Preseason Week 1 GDT - Trey Lance Debut

[757-NINER]

1 hour ago, JIllg said:

To my understanding from a couple of articles, the late rounders are largely the gifts given to the scouting team + analytics department. The coaching staff has a much larger say before that. 

Yea, I've read similar. And my retort to that is the coaches need less say, if what is being reported is correct. 

Edited August 17, 2021 by 757-NINER

[Forge]

1 hour ago, JIllg said:

To my understanding from a couple of articles, the late rounders are largely the gifts given to the scouting team + analytics department. The coaching staff has a much larger say before that. 

Also makes sense. Lynch / Shanny and the coaching staff aren't scouts. They aren't prepping and watching 200 players. They are too busy for that. This stuff should 100% be on Waugh and Peters and their regional area scouts. 

[NinerNation21]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

Also makes sense. Lynch / Shanny and the coaching staff aren't scouts. They aren't prepping and watching 200 players. They are too busy for that. This stuff should 100% be on Waugh and Peters and their regional area scouts. 

They haven’t missed yet in the 5th through 5 drafts. It’s pretty amazing.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

8 hours ago, NinerNation21 said:

I think you're being too nice. Their grading system is a complete joke. Once I found out that just about anyone can be a grader for them, regardless of football knowledge, it completely ruled out their validity for me. 

I know one of the graders and he's an idiot who only plays madden and casually watches prime-time games if he happens to be in front of a tv. 

Who is the grader you know? They have a Twitter account? 

Just for my own edification. 

Edited August 18, 2021 by TecmoSuperJoe

[TecmoSuperJoe]

8 hours ago, JIllg said:

Right, and they have to work with so many players on so many plays so quickly. They are really good at charting OL/DL wins and losses and giving you a general idea if a QB is throwing balls to correct locations, but the latter part relies on receivers being the correct spot, and they can only guess on that - it should work over large samples, but only if you aren't stuck with stupid/terrible receivers. Their defensive back metrics rely on end results - did a catch happen when you were the closest person in coverage? How far away from it were you? And those end results only occur after a number of things happen that are outside a defensive back's control. Pass rush, scheme, communication, etc. Linebacker metrics rely (like old school baseball fielding metrics) on whether or not you are making/missing tackles without accounting for getting to more plays. All of these things are understandable early analytical quirks and the sense of superiority that accompanies those metrics is pretty natural too - the baseball metrics guys were smugly talking about how much better Adam Dunn was than scrappy defensive player X because of measurable offensive metrics without understanding just how many runs Dunn was giving away defensively and just how many runs player X could save defensively. Defense was just a lot harder to quantify quickly. Those same analytics guys were dead right about the value of walks and home runs and were right to be constantly fighting for most of their conclusions. Anyhow - I dig PFF's OL/DL stuff and some of the QB metrics and use them as a part of a broader understanding of the sport. I dig at least the attempt to quantify and identify unearthed value in a sport that has a lot of old traditions. I dig the pointing out that sacks are less important and more variable than their underlying causes and that running backs are largely a product of their environment. These can lead to more accurate thinking about the sport. Some of their other conclusions will slowly adapt as more and better data becomes available. This is how analytics work. 

Your answer was beautiful. 

In regards to PFF, I'm a fan more than I'm not. Someone else made a pretty simple evaluation a few years ago that I also agree with:

Quote

PFF grades are more valuable than this subreddit thinks but less valuable then they think. I'll list out the pros and cons.

Pros:

Objective - Their grading system isn't subjective and they follow a pretty strict protocol when doing their grades.

Consistent - They grade the same play the same way every time. They have the resources to ensure that this happens and doesn't succumb to human error.

Experience - They have been doing this long enough that they have ironed out a lot of their kinks.

Cons:

Assumptions - Any model of anything has to have assumptions and PFF makes plenty about what is "good" and "bad". One example is that quarterbacks are given a lot of credit for threading the needle but if a quarterback dumps the ball off to a back instead who picks up the same number of yards in the open field they'd get less credit despite it being a better (safer) play.

Math Issues - They try and assign values on a pseudo normalized distribution -2 to +2 range. I'm 99% sure it's a math error to add values like that together. It 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. (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.)

Revisionist/Missing Context - They grade things based on just what happens not comparing against what would've/could've/should've happened. A player can do the exact same thing but because of an external factor they get a different grade.

Basically they are like any other metric of evaluation, there are biases baked in that you have to keep in mind. The grades are best used for things like offensive and defensive line play where the game is more straightforward and free of context.

I do think PFF has gotten better, and I'm glad their profile has expanded more and more as time as gone by. Obviously it's not perfect, but it's still the best that the general public has compared to what we did have before 2006...which was just sportswriters or former football players on TV/radio giving their opinion for the most part with non All 22 footage that wasn't peer reviewed. So basically not much. We now have something better than the "eye test" or "your gut". Obviously sports isn't always about logic, but at least we have both old school intuition and analytics to utilize in the football arena. That's a good thing to me. As long as folks don't treat PFF like a holy grail or a complete joke, I don't see what the problem is. But as people we either want something to be the best ever, or worst ever, no in between. 

[NinerNation21]

12 minutes ago, TecmoSuperJoe said:

Who is the grader you know? They have a Twitter account? 

Just for my own edification. 

I don’t think he does. It’s a guy I went to college with. I have no clue how he ended up working for pff. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Nick Bosa got vaccinated. 

[NinerNation21]

7 hours ago, TecmoSuperJoe said:

Nick Bosa got vaccinated. 

About time. Glad someone got through to him. 

[Chrissooner49er]

15 hours ago, 757-NINER said:

I'll say again, I really like Lenoir....

Oh, yes. 

Question: Am I the only one who thinks "Shouldn't that be pronounced 'Len-WAH'?"  I had that issue with 'Farv', too. I know, these are Americanized names, but being a Geography teacher, original language pronunciation matters to me....

[J-ALL-DAY]

I've read people say Banks had a 0.00 pass blocking rating and that means that PFF had him losing every rep...But I'm fairly certain that is not how it works. Every play is graded separately and certain reps are graded higher or lower. He must have had some highly negatively graded plays. I have to watch the game again and pay attention to see just how bad he was. But what stood out at initial watch was just how slow he was to react. He was moving slower than the rest of the OL. I wonder if they try to get him to lost 15-20 pounds by next season? 

[NinerNation21]

41 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I've read people say Banks had a 0.00 pass blocking rating and that means that PFF had him losing every rep...But I'm fairly certain that is not how it works. Every play is graded separately and certain reps are graded higher or lower. He must have had some highly negatively graded plays. I have to watch the game again and pay attention to see just how bad he was. But what stood out at initial watch was just how slow he was to react. He was moving slower than the rest of the OL. I wonder if they try to get him to lost 15-20 pounds by next season? 

I wouldn't be surprised if they do ask him to make his body more efficient. He's very top heavy, which is evident when he's off balance. 

He's also not considered very strong for his size, which is why he won with technique in college more times than not. I don't think we've seen the best iteration of Banks yet, TBH.

[Forge]

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I've read people say Banks had a 0.00 pass blocking rating and that means that PFF had him losing every rep...But I'm fairly certain that is not how it works. Every play is graded separately and certain reps are graded higher or lower. He must have had some highly negatively graded plays. I have to watch the game again and pay attention to see just how bad he was. But what stood out at initial watch was just how slow he was to react. He was moving slower than the rest of the OL. I wonder if they try to get him to lost 15-20 pounds by next season? 

His slow feet are an issue. In pass rush sets, he's not getting his feet back and anchored in early enough, so people are getting in around him fairly easily. Could be slow reaction time off the snap, could be weight. Hard to say. But he's definitely not getting dug in quickly enough

[J-ALL-DAY]

6 minutes ago, Forge said:

His slow feet are an issue. In pass rush sets, he's not getting his feet back and anchored in early enough, so people are getting in around him fairly easily. Could be slow reaction time off the snap, could be weight. Hard to say. But he's definitely not getting dug in quickly enough

Yep, like it is clear watching the others move and then him move and he's playing at a slower pace....Who impressed me was Shepley...Maybe it was because he was playing next to Banks, but that man looked GOOD. He looks better than Banks, that's for sure. 

[Forge]

 

[NinerNation21]

35 minutes ago, Forge said:

 

You can see both the exciting talent and potential as well as the rawness and rust of not playing much in the past 2 years.