Gman: ...we're going to attack the issue [of LT]

[LinvilleGorge]

19 minutes ago, Black&Blue said:

I think it's a very good website, but I agree with you that PFF is being taken way too seriously. 

I just take it for what it is, a couple of guys' uneducated opinion. At least they attempt to quantify and qualify it, but it's still just the opinion of some fans churched up with some numbers.

[Guest Lasus83]

I just take it for what it is, a couple of guys' uneducated opinion. At least they attempt to quantify and qualify it, but it's still just the opinion of some fans churched up with some numbers.

Lawd... what does that make us?

Sent from my SM-G930P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[AU-panther]

16 minutes ago, Lasus83 said:

Lawd... what does that make us?

Sent from my SM-G930P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

Uneducated opinions of a bunch of guys that just watch Panthers games and during the game just focus on the ball, probably on a network broadcast. :)

At least the PFF guys probably watch all the games and focus on the actual player they are grading.

I'm not saying PFF is perfect but unless you are a coach and have know the play calls its probably the best we have.  Even then the coaches probably just grade the play on their own merits not against the league as a whole.

[LinvilleGorge]

34 minutes ago, Lasus83 said:

Lawd... what does that make us?

Sent from my SM-G930P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

Fans.

[LinvilleGorge]

12 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Uneducated opinions of a bunch of guys that just watch Panthers games and during the game just focus on the ball, probably on a network broadcast. :)

At least the PFF guys probably watch all the games and focus on the actual player they are grading.

I'm not saying PFF is perfect but unless you are a coach and have know the play calls its probably the best we have.  Even then the coaches probably just grade the play on their own merits not against the league as a whole.

My main criticism of PFF is that it's simply impossible to grade players unless you know for certain their assignment.

It looks like that tackle got beat to the outside, but the coaches know the RB was supposed to stay in and chip the DE. He released into his route early. You wouldn't know that without understanding the play called.

Same with a DB. Looks like that CB got beat, but the FS was supposed to be playing over the top but he gambed and tried to jump a route on the TE instead.

QB missed that throw. Oops... WR actually ran the wrong route.

That LB completely whiffed on that running play. Nope, he was playing his gap assignment correctly and if he hadn't, there would've been a huge hole there instead of the one the RB hit.

Without understanding the play call, you can't truly accurately judge a players performance. Especially if you're just a fan. Scouts are going to be able to judge intricacies that we don't even know about much less consider.

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I hope we don't. The guys who run PFF are just a few football fans who are data analysts. They aren't football people.

Actually it's not as simple as that.

http://m.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Cris-Collinsworth-explains-value-of-Pro-Football-Focus-in-evaluating-players-like-Chris-Harris-Jr/24287eb9-0561-44c9-8acf-d3f0e179a47c

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2016/08/20/doc-collinsworth-football-venture/89049586/

 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Actually it's not as simple as that.

http://m.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Cris-Collinsworth-explains-value-of-Pro-Football-Focus-in-evaluating-players-like-Chris-Harris-Jr/24287eb9-0561-44c9-8acf-d3f0e179a47c

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2016/08/20/doc-collinsworth-football-venture/89049586/

 

 

I'm just going off of what the site founder has actually said.

Although we do have a number of other analysts, Ben and I have completed 90 percent of what you see on the current site. I initially estimated that I might need 16 people, each analyzing one game a week, but because Ben gets through so much analysis I now know this estimate was way off.

[AU-panther]

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

My main criticism of PFF is that it's simply impossible to grade players unless you know for certain their assignment.

It looks like that tackle got beat to the outside, but the coaches know the RB was supposed to stay in and chip the DE. He released into his route early. You wouldn't know that without understanding the play called.

Same with a DB. Looks like that CB got beat, but the FS was supposed to be playing over the top but he gambed and tried to jump a route on the TE instead.

QB missed that throw. Oops... WR actually ran the wrong route.

That LB completely whiffed on that running play. Nope, he was playing his gap assignment correctly and if he hadn't, there would've been a huge hole there instead of the one the RB hit.

Without understanding the play call, you can't truly accurately judge a players performance. Especially if you're just a fan. Scouts are going to be able to judge intricacies that we don't even know about much less consider.

I agree that the fact they don't know the play calls is a limiting factor, and said as such earlier, but neither do fans.  I never said PFF was better then coaches but they are probably better then most fans.

I doubt many fans on here take the time to watch a single player on every play, regardless of where the ball is at.  Also they watch all of the players which means you get a rank that is relative to other players.  Fans tend to think in binary terms, player x is great or player x is terrible. 

For example, LT gives up 5 sacks for the season fan thinks he is terrible and "anybody" would be better.  PFF grades the same player and also looks at run blocking and sees how many times the QB held on to the ball too long and how many pressures they gave up.  When it is all said and done maybe that player that the fan thinks "anybody" could replace actually had the 14th best season out of all the LTs in the league.  Hpw many fans really watch all of the games?

Also I like the fact that PFF grades based on what they see and just not stats.  If Cam throws a perfect pass and the receiver lets it go through his hands for an interception PFF can account for that.  Traditional QB ratings would penalize Cam for that.

Like it said earlier, its not perfect but personally I trust it more then most of the random thoughts you hear on message boards.

 

[LinvilleGorge]

I don't completely dismiss PFF, but I do take it with a grain of salt. I certainly don't hold it as the gospel the way a lot of fans seem to.

In terms of opinions on players, I'll take the opinion of the knowledgeable hardcore fans of that team over PFF analysis.

Going into the Super Bowl last year, PFF nailed the fact that Remmers was our glaring weakness on offense. But they completely whiffed on our receiver corps. They had our receiving corps rated #4 in the NFL. If you talked to our knowledgeable fans, all of them would've acknowledge s the weakness of Remmers, but none of them would've tried to argue we had the 4th best WR corps in the league... or even the 10th best for that matter.

Sometimes I think they try to outsmart themselves trying to come up with an analysis that is against the grain.

[top dawg]

17 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I'm just going off of what the site founder has actually said.

Although we do have a number of other analysts, Ben and I have completed 90 percent of what you see on the current site. I initially estimated that I might need 16 people, each analyzing one game a week, but because Ben gets through so much analysis I now know this estimate was way off.

That's more about the story of how they got started. PFF has gone through some evolution. Collinsworth suggests they have two-thirds of the teams as clients, as well as many players and agents. Moreover, they try and do the best they can grading, realizing they aren't necessarily going to be perfect, and they have a policy to not grade plays where assignments are in question. 

I think that it's cool stuff as long as you keep it in perspective. 

 

[AU-panther]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I don't completely dismiss PFF, but I do take it with a grain of salt. I certainly don't hold it as the gospel the way a lot of fans seem to.

In terms of opinions on players, I'll take the opinion of the knowledgeable hardcore fans of that team over PFF analysis.

Going into the Super Bowl last year, PFF nailed the fact that Remmers was our glaring weakness on offense. But they completely whiffed on our receiver corps. They had our receiving corps rated #4 in the NFL. If you talked to our knowledgeable fans, all of them would've acknowledge s the weakness of Remmers, but none of them would've tried to argue we had the 4th best WR corps in the league... or even the 10th best for that matter.

Sometimes I think they try to outsmart themselves trying to come up with an analysis that is against the grain.

Yeah I wouldn't agree with the 4th either, do you happen to have that article I would love to know what metric they used?

 

[top dawg]

PFF's specialty is the individual. Not sure that anyone is taking it that seriously or holding its feet to the fire for more subjective endeavors like grading a unit or team, especially considering chemistry and all the other dynamics involved.

 

[CWORS]

What is Joe Thomas or Joe Staley for a 3rd Alex?

[Guest Lasus83]

Well, I think all this back and forth proves the overall point of:

1. PFF is a very good GUIDE for the fans compared to other available resources

2. Our opinions are limited and often change and forget where they were as little as a season ago.

3. We, the ones here in January spouting off all this nonsense at all hours, are far more Hardcore than the average fan. Read: hear morons on the street and dayum near rage-kill them.

In that vein, I go back to my orriginal comment of: Reiff

Sent from my SM-G930P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app