PFF 2015 free agents

blackangold · 04-18-2015, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

That's right genius. They SHOULD be ignored, as their rating system far more often than not fails to make valid observations of a player. Yet people (like you apparently) continue to buy into it just because. How many Rating services are out there for the NFL? Where else would people go if they wanted that kind of information? Of course it's popular when they have little to no competition.

And because people want to feel like they know everything, they accept what they read without bothering to actually watch the player in question and see if he really lives up to his PFF ranking.

Name me 1 example of how you think it fails to make a valid observation...

I suggest you read this: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

Focus on this section:
"How subjective is the Grading?

Many people say that as soon as you start grading, you bring subjectivity into your work. Obviously, to some degree, that’s true.

However, there’s also subjectivity around whether a play was a QB run for negative yardage or a sack, if an assist on a tackle should be awarded and if a catch was dropped or not. Sure, you can come up with a set of rules to determine which is which, but in the end, at the borderline between one and the other, it’s always subjective. It comes down to a judgment call.

The real trick of grading is to define a clear set of rules, encompassing each type of play. If your rules are thorough and precise enough, the answers just fall out. It becomes as easy as determining the dropped pass that hit the TE right between the numbers.

Statistics in their raw form are considered objective. But in our opinion, with the small number of NFL games played each season, raw stats are very often unintelligent. If a QB throws three interceptions in a game but one came from a dropped pass, another from a WR running a poor route and a third on a Hail Mary at the end of the half, it skews his stats by far too great an amount to be useful. Our grading allows us to bring some intelligence to the raw numbers and with many different sets of eyes getting a look at each game, we’re able to avoid the individual biases that may arise if only one person was responsible for grading the game."

burningmetal · 04-18-2015, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by blackangold

Name me 1 example of how you think it fails to make a valid observation...

I suggest you read this: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

Focus on this section:
"How subjective is the Grading?

Many people say that as soon as you start grading, you bring subjectivity into your work. Obviously, to some degree, that’s true.

However, there’s also subjectivity around whether a play was a QB run for negative yardage or a sack, if an assist on a tackle should be awarded and if a catch was dropped or not. Sure, you can come up with a set of rules to determine which is which, but in the end, at the borderline between one and the other, it’s always subjective. It comes down to a judgment call.

The real trick of grading is to define a clear set of rules, encompassing each type of play. If your rules are thorough and precise enough, the answers just fall out. It becomes as easy as determining the dropped pass that hit the TE right between the numbers.

Statistics in their raw form are considered objective. But in our opinion, with the small number of NFL games played each season, raw stats are very often unintelligent. If a QB throws three interceptions in a game but one came from a dropped pass, another from a WR running a poor route and a third on a Hail Mary at the end of the half, it skews his stats by far too great an amount to be useful. Our grading allows us to bring some intelligence to the raw numbers and with many different sets of eyes getting a look at each game, we’re able to avoid the individual biases that may arise if only one person was responsible for grading the game."

Here's one example for you. A random PFF ranking list from the 2013 season.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...top-to-bottom/

You can go on and on about raw stats and all of that... I know that stats don't tell the whole story, I'm not some football noob. I know if a guy has 100 plus tackles that doesn't tell the story of how many of them are just garbage -pile on at the end of the play- assisted tackles, and it also doesn't tell of missed tackles. I can tell that with my own eyes. Everyone can. Vinny Testeverde is one of the all time leaders in passing yards, but won't ever be a Hall of Famer because people who watched him know that he was just a compiler. He was average at best.

That list above that I gave has some really egregious rankings. Colston makes the list, but no Dez Bryant, as a commenter on the page points out, and Tom Brady (who I hate giving credit, but c'mon) is 90th on that list behind the likes of Drew Brees and Philip Rivers at his own position... neither of those guys have been near the same players the past couple years. Josh Gordon, who blew away the NFL in the 14 games he played that year ranks 74th?

And I'm constantly hearing about how Strief supposedly ranks in the top end of his position, when anyone who has watched him play knows that our tackles are always causing drew to run for his life. Does PFF take into account the amount of sacks he's saved them? You'd think that would be a pretty easy thing to grade, but their rankings don't seem to reflect it.

blackangold · 04-18-2015, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Here's one example for you. A random PFF ranking list from the 2013 season.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...top-to-bottom/

You can go on and on about raw stats and all of that... I know that stats don't tell the whole story, I'm not some football noob. I know if a guy has 100 plus tackles that doesn't tell the story of how many of them are just garbage -pile on at the end of the play- assisted tackles, and it also doesn't tell of missed tackles. I can tell that with my own eyes. Everyone can. Vinny Testeverde is one of the all time leaders in passing yards, but won't ever be a Hall of Famer because people who watched him know that he was just a compiler. He was average at best.

That list above that I gave has some really egregious rankings. Colston makes the list, but no Dez Bryant, as a commenter on the page points out, and Tom Brady (who I hate giving credit, but c'mon) is 90th on that list behind the likes of Drew Brees and Philip Rivers at his own position... neither of those guys have been near the same players the past couple years. Josh Gordon, who blew away the NFL in the 14 games he played that year ranks 74th?

And I'm constantly hearing about how Strief supposedly ranks in the top end of his position, when anyone who has watched him play knows that our tackles are always causing drew to run for his life. Does PFF take into account the amount of sacks he's saved them? You'd think that would be a pretty easy thing to grade, but their rankings don't seem to reflect it.

You completely contradict yourself here. First paragraph you state stats don't tell the whole story, but you point out guys that "blew the league away" not ranking higher than others?

PFF is not a stats based rating site. Three different people watch every game and every player's movement, then they give them a positive, neutral or negative rating on each play.

I can tell by your assertions that you clearly didn't read this in it's entirety: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

The answer to your last sentence in your last paragraph is in the page I linked and it's your choice not to educate yourself.

burningmetal · 04-19-2015, 03:28 AM

Originally Posted by blackangold

You completely contradict yourself here. First paragraph you state stats don't tell the whole story, but you point out guys that "blew the league away" not ranking higher than others?

PFF is not a stats based rating site. Three different people watch every game and every player's movement, then they give them a positive, neutral or negative rating on each play.

I can tell by your assertions that you clearly didn't read this in it's entirety: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

The answer to your last sentence in your last paragraph is in the page I linked and it's your choice not to educate yourself.

How is that a contradiction? I didn't use stats. I said "blew away the league". That's an observation, and one that is undeniable. Are you actually going to sit in your wanna be front office chair and tell me that what Josh Gordon did that year was because of his great QB? Well let's trade Drew to the Texans for Brian Hoyer right now!

I am a very educated person, but thanks for the advice, professor. I Know what a grade is. I know that each play is given an individual grade based on how they view it. It's why I said in an earlier post that you have to use the eyes to tell the difference between garbage stats and players who legitimately produce. I'm looking at the rankings they have given, based on THEIR grades, and I'm calling them ridiculous.

You are telling me that because I don't agree with a ranking that I haven't read or educated myself, when I know exactly how the system works. It's a system that is entirely based on opinion just like yours or mine. Grades are given out based on what these people think. The grades don't match the performance in many cases. You can disagree with that all you want, but don't accuse me of something without first understanding my point. You are getting awfully worked up about something I said that had nothing to do with you.

And if any scouts are using this information, they are pretty useless. It is the job of the scouts to do their own research, not ask somebody else what they think. How many bad decisions are made in the NFL every year, personnel-wise? How has PFF changed anything? It is the choice of each organization on how they will gather information, and how well they interpret what they see on the field. There are good choices and decisions, and there are terrible one's. PFF is just a singular option. It is not the NFL's version of the gospel, which is basically how you are painting it to be, by taking offense to my disagreement.

You seem to have missed the point of my very first post in this thread. It wasn't a question of WHOM uses this information, but WHY do they? Any opinion you want to form on my stance is purely subjective, as is mine. I'm calling it crap based on what I see. Your defense of it is that some teams use it. But what information do you have that says they're giving out good info? I'd bet it's very hit and miss. which is why I say, let's just watch and see what players do, instead of worrying about how PFF grades players. But hey, that's just me. Don't let me ruin your enjoyment.

blackangold · 04-19-2015, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

You seem to have missed the point of my very first post in this thread. It wasn't a question of WHOM uses this information, but WHY do they? Any opinion you want to form on my stance is purely subjective, as is mine. I'm calling it crap based on what I see. Your defense of it is that some teams use it. But what information do you have that says they're giving out good info? I'd bet it's very hit and miss. which is why I say, let's just watch and see what players do, instead of worrying about how PFF grades players. But hey, that's just me. Don't let me ruin your enjoyment.

Of course their rankings are subjective, as is any scouts rating of a player. The key difference with PFF being the rating is from a scouting perspective based on every single play. Normal individuals, unless being paid to do so, will not watch every player through the entirety of the game. Thus, PFF comes into play for those of us that want a more educated opinion of players we don't watch continuously.

You call out PFF ratings of players over Gordon, but did you watch every single snap Gordon took that year, even when it was a running play or he didn't get a pass thrown his way? No, of course you didn't, but 3 people from PFF did and came up with a cumulative rating. Just like your example of Colston and Dez, Colston may not have had the stats Dez did but that doesn't paint the whole picture, and apparently you can't grasp that.

No one is forcing you to look at PFF ratings. No one is claiming them to be perfect, however they are very useful in educating yourself about players you don't watch consistently. In addition, PFF provides some alternative opinions of players you do watch on a consistent basis to avoid your own bais.

To claim they are not useful, or should be ignored is naive.

04-18-2015, 01:45 PM	#1
blackangold 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 3,422	Re: PFF 2015 free agents Originally Posted by burningmetal That's right genius. They SHOULD be ignored, as their rating system far more often than not fails to make valid observations of a player. Yet people (like you apparently) continue to buy into it just because. How many Rating services are out there for the NFL? Where else would people go if they wanted that kind of information? Of course it's popular when they have little to no competition. And because people want to feel like they know everything, they accept what they read without bothering to actually watch the player in question and see if he really lives up to his PFF ranking. Name me 1 example of how you think it fails to make a valid observation... I suggest you read this: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/ Focus on this section: "How subjective is the Grading? Many people say that as soon as you start grading, you bring subjectivity into your work. Obviously, to some degree, that’s true. However, there’s also subjectivity around whether a play was a QB run for negative yardage or a sack, if an assist on a tackle should be awarded and if a catch was dropped or not. Sure, you can come up with a set of rules to determine which is which, but in the end, at the borderline between one and the other, it’s always subjective. It comes down to a judgment call. The real trick of grading is to define a clear set of rules, encompassing each type of play. If your rules are thorough and precise enough, the answers just fall out. It becomes as easy as determining the dropped pass that hit the TE right between the numbers. Statistics in their raw form are considered objective. But in our opinion, with the small number of NFL games played each season, raw stats are very often unintelligent. If a QB throws three interceptions in a game but one came from a dropped pass, another from a WR running a poor route and a third on a Hail Mary at the end of the half, it skews his stats by far too great an amount to be useful. Our grading allows us to bring some intelligence to the raw numbers and with many different sets of eyes getting a look at each game, we’re able to avoid the individual biases that may arise if only one person was responsible for grading the game."

04-18-2015, 10:21 PM	#2
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: PFF 2015 free agents Originally Posted by blackangold Name me 1 example of how you think it fails to make a valid observation... I suggest you read this: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/ Focus on this section: "How subjective is the Grading? Many people say that as soon as you start grading, you bring subjectivity into your work. Obviously, to some degree, that’s true. However, there’s also subjectivity around whether a play was a QB run for negative yardage or a sack, if an assist on a tackle should be awarded and if a catch was dropped or not. Sure, you can come up with a set of rules to determine which is which, but in the end, at the borderline between one and the other, it’s always subjective. It comes down to a judgment call. The real trick of grading is to define a clear set of rules, encompassing each type of play. If your rules are thorough and precise enough, the answers just fall out. It becomes as easy as determining the dropped pass that hit the TE right between the numbers. Statistics in their raw form are considered objective. But in our opinion, with the small number of NFL games played each season, raw stats are very often unintelligent. If a QB throws three interceptions in a game but one came from a dropped pass, another from a WR running a poor route and a third on a Hail Mary at the end of the half, it skews his stats by far too great an amount to be useful. Our grading allows us to bring some intelligence to the raw numbers and with many different sets of eyes getting a look at each game, we’re able to avoid the individual biases that may arise if only one person was responsible for grading the game." Here's one example for you. A random PFF ranking list from the 2013 season. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...top-to-bottom/ You can go on and on about raw stats and all of that... I know that stats don't tell the whole story, I'm not some football noob. I know if a guy has 100 plus tackles that doesn't tell the story of how many of them are just garbage -pile on at the end of the play- assisted tackles, and it also doesn't tell of missed tackles. I can tell that with my own eyes. Everyone can. Vinny Testeverde is one of the all time leaders in passing yards, but won't ever be a Hall of Famer because people who watched him know that he was just a compiler. He was average at best. That list above that I gave has some really egregious rankings. Colston makes the list, but no Dez Bryant, as a commenter on the page points out, and Tom Brady (who I hate giving credit, but c'mon) is 90th on that list behind the likes of Drew Brees and Philip Rivers at his own position... neither of those guys have been near the same players the past couple years. Josh Gordon, who blew away the NFL in the 14 games he played that year ranks 74th? And I'm constantly hearing about how Strief supposedly ranks in the top end of his position, when anyone who has watched him play knows that our tackles are always causing drew to run for his life. Does PFF take into account the amount of sacks he's saved them? You'd think that would be a pretty easy thing to grade, but their rankings don't seem to reflect it.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

04-18-2015, 11:50 PM	#3
blackangold 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 3,422	Re: PFF 2015 free agents Originally Posted by burningmetal Here's one example for you. A random PFF ranking list from the 2013 season. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...top-to-bottom/ You can go on and on about raw stats and all of that... I know that stats don't tell the whole story, I'm not some football noob. I know if a guy has 100 plus tackles that doesn't tell the story of how many of them are just garbage -pile on at the end of the play- assisted tackles, and it also doesn't tell of missed tackles. I can tell that with my own eyes. Everyone can. Vinny Testeverde is one of the all time leaders in passing yards, but won't ever be a Hall of Famer because people who watched him know that he was just a compiler. He was average at best. That list above that I gave has some really egregious rankings. Colston makes the list, but no Dez Bryant, as a commenter on the page points out, and Tom Brady (who I hate giving credit, but c'mon) is 90th on that list behind the likes of Drew Brees and Philip Rivers at his own position... neither of those guys have been near the same players the past couple years. Josh Gordon, who blew away the NFL in the 14 games he played that year ranks 74th? And I'm constantly hearing about how Strief supposedly ranks in the top end of his position, when anyone who has watched him play knows that our tackles are always causing drew to run for his life. Does PFF take into account the amount of sacks he's saved them? You'd think that would be a pretty easy thing to grade, but their rankings don't seem to reflect it. You completely contradict yourself here. First paragraph you state stats don't tell the whole story, but you point out guys that "blew the league away" not ranking higher than others? PFF is not a stats based rating site. Three different people watch every game and every player's movement, then they give them a positive, neutral or negative rating on each play. I can tell by your assertions that you clearly didn't read this in it's entirety: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/ The answer to your last sentence in your last paragraph is in the page I linked and it's your choice not to educate yourself.

04-19-2015, 03:28 AM	#4
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: PFF 2015 free agents Originally Posted by blackangold You completely contradict yourself here. First paragraph you state stats don't tell the whole story, but you point out guys that "blew the league away" not ranking higher than others? PFF is not a stats based rating site. Three different people watch every game and every player's movement, then they give them a positive, neutral or negative rating on each play. I can tell by your assertions that you clearly didn't read this in it's entirety: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/ The answer to your last sentence in your last paragraph is in the page I linked and it's your choice not to educate yourself. How is that a contradiction? I didn't use stats. I said "blew away the league". That's an observation, and one that is undeniable. Are you actually going to sit in your wanna be front office chair and tell me that what Josh Gordon did that year was because of his great QB? Well let's trade Drew to the Texans for Brian Hoyer right now! I am a very educated person, but thanks for the advice, professor. I Know what a grade is. I know that each play is given an individual grade based on how they view it. It's why I said in an earlier post that you have to use the eyes to tell the difference between garbage stats and players who legitimately produce. I'm looking at the rankings they have given, based on THEIR grades, and I'm calling them ridiculous. You are telling me that because I don't agree with a ranking that I haven't read or educated myself, when I know exactly how the system works. It's a system that is entirely based on opinion just like yours or mine. Grades are given out based on what these people think. The grades don't match the performance in many cases. You can disagree with that all you want, but don't accuse me of something without first understanding my point. You are getting awfully worked up about something I said that had nothing to do with you. And if any scouts are using this information, they are pretty useless. It is the job of the scouts to do their own research, not ask somebody else what they think. How many bad decisions are made in the NFL every year, personnel-wise? How has PFF changed anything? It is the choice of each organization on how they will gather information, and how well they interpret what they see on the field. There are good choices and decisions, and there are terrible one's. PFF is just a singular option. It is not the NFL's version of the gospel, which is basically how you are painting it to be, by taking offense to my disagreement. You seem to have missed the point of my very first post in this thread. It wasn't a question of WHOM uses this information, but WHY do they? Any opinion you want to form on my stance is purely subjective, as is mine. I'm calling it crap based on what I see. Your defense of it is that some teams use it. But what information do you have that says they're giving out good info? I'd bet it's very hit and miss. which is why I say, let's just watch and see what players do, instead of worrying about how PFF grades players. But hey, that's just me. Don't let me ruin your enjoyment.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

04-19-2015, 12:19 PM	#5
blackangold 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 3,422	Re: PFF 2015 free agents Originally Posted by burningmetal You seem to have missed the point of my very first post in this thread. It wasn't a question of WHOM uses this information, but WHY do they? Any opinion you want to form on my stance is purely subjective, as is mine. I'm calling it crap based on what I see. Your defense of it is that some teams use it. But what information do you have that says they're giving out good info? I'd bet it's very hit and miss. which is why I say, let's just watch and see what players do, instead of worrying about how PFF grades players. But hey, that's just me. Don't let me ruin your enjoyment. Of course their rankings are subjective, as is any scouts rating of a player. The key difference with PFF being the rating is from a scouting perspective based on every single play. Normal individuals, unless being paid to do so, will not watch every player through the entirety of the game. Thus, PFF comes into play for those of us that want a more educated opinion of players we don't watch continuously. You call out PFF ratings of players over Gordon, but did you watch every single snap Gordon took that year, even when it was a running play or he didn't get a pass thrown his way? No, of course you didn't, but 3 people from PFF did and came up with a cumulative rating. Just like your example of Colston and Dez, Colston may not have had the stats Dez did but that doesn't paint the whole picture, and apparently you can't grasp that. No one is forcing you to look at PFF ratings. No one is claiming them to be perfect, however they are very useful in educating yourself about players you don't watch consistently. In addition, PFF provides some alternative opinions of players you do watch on a consistent basis to avoid your own bais. To claim they are not useful, or should be ignored is naive.