Jump to content

We got the worst rated draft from PFF


Recommended Posts

I think that PFF is a valuable tool but it definitely has its flaws. Those are made more obvious in college where things like spread offenses and triple options, etc. completely change what is considered successful for a play in terms of coverage, blocking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Kayoh said:

 

To be fair, Will Mo would've been amazing as the SS in this system if he'd been able to keep healthy. Hopefully Neal stays healthy. Also worth noting Neal is better in coverage than Moore ever was, and I'd argue he's a more explosive athlete as well. Better first step acceleration.

Not sure about amazing, because he was just plain bad in coverage. I think he would have been pretty good at the inside the box stuff, but we already knew that. I still think even without the health issues that spot could've used an upgrade...this isn't cover 2 so it's not life or death but the dude still would be in coverage at some points and I think other offenses would've exploited that. Kind of like they're exploiting Worrislow now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Kayoh said:

 

To be fair, Will Mo would've been amazing as the SS in this system if he'd been able to keep healthy. Hopefully Neal stays healthy. Also worth noting Neal is better in coverage than Moore ever was, and I'd argue he's a more explosive athlete as well. Better first step acceleration.

I definitely agree with this. Moore was a big hitter but never appeared to be as aggressive or sudden as Neal is, from what I can tell. Neal gets to top speed in an instant and you can see him getting ready to strike. Like a ******* cobra. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JeffAtl said:

PFF tries to bring baseball Sabermetrics to football, but unfortunately they don't have a required expertise in statistics nor grading football performances.

The PFF guys try to analyze film, but they really don't know what the responsibilities of the individual players were.  

 

I understand this argument each and every time it's made. In the particular discussion we're having, however, it's irrelevant. Nobody needs to understand assignments to evaluate whether a player fails to make a tackle or not. And that's the area where PFF dislikes the players we've drafted. This one is finite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AndySG said:

I think that PFF is a valuable tool but it definitely has its flaws. Those are made more obvious in college where things like spread offenses and triple options, etc. completely change what is considered successful for a play in terms of coverage, blocking. 

I agree with Kayoh and you that their college evaluations have plenty of room for growth. They're on the ground floor with this, and what they're discovering is that it's much easier to evaluate 16 games a week in the NFL (at most) than 250 college games, at least 100 of which have viable NFL draft candidates each week. Kayoh's point is well taken that the pure PFF grade currently does a poor job of reflecting NFL prospect talent. It's the same issue all scouting evaluation struggles to address. Which is more important, natural ability or on-field performance? The truth lies somewhere in the middle most of the time although the wildly talented player with little college impact can excel (see: Dontari Poe) as can the proven college athlete with questionable measurables (Geno Atkins/Aaron Donald).

As to Kayoh's point about PFF changing under Collinsworth, I must admit I rarely lead their articles. As a webmaster of old, clickbait is something I despise, and they are guilty of that too often. I absolutely love their stats and will miss them this year, though. In fact, I keep thinking about offering to write for them simply because I want to maintain access to that data, which I consider invaluable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Knight of God said:

Never liked PFF. It's fantasy crap. The caveat is, some of you mad guys..would be defending the crap out of them had they be saying it was an A

Actually I would be more concerned if they gave us an A

Edited by citsalp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jidady said:

The truth lies somewhere in the middle most of the time although the wildly talented player with little college impact can excel (see: Dontari Poe) as can the proven college athlete with questionable measurables (Geno Atkins/Aaron Donald).

I agree with everything in your post but this.

Geno Atkins and Aaron Donald are freak athletes. Donald moreso than Atkins, but both guys are freaky. Geno at 6'1.375" 293 ran 4.85 with a 1.75 10 split, did 34 reps, 33" vert, 9'9" broad, and a 7.33 3 cone. Those are all very impressive numbers; he would've been the 2nd best athlete in this year's DL class behind Justin Zimmer. Donald at 6'0.75" ran 4.69 with a 1.63 10 split, did 35 reps, 32" vert, 9'8" broad, and a 7.11 3 cone. These guys are freaks no matter how you look at it. Poe is freaky too without a doubt, but ya can't act like Geno or Donald were just short, slow, unathletic globs either. :P

1 hour ago, FentayeJones said:

PFF just posted an article saying Derrick Henry - the Heisman Trophy winner was the 8th worst pick in the draft. On what planet is Derrick Henry going to a Mularky offense that's predicated on power running a bad pick?

PFF's system basically punishes volume. The more chances you have to screw up, the lower your grade is probably gonna be. PFF doesn't care what you can do at your best, they have a hard cap on their grades. PFF's grades measure consistency. How many snaps can you go without screwing up? How many more good plays do you have than bad plays? They don't concern themselves with upside, they care exclusively about players not screwing up. According to them, Derrick Henry is too easy to bring down in space, isn't a good enough receiver, and is only going to be a backup in Tennessee because of Demarco Murray. What they don't realize is that Henry is probably the single most difficult back to stop in this class, in the sense that even if you do bring him down he's gaining 2-3 yards on his way to the ground because he's always falling forward. If Tennessee's scheme is built around Mariota's skillset, we're looking at a lot of read option, which puts the RB one on one with safeties a lot of the time. I don't know how many safeties are going to bring Derrick Henry down one on one. I know our new starting safety pulled that feat off, but again, PFF doesn't care about what you can do, they care about what bad stuff you don't do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kayoh said:

I agree with everything in your post but this.

Geno Atkins and Aaron Donald are freak athletes. Poe is freaky too without a doubt, but ya can't act like Geno or Donald were just short, slow, unathletic globs either. :P

 

I said measurables, not athletic ability. As you may recall, I was a strong advocate of Donald throughout his college career and stated multiple times here that the devaluing of him due to his height is exactly the sort of mistake I despise in the NFL Draft. Evaluators ignore game film too much and focus on less important stuff such as height and hand size. That's why I admire what PFF is trying to accomplish. They're grading every play from every performer, trying to identify players who might otherwise slip through the cracks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jidady said:

I said measurables, not athletic ability. As you may recall, I was a strong advocate of Donald throughout his college career and stated multiple times here that the devaluing of him due to his height is exactly the sort of mistake I despise in the NFL Draft. Evaluators ignore game film too much and focus on less important stuff such as height and hand size. That's why I admire what PFF is trying to accomplish. They're grading every play from every performer, trying to identify players who might otherwise slip through the cracks.

I think if you get me in a room with my algorithms and formulas regarding measurables with the PFF guys who only care about tape, and we could put together a pretty **** impressive big board together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, jidady said:

That's why I admire what PFF is trying to accomplish. They're grading every play from every performer

Bad data is far worse than no data, however.  

Even in baseball where it is much easier to determine player responsibilities and eliminate confounding variables such as teamwork, the Sabermetrics analysis still struggles most with defense.

I'm curious, you've mentioned before that find the PFF analysis to be irreplaceable; what specifically do you find valuable?

 

 

 

 

Edited by JeffAtl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These grades are completely pointless. Kiper gave the 2011 Seattle Seahawks class a D-. He's been doing this "draft analysis" thing for a long time, I think you'd agree. However, that was the draft that they put together "The Legion of Boom". He recently came back and re-graded them to a B-. Just goes to show, anyone can do this "draft grading" job. So I give the Atlanta Falcons an "S", because I want to. Rise Up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Kayoh said:

I think if you get me in a room with my algorithms and formulas regarding measurables with the PFF guys who only care about tape, and we could put together a pretty **** impressive big board together.

 

This is precisely why I keep debating whether I should advocate for a job with them. I was one of the first data acquisition folks on the net, albeit in movie box office, and I'd love to help them evolve into what I expect they'll eventually become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, JeffAtl said:

Bad data is far worse than no data, however.  

Even in baseball where it is much easier to determine player responsibilities and eliminate confounding variables such as teamwork, the Sabermetrics analysis still struggles most with defense.

I'm curious, you've mentioned before that find the PFF analysis to be irreplaceable; what specifically do you find valuable?

With regards to the bad data thing, that's not at all applicable here. There's nothing but upside to a team of film evaluators determining what percentage of tackles a player misses. If anything, it's disgraceful that we haven't been doing this since the inception of the internet.

 

I find the post-game grading of individual players a stat lover's dream. I don't have the time to go through and grade film for each game every week, but I do watch more than just the ball during the game. I love the chess match elements of NFL strategy. Where PFF aids me in establishing whether my preconceived notions have a basis in reality.

One of the aspects of Moneyball that always resonated with me is that sometimes people want to believe something so much that they'll ignore reality to do so. Something else I took away from the book that I'm not even sure Michael Lewis appreciates is that the best player Oakland drafted that year, Nick Swisher, was the one that the scouts *and* the metrics guys agreed would be great. There's a wealth of information hidden in that one statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...