Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dll2000

Random Thoughts for May 2019

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Wait.  How do you an add a picture from your computer?

No clue, dude. I haven't tried anything like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

No clue, dude. I haven't tried anything like that. 

I added a link.  I had to find somewhere on web to upload it.

Being an older dude in computer age is tough.  Always behind.  

But I am clever and can figure things out through trial and error.  

 

 

Edited by dll2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dll2000 said:

I added a link.  I had to find somewhere on web to upload it.

Being an older dude in computer age is tough.  Always behind.  

But I am clever and can figure things out through trial and error.  

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

giphy.gif

Dammit Jim I'm a doctor but I don't have to agree with you 100% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dll2000 said:

I added a link.  I had to find somewhere on web to upload it.

Being an older dude in computer age is tough.  Always behind.  

But I am clever and can figure things out through trial and error.  

 

 

Heh, you think you're old????

I'm so old my laptop has an abacus instead of a number keypad.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

PFF is big on saying run game does not matter.  Running backs do not matter.  They point to things like Bell being one of best backs in league and Pitt having no significant statistical drop off without him.  

I think they are looking at the numbers wrongly.   Yes, you don't necessarily need a good statistical run game to succeed in today's NFL, but you need a run game that defense's respect.  For them to respect it, the RB must be scary or the run game efficient.  

To illustrate look at the Rams.  The Rams offense which was gangbusters early really fell apart when Gurley stopped being a major threat.  Ironically right around Bears game.  Goff went from looking like an all-pro to a lower tier QB.  Quite a swing.  Like PFF points out, many of yards and points come off pass.  But Rams were moving not so much off Gurley production, but threat of Gurley.  The play action pass is their bread and butter.   Those passes don't work nearly as well if guys aren't worried about the run.

Because Bears couldn't effectively run the ball their offense was really hampered, not by their lack of run production so much as lack of efficient and threatening run production.  

I think that was another factor in way MT looked last year.  Largest factor was simply he was a newbie in offense and NFL offense in general, but a large factor was lack of efficient run game.   You could see how it both benefitted and hampered Goff when he had a scary run game and when he didn't.

Running backs do matter.  You put Saquan Barkley on the Chicago Bears and they are scoring at least another touchdown a game everything else being the same.  

Running backs are devalued because there is a glut of them with same skill set and roughly same level of skill and many of those can be found in later rounds or FA.  Not because they are lacking value on the field.   It's just supply and demand driving down price.  Elite players at position like Elliot and Barkley still make a large difference for any team you put them on.   

Edited by dll2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PFF is becoming PFFttttttttt......they've lost most of the respect they once had.

I'm very excited about what Nagy can do with an effective running game especially when I hear Mike Davis talking about how he's "all in" on sharing carries but in now way simply gonna allow Cohen and Monty to keep him off the field.

With Long back and 100% healthy again and playing at his ideal weight and Daniels and Whitehair moving to their best positions this is the best this line has looked since the '80s.  Now, we just need to keep them all intact for 16 games and playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, soulman said:

PFF is becoming PFFttttttttt......they've lost most of the respect they once had.

I'm very excited about what Nagy can do with an effective running game especially when I hear Mike Davis talking about how he's "all in" on sharing carries but in now way simply gonna allow Cohen and Monty to keep him off the field.

With Long back and 100% healthy again and playing at his ideal weight and Daniels and Whitehair moving to their best positions this is the best this line has looked since the '80s.  Now, we just need to keep them all intact for 16 games and playoffs.

PFF has become go to resource for media.  I hear "according to PFF" all the time.  They are growing not shrinking.

They make some good points sometimes.  I just dont like that they act like their data is unassailable and none of it is subjective.

 Even if data was completely correct, they often jump to wild conclusions from data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

PFF has become go to resource for media.  I hear "according to PFF" all the time.  They are growing not shrinking.

They make some good points sometimes.  I just dont like that they act like their data is unassailable and none of it is subjective.

 Even if data was completely correct, they often jump to wild conclusions from data.

They were the prime mover of all the Adrian Amos hype.  If I recall he was there #1 safety 2 years ago.  I watched him every game, he was good, he was not great, but a whole lot of people took that as gospel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RunningVaccs said:

They were the prime mover of all the Adrian Amos hype.  If I recall he was there #1 safety 2 years ago.  I watched him every game, he was good, he was not great, but a whole lot of people took that as gospel. 

It is impossible to provide an accurate objective grade on a player on an every down basis.

Way too many variables on any given play and grade is dependent on what you value and your interpretation of what he did.  

Best grader would be the players position coach and coordinator working together with each play call and intra play adjustment in front of them as they watch each play and even they wouldn’t be perfect. 

Unless they had same grader for every player it is going to vary wildly too.  @WindyCity @Madmike90 @soulmancan watch same player on 10 plays and disagree on how well they did on 4 or 5 of them.  Unless play is clearly dominant or clearly bad there is going to be wiggle room and what ifs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PFF also gets nearly instant results on its grades.  They send them out to reporters immediately. Which tells me it isn’t human eyes they are using in some fashion. 

For one player for a complete game it could take a human like 40 minutes to an hour to grade him working efficiently.  You have to grade like 90 players in a game. 

They are cutting corners in some fashion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dll2000 said:

PFF has become go to resource for media.  I hear "according to PFF" all the time.  They are growing not shrinking.

They make some good points sometimes.  I just dont like that they act like their data is unassailable and none of it is subjective.

 Even if data was completely correct, they often jump to wild conclusions from data.

I don't give a rip what the media thinks of them.  Most of them have no background in statistics and metrics at all so they're too easily impressed by PFF even when they're either wrong or making it all up and behaving like it's all very accurate and meaningful data. 

They've gone from humble beginnings to becoming very arrogant looking to entertain more so than simply report their findings.  For me I look at them like the Skip Bayless and Steven A Smith of football metrics looking as much to produce conflict as useful knowledge.

The fact that Phil Emery once said he relied on their stuff in personnel matters says a lot about their professional value.  9_9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dll2000 said:

It is impossible to provide an accurate objective grade on a player on an every down basis.

Way too many variables on any given play and grade is dependent on what you value and your interpretation of what he did.  

Best grader would be the players position coach and coordinator working together with each play call and intra play adjustment in front of them as they watch each play and even they wouldn’t be perfect. 

Unless they had same grader for every player it is going to vary wildly too.  @WindyCity @Madmike90 @soulmancan watch same player on 10 plays and disagree on how well they did on 4 or 5 of them.  Unless play is clearly dominant or clearly bad there is going to be wiggle room and what ifs. 

 

This is how I view it as well.  When they grade from videos they have full knowledge of how any play was designed to work and what everyone's assignment is.  In some cases the OL blocking assignments seem obvious but not in all cases so how do you grade when half the time you don't have 100% correct data to begin with?

I get that they want to quantify everything but in many cases it's just not possible to do as accurately as they'd like us to believe.  Simply watching a game video and having some experience doing it can often tell as much about a player as PFFs numbers do.  My take is it's fine as supporting info but not something to be taken as gospel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, soulman said:

I don't give a rip what the media thinks of them.  Most of them have no background in statistics and metrics at all so they're too easily impressed by PFF even when they're either wrong or making it all up and behaving like it's all very accurate and meaningful data. 

They've gone from humble beginnings to becoming very arrogant looking to entertain more so than simply report their findings.  For me I look at them like the Skip Bayless and Steven A Smith of football metrics looking as much to produce conflict as useful knowledge.

The fact that Phil Emery once said he relied on their stuff in personnel matters says a lot about their professional value.  9_9

Just take grading interior d linemen for instance.  

I mean it can make a huge difference if a 3-4 dlinemen is lined up at 5 tech, 2 tech or 3 tech.  A lot of times that depends on down and distance and call.  

It is way harder to rush passer and get home from inside tackles and way easier from 5 tech or when D coordinator has called a successful stunt.  Obviously, the guard, center or tackle quality varies wildly as well.  If a guy can't physically block me I will look great.  

Well why doesn't D coordinator stunt and line guys up outside all the time you ask?  Because then it is too easy to run the football on early downs.  You have to protect A and B gaps in football too.  PFF just ignores things like that.  Data doesn't bear that out they say.  That's because teams forced the offense' hand.  

A QB like Aaron Rodgers or Ben Roethlisberger will hold ball to make a play and therefore give up more sacks, while Tom Brady is getting rid of that ball in 2 seconds or less.

If I got a 'pressure' on Rodgers meaning I was chasing him after 2.6 seconds, but I got no pressure on Brady because ball was gone in 2.  My grade versus Rodgers will be better when my actual play quality was the same.

You could point out similar things for every position and every play.  You can't have a grade without greater context.  Why you need a human eyeball and you can't just go off raw data.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dll2000 said:

Just take grading interior d linemen for instance.  

I mean it can make a huge difference if a 3-4 dlinemen is lined up at 5 tech, 2 tech or 3 tech.  A lot of times that depends on down and distance and call.  

It is way harder to rush passer and get home from inside tackles and way easier from 5 tech or when D coordinator has called a successful stunt.  Obviously, the guard, center or tackle quality varies wildly as well.  If a guy can't physically block me I will look great.  

Well why doesn't D coordinator stunt and line guys up outside all the time you ask?  Because then it is too easy to run the football on early downs.  You have to protect A and B gaps in football too.  PFF just ignores things like that.  Data doesn't bear that out they say.  That's because teams forced the offense' hand.  

A QB like Aaron Rodgers or Ben Roethlisberger will hold ball to make a play and therefore give up more sacks, while Tom Brady is getting rid of that ball in 2 seconds or less.

If I got a 'pressure' on Rodgers meaning I was chasing him after 2.6 seconds, but I got no pressure on Brady because ball was gone in 2.  My grade versus Rodgers will be better when my actual play quality was the same.

You could point out similar things for every position and every play.  You can't have a grade without greater context.  Why you need a human eyeball and you can't just go off raw data.  

 

 

 

All well said.  Some things are just not easily quantified yet PFF tries to sell it as everything can be quantified and every player accurately rated and ranked based on their data and that's just not so.

It is however how you can use that data to promote your fee based services to info hungry fans.  I much prefer those analyses Jonathan Woods does that provide us with info from which to draw our own conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×