependent.

I'm going to have to largely disagree on that. Are PFF perfect? No. Who is? But they have 3 guys grading every play by every player and they all have experience. They are former NFL coaches, former players etc and if there is a lack of consensus on the grade of just a single play it's then arbitrated by a 4th.

Paul Alexander, the long time Bengals O line coach, went into PFF a few years back to see how they grade O line and he watched them grade 600 plays of the Bengals O line and there were just 12 he considered wrong.

Nobody is perfect but PFF is a useful tool and it's far more accurate than not. The "They don't know the plays" argument doesn't hold water or you would see known good players (Kelce, Kittle, Tyron Smith, Bakhtiari, Williams, Nelson etc) graded erratically and they aren't.

The players we know play well because we see it with our eyes inevitably grade well, and vice versa. Which speaks to the accuracy of the system. The players that cry "You don't know the play" are often those that grade mediocre.

It's just one tool of many of course, and like all statistics there needs to be context, but fans like to discredit it far more than it deserves I think.

 

[Cardsfaninlouky]

Kennard's playing time was impacted by the sudden emergence of Reddick more than Golden. Kennard is simply better against the run than Golden, not unimportant and he can also sub for CJ on the other side. If the Cards adjust his salary, I certainly have no issue with that but cut him at this point makes little sense/cents.

Apple's to Oranges. I'd rather save the money & run with the rookie. Not like there will not be cuts come June 1st. There will be an OLB/Edge Rusher available at a low price I'm sure. Many players can give us what Kennard did, basically he was just a body out there to give someone a breather. I was excited when we signed him but very disappointed after seeing him play.

 

[Krangodnzr]

PFF grades are overrated. No experts would rank DJ in the top 5, much less top 10. He's not bad, but it's just an overreaction to one site's grades..

Any proof of an expert right now, not ranking DJ even in the top ten? PFF does, and it mirrors what we saw last year. DJ is probably the best LT the Cardinals have had since they came to Arizona, and I don't even see how you can argue that

When the Cardinals are tied for the longest playoff drought in the league, how is it invalid to stick to the "Cardinals suck" party line? Prove me wrong, Cardinals. Then I'll have reason to feel good.

Awesome. Be negative JUST because being negative in the past was right.

You were so epically wrong about Murray/Rosen/Bosa.

You and I can agree that the Rams are a bit shakier and have some upcoming issues, but their coaching, and average talent/youth are much better than ours here in the moment. We don't particularly have a brighter future. About even for different reasons.

They don't have a young QB anymore. No good young Wars really. Their offensive line is talent bare outside of Corbett. You have rose colored glasses for our opponents. The Rams lost to the JETS last year. They still have their number, but the Seahawks used to as well.

The Rams defense continues to lose good young talent every year.

McVay consistently put Goff into positions to succeed that Stafford has more or less never had, including taking care of his pre-snap reads. Stafford has rarely had advantageous coaching, talent, or defensive help.

You vastly overrate Stafford. Despite his talent he has never been a guy who elevates his team. There has been years where the Packers have had comparable team talent to the Lions, and Rodgers was the difference. It's a massive gamble that Stafford will be better than Goff and if it doesn't work out it will probably be the McVay/Snead regime undoing.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Apple's to Oranges. I'd rather save the money & run with the rookie. Not like there will not be cuts come June 1st. There will be an OLB/Edge Rusher available at a low price I'm sure. Many players can give us what Kennard did, basically he was just a body out there to give someone a breather. I was excited when we signed him but very disappointed after seeing him play.

It's not your money, why do you care?

The rookie could be substantially worse than Kennard who is a solid NFL player.

 

[kerouac9]

I'm going to have to largely disagree on that. Are PFF perfect? No. Who is? But they have 3 guys grading every play by every player and they all have experience. They are former NFL coaches, former players etc and if there is a lack of consensus on the grade of just a single play it's then arbitrated by a 4th.

Paul Alexander, the long time Bengals O line coach, went into PFF a few years back to see how they grade O line and he watched them grade 600 plays of the Bengals O line and there were just 12 he considered wrong.

Nobody is perfect but PFF is a useful tool and it's far more accurate than not. The "They don't know the plays" argument doesn't hold water or you would see known good players (Kelce, Kittle, Tyron Smith, Bakhtiari, Williams, Nelson etc) graded erratically and they aren't.

The players we know play well because we see it with our eyes inevitably grade well, and vice versa. Which speaks to the accuracy of the system. The players that cry "You don't know the play" are often those that grade mediocre.

It's just one tool of many of course, and like all statistics there needs to be context, but fans like to discredit it far more than it deserves I think.

Nice work memorizing that marketing copy, I guess. If they’re grades always line up with the eye test, what’s the point tho?

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Any proof of an expert right now, not ranking DJ even in the top ten? PFF does, and it mirrors what we saw last year. DJ is probably the best LT the Cardinals have had since they came to Arizona, and I don't even see how you can argue that




Awesome. Be negative JUST because being negative in the past was right.

You were so epically wrong about Murray/Rosen/Bosa.




They don't have a young QB anymore. No good young Wars really. Their offensive line is talent bare outside of Corbett. You have rose colored glasses for our opponents. The Rams lost to the JETS last year. They still have their number, but the Seahawks used to as well.

The Rams defense continues to lose good young talent every year.




You vastly overrate Stafford. Despite his talent he has never been a guy who elevates his team. There has been years where the Packers have had comparable team talent to the Lions, and Rodgers was the difference. It's a massive gamble that Stafford will be better than Goff and if it doesn't work out it will probably be the McVay/Snead regime undoing.

You raise some valid points. But if you think a stafford failure is going to result in McVay’s job being in jeopardy I can only laugh. That’s a ridiculous statement.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Nice work memorizing that marketing copy, I guess. If they’re grades always line up with the eye test, what’s the point tho?

That’s a great point. How much is statistical analysis worth if it’s merely confirmation? Once you know that you can discard and rely on the eye test that’s been proven accurate again.

 

[Shane]

You raise some valid points. But if you think a stafford failure is going to result in McVay’s job being in jeopardy I can only laugh. That’s a ridiculous statement.

How is that ridiculous

 

[slanidrac16]

It’s kind of like a market investors or weight loss program disclaimer. “Past results may not be indicative of future results and are not typical”.

 

[BritCard]

Nice work memorizing that marketing copy, I guess. If they’re grades always line up with the eye test, what’s the point tho?

Because who can watch everyone and remember past years too?

 

[QuebecCard]

Apple's to Oranges. I'd rather save the money & run with the rookie. Not like there will not be cuts come June 1st. There will be an OLB/Edge Rusher available at a low price I'm sure. Many players can give us what Kennard did, basically he was just a body out there to give someone a breather. I was excited when we signed him but very disappointed after seeing him play.

You're "sure" of a lot of things.

 

[BritCard]

That’s a great point. How much is statistical analysis worth if it’s merely confirmation? Once you know that you can discard and rely on the eye test that’s been proven accurate again.

How much is a numerical indicator of performance that recorded over time vs what people see with their eyes, all the inherent biases we contain and our inability to accurately remember what happened 2 weeks ago?

I mean, there are guys who think most ASU players should be starting in the NFL.

 

[Krangodnzr]

How is that ridiculous

Yeah I don't see how if Stafford fails, that their jobs WON'T be in jeopardy.

The Rams have little room under the cap few premium draft picks and some looming roster issues.

As great as Snead did for a few seasons, his magic touch is starting to wear off a bit, and he doesn't have a Russell Wilson to make chicken salad out of chicken poo.

 

[QuebecCard]

PFF grades are overrated. No experts would rank DJ in the top 5, much less top 10. He's not bad, but it's just an overreaction to one site's grades.

1) this sentence is ass backwards.

2) DJ has passed the eye test for two straight seasons and over 2000 snaps.

 

[football karma]

That’s a great point. How much is statistical analysis worth if it’s merely confirmation? Once you know that you can discard and rely on the eye test that’s been proven accurate again.

this came up because there was some enthusiastic disagreement on if DJ Humphries was a top 4 tackle. PFF says he is, others said he isnt based on the eye test, or experts, or something.

so we have come full circle -- PFF is overrated because it confirms the eye test that shows that PFF is overrated

 

[Gandhi]

I once read this, and I can’t find a better way to exemplify it myself, so I am just going to copy it into this post:

“Their mathematical rating system isn’t exactly foolproof. They try and assign values on a pseudo normalized distribution -2 to +2 range. This implies that two -1 graded plays and a +2 graded play are equivalent to three 0 graded plays where in reality the first set of plays is more valuable. Here’s an example: If a corner misses two tackles against a runner but then jumps a curl route and takes the ball to the house that’s better than being on the opposite side of the field for three plays in reality but not in their grades.”

I'm going to have to largely disagree on that. Are PFF perfect? No. Who is? But they have 3 guys grading every play by every player and they all have experience. They are former NFL coaches, former players etc and if there is a lack of consensus on the grade of just a single play it's then arbitrated by a 4th.

Can you elaborate a little on who it is that are working for them? Because I cannot find out. Sure, it is easy to read on their website, what you just wrote, but exactly who are those former coaches and former players? Is it an intern assistant coach 15 years ago or is it recently fired head coach? Are the players mentioned undrafted rookies that was once in a training camp for three weeks before being kicked out of the league forever, or is it All Pro’s? You have probably also read on Pro Football Focus’ website how often they make reservations in different variations as “we obviously don’t know…”, so why don’t they say who it is they have hired to make subjective guess work? Since it is the only available site of its kind, I personally would like to know who it is that I am supposed to trust.

And why don’t they disclose what data they are providing to the teams? We only know it is called “PFF Ultimate,” but we have no idea what it actually is. Why? They don’t need to get into detail, but why are they keeping all of it a secret? Maybe the only “partnership” they have with all 32 teams are to provide data about the coin toss? Or maybe their data has been the key to several Super Bowl wins. None of us has any earthly idea.

The "They don't know the plays" argument doesn't hold water or you would see known good players (Kelce, Kittle, Tyron Smith, Bakhtiari, Williams, Nelson etc) graded erratically and they aren't.

It doesn’t matter what grades those players get. As you mention yourself – anyone can see that Travis Kelce and Quenton Nelson are good. Grading them fairly accurate certainly don’t legitimize anyone to claim to understand finer details of the game. Pro Football Focus would only be relevant if they could give us quality information about the non-superstar players, and to do that you need to know the playcall.

I know your stance, but even though you consider Bill Belichick as someone who doesn’t know what he is talking about, I will still quote him (https://patriotswire.usatoday.com/2...lm-challenges-accuracy-of-pro-football-focus/):

“You see a play on film and a receiver goes uncovered down the field. So you know it’s probably one of two guys’ mistakes, so you don’t know which guy it is,” Belichick said on “Ordway, Merloni and Fauria” on Monday during his weekly interview with WEEI. “A lot of times the announcer will say, ‘[This guy] should’ve taken him,’ or, ‘[That guy] should have taken him.’ And I’m looking at the play saying, it could have been either guy, depending on what the call was.”

“In terms of analytics, you get a lot of, ‘This guy should have him. That guy should have him.’ I know from our team, there are times when we don’t know exactly what went wrong until we sort out the play,” Belichick said on WEEI. “So it’s impossible someone else could have known. Sometimes what it looks like is not what it is.”

“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,” Belichick said.


As Kerouac mention earlier in this thread, Football Outsider’s metrics cannot tell you the same as Pro Football Focus, because they are not guessing. Their analytics are based on facts. Completely objective observations.

 

[BritCard]

I once read this, and I can’t find a better way to exemplify it myself, so I am just going to copy it into this post:

“Their mathematical rating system isn’t exactly foolproof. They try and assign values on a pseudo normalized distribution -2 to +2 range. This implies that two -1 graded plays and a +2 graded play are equivalent to three 0 graded plays where in reality the first set of plays is more valuable. Here’s an example: If a corner misses two tackles against a runner but then jumps a curl route and takes the ball to the house that’s better than being on the opposite side of the field for three plays in reality but not in their grades.”

Yup I agree. This is a weakness of their system. Although I imagine over a season it evens itself out. It's not great at factoring explosive plays such as a game winning pick 6 or a great 60 yard TD run. The same is in reverse though, it doesn't over grade the massive whiff that leads to a TD or the blown coverage that loses the game.

Regarding the "It doesn't matter if they grade good players well, thats easy" I don't see how. They are grading the play, not the player. If Kelce makes a bad block he gets scored the same way Dan Arnold does if he makes a bad block.

The fact is that generally speaking players we know are good get good grades, players we know played bad have bad grades. Or often both. Look at Simmons last year, his early game grades were really poor. As the season went on they became much better. That tallied with what we could see because we happened to be paying close attention to our #8 pick.

If their grades are closely resembling what we see then they are doing something right. It's not perfect, I'm not even trying to stan for PFF. It's a tool that has it's merits. I just don't agree with the "It sucks they don't know whats happening" crowd.