Jump to content
Leader

Random Packer News & Notes

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, FinneasGage said:

the trade deadline already passed, there's rumors they're gonna move him over the offseason. 

Yeah, not sure what I was thinking when I typed that.  Clearly I wasn't thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again, PFF gets paid for it.  There's value to it.  If there was no value to it, the NFL wouldn't support it, people wouldn't support it, and it wouldn't last long.  

If there was bias, the alleged GOAT Rodgers would have a higher rating than Tom Brady considering their statistical differences on the year.  So I think it's very useful for comparing players or groups. 

The only times anyone says anything bad about PFF is when it kills their argument.  I tend to have to agree with PFF since I use it frequently and don't want to be labeled a hypocrite. 

Completely agree it would be the ultimate hypocrisy for a poster to cite PFF rankings to support his or her arguments while simultaneously ignoring PFF rankings that do not further his or her arguments.

Along those lines, the PFF rankings through 13 games are quite revealing as to which of the Pack's offensive players are having productive or relatively less productive seasons (unless of course the rankings need to be ignored, collectively):

55.7 Geronimo Allison 

57.5 Robert Tonyan 

58.1 MVS  (Well PFF can’t be correct all the time, right?)

58.2 Jimmy Graham 

62.6 Billy Turner 

64.8 Elgton Jenkins 

65.8 Corey Linsley 

70.2 Marcedes Lewis 

71.6 David Bakhtiari 

73.4 Allen Lazard

75.0 Bryan Bulaga 

75.6 Jamaal Williams                                                                                

80.5 Aaron Rodgers

84.3 Davante Adams

88.1 Aaron Jones

I don't know how anyone looking at these PFF rankings could possibly not conclude that the problem on offense is almost exclusively the QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheOnlyThing, on MVS, he hasn't been on the field.  I believe he's being poorly utilized.  His grade will reflect that.  He's not playing well, but he's also not getting a lot of opportunities.  Keeping in mind that Rodgers has an 88.1 RB, two 70+ tackles, 3 60+ guards (which is very high comparatively to the rest of the NFL), an 80 + WR and a 70 + WR, his rating of 80.5 is not something to brag about. 

Wilson - 91.8
Brees - 91.4
Tannehill - 90.0
Jackson - 89.9
Cousins - 84.9
Prescott - 83.5
Watson - 83.1
Brady - 82.6
Rodgers - 80.5
Carr - 78.9
Wentz - 77.5
Rivers - 76.6
Garoppolo - 75.5
Goff - 74.2

I don't want my QB who is getting paid 26.5 million to be the 9th best QB in the league. 

Especially when Ryan Tannehill is playing better than him. 

Why don't you take a look at the receivers, OL and tight ends and their scores for Wilson, Tannehill, Watson and Brady? 

Brady's best receiver is Edleman and his score is 72.  How can this be? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheOnlyThing, I'll keep tagging you until you respond to Rodgers being the 9th ranked QB with about the 3rd ranked OL/WR aggregate. 

Let's compare Rodgers to the best QB in the league as far as the help they've got. 

Starting RB, top two receivers, plus starting OL added together and then divided. 

Rodgers (Jones, Adams, Lazard, Linsley, Bakh, Bulaga, Jenkins, Turner) = 72.86
Wilson (Carson, Lockett, Metcalf, Wilson, Brown, Ifedi, Iupati, Fluker, Hunt) = 64.3

So Wilson has a score over 10 points higher than Rodgers, and yet Aaron's starters have an average score of 8 points higher than Wilson's?

Don't try to "gotcha" if your point sucks.  Our receivers and their score is equal to or higher than less-capable quarterbacks playing better than Rodgers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheOnlyThing, Rodgers has a PFF score 1.6 points higher than Derek Carr how can this be?  If I admit that MVS is playing poorly, can you admit Rodgers is not playing as well as he needs to for our offense to be effective, especially considering the talent around him?  With an elite RB, elite WR, and well above average OL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As if Rodgers would throw to OBJ anyway. Why shell out that cash for someone who'll be used as much as MVS is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, YaddaHolla said:

 

 

From a talent stand point, I'd love it.  OBJ's would probably be the most talented WR Rodgers has ever played with.  Saying that though, he's one of the biggest prima-donnas in the NFL and I'm not convinced that he's not gonna want to renegotiate his contract shortly after he finds his new home.  Not sure I'd want to trade what would probably be required given the risk.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I'd love a great pair of WRs, we saw what happened when we paid a ton of money to both QB and 2xWR with Cobb/Nelson. Again why I think we would be far better off targeting a WR early who can be effective for a few years for cheap. 

Share this post


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

Completely agree it would be the ultimate hypocrisy for a poster to cite PFF rankings to support his or her arguments while simultaneously ignoring PFF rankings that do not further his or her arguments.

Along those lines, the PFF rankings through 13 games are quite revealing as to which of the Pack's offensive players are having productive or relatively less productive seasons (unless of course the rankings need to be ignored, collectively):

55.7 Geronimo Allison 

57.5 Robert Tonyan 

58.1 MVS  (Well PFF can’t be correct all the time, right?)

58.2 Jimmy Graham 

62.6 Billy Turner 

64.8 Elgton Jenkins 

65.8 Corey Linsley 

70.2 Marcedes Lewis 

71.6 David Bakhtiari 

73.4 Allen Lazard

75.0 Bryan Bulaga 

75.6 Jamaal Williams                                                                                

80.5 Aaron Rodgers

84.3 Davante Adams

88.1 Aaron Jones

I don't know how anyone looking at these PFF rankings could possibly not conclude that the problem on offense is almost exclusively the QB.

Without looking things up, we tend to see scores as 0-100.  0 being terrible.  100 being outstanding.  And the fact is, you need to look at how the position fares in the entire league when posting things like this.

Last time I looked, which was a few weeks ago, Aaron Jones was leading the league with his rating.  And it was under 90.

When I looked at guards, ours were still looking good compared to others.  64 starting guards in the league.  What's the high score, what's the low score, then....what is the median?  I think ours were both a little ahead of the median.

Just something to consider when looking at PFF scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, our interior line scores comparatively are probably outstanding.  Obviously there are a lot of better individual performances, but to have your guard, center and guard at 64 + and your OTs both above 70 is pretty damn good.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2019 at 9:56 AM, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

Yet we are willing to accept pro day 40 times that are hand held watches?  

You accept the numbers if the same person uses the stop watch.  You and I will get different numbers if we both time players A and B.  But the errors we each make should be the same with both A and B.  Maybe I am more in tune with the sound of the starting gun and start my time closer to accurate, but you have sharper eyes and get a closer call when the finish line is crossed.  

 

But what are we even arguing about anyway? I just have an interest in stopwatches and human error. :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Without looking things up, we tend to see scores as 0-100.  0 being terrible.  100 being outstanding.  And the fact is, you need to look at how the position fares in the entire league when posting things like this.

Last time I looked, which was a few weeks ago, Aaron Jones was leading the league with his rating.  And it was under 90.

When I looked at guards, ours were still looking good compared to others.  64 starting guards in the league.  What's the high score, what's the low score, then....what is the median?  I think ours were both a little ahead of the median.

Just something to consider when looking at PFF scores.

Yep, all ratings/scores need to be considered in context.

For example, perhaps a WRs score looks better because the QB is actually delivering the ball when & where it needs to be delivered and where most QBs cannot deliver it and, conversely, maybe the great WR just makes plays that results in a deceptively high ranking for the QB l better a la AJ Green and Dalton for all those years in Cincy.

It is also true that PFF's rankings indicate that the Packers offense is far from devoid of talent given the scores of Davante Adams, Aaron Jones, and, to a far lesser extent, Allen Lazard.

But while ranking Adams and Jones highly, PFF is also killing Allison at 55.7, MVS at 58.1, and Graham at 58.2. The first two have been the #s 2-3 WRs for the bulk of the season and Graham is the #1 TE. The other TE receiving hope (at least until Sternberger came back) Tonyan has an even worse score at 57.5.

Is Rodgers responsible for the poor PFF rankings of WR 2-3 and the two TE receiving threats?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Yep, all ratings/scores need to be considered in context.

For example, perhaps a WRs score looks better because the QB is actually delivering the ball when & where it needs to be delivered and where most QBs cannot deliver it and, conversely, maybe the great WR just makes plays that results in a deceptively high ranking for the QB l better a la AJ Green and Dalton for all those years in Cincy.

It is also true that PFF's rankings indicate that the Packers offense is far from devoid of talent given the scores of Davante Adams, Aaron Jones, and, to a far lesser extent, Allen Lazard.

But while ranking Adams and Jones highly, PFF is also killing Allison at 55.7, MVS at 58.1, and Graham at 58.2. The first two have been the #s 2-3 WRs for the bulk of the season and Graham is the #1 TE. The other TE receiving hope (at least until Sternberger came back) Tonyan has an even worse score at 57.5.

Is Rodgers responsible for the poor PFF rankings of WR 2-3 and the two TE receiving threats?

 

Concerning WR's...I think that PFF ranks them outside of the QB play.  For example, if they are covered like a blanket, they may get a negative score even if the ball doesn't go their way.

And if the WR wins their route and the ball doesn't go their way?  Positive score.

I know it is tricky.  And far from perfect.

Last time I looked, Lazard had a monster score for run blocking, which is inflating his overall score.  Guessing that is still the case.  Though I do very much like him, don't get me wrong, but that run blocking score was like the second best in the league at WR, so naturally it would inflate his overall score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MVS and Allison's struggles are a combination of things.  Both are fighting the ball in their limited opportunities, you can't have that.  I don't think the scheme is helping Allison one bit.  I also think Rodgers has made some awful throws MVS's way, which have left yards, and points on the field.  

Too bad we don't have a crystal ball.  I would love to have seen Cobb in this offense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Too bad we don't have a crystal ball.  I would love to have seen Cobb in this offense.  

I'd personally rather have Jordy than Cobb.

Edited by MaximusGluteus

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



×