PFF Says the likes of Dak Prescott, Marcus Mariota, and Tyrod Taylor + 2 more are better running quarterbacks than Cam

[saints4lifeagain]

1 minute ago, Toomers said:

    Well. You’re on another teams board, which I have no problem with and have shown you that respect many times. But you’re acting like we should just not even disagree with a bogus, subjective opinion piece. How do you think your fellow Saints fans, and yourself, would act if I went on their board and defended someone “disrespecting” Brees. Not dramatic. Just reality. 

I don't have a problem with the disagreeing. I'm simply arguing that it's not bogus, simply because you disagree.

I also don't find it disrespectful. Disrespect would be if it was someones opinion, and they left him off. They use statistics and analytics to come up with their grades. When using numbers, there is no way to disrespect a player. 

Disrespectful would be leaving Brees off of your all time top 30 QB list. Disrespectful would be leaving Cam off of the top 5 running QBs of all time list. Disrespectful is not leaving a player off of a list that you used statistics to come up with a grade for. 

Just for the record, we're on the same page here. There just seems to be a disconnect about how one could come to a grade without Cam on the list. I umderstand that a large number of short yardage carries actually hurts his grade, while making him one of the most prolific running QBs of all time. Some are having trouble with the concept.

[Toomers]

3 minutes ago, saints4lifeagain said:

I don't have a problem with the disagreeing. I'm simply arguing that it's not bogus, simply because you disagree.

I also don't find it disrespectful. Disrespect would be if it was someones opinion, and they left him off. They use statistics and analytics to come up with their grades. When using numbers, there is no way to disrespect a player. 

Disrespectful would be leaving Brees off of your all time top 30 QB list. Disrespectful would be leaving Cam off of the top 5 running QBs of all time list. Disrespectful is not leaving a player off of a list that you used statistics to come up with a grade for. 

Just for the record, we're on the same page here. There just seems to be a disconnect about how one could come to a grade without Cam on the list. I umderstand that a large number of short yardage carries actually hurts his grade, while making him one of the most prolific running QBs of all time. Some are having trouble with the concept.

  So leaving Cam off an all-time list is disrespectful, but leaving him off a list for a year where he was 1st in many categories isn’t. Yes. We have a disconnect. If you want to make up a criteria, which is what PFF did, and always does,  and it leaves the widely recognized best running QB not near the top, there is something wrong with the “formula”.  You have already stated Cam is the best running QB in th NFL. PFF just came up with the only criteria that would drop him that low. Why would anyone give a list like that any credibility? 

[kungfoodude]

21 minutes ago, saints4lifeagain said:

I don't have a problem with the disagreeing. I'm simply arguing that it's not bogus, simply because you disagree.

I also don't find it disrespectful. Disrespect would be if it was someones opinion, and they left him off. They use statistics and analytics to come up with their grades. When using numbers, there is no way to disrespect a player. 

Disrespectful would be leaving Brees off of your all time top 30 QB list. Disrespectful would be leaving Cam off of the top 5 running QBs of all time list. Disrespectful is not leaving a player off of a list that you used statistics to come up with a grade for. 

Just for the record, we're on the same page here. There just seems to be a disconnect about how one could come to a grade without Cam on the list. I umderstand that a large number of short yardage carries actually hurts his grade, while making him one of the most prolific running QBs of all time. Some are having trouble with the concept.

My biggest problem is that people are not even attempting to understand what they are doing with their grading system. That is what is so flabbergasting.

And why does it even matter that he isn't in the top 5 of their grading system? People are inferring a lot of things that the grade really isn't implying.

[saints4lifeagain]

17 minutes ago, Toomers said:

  So leaving Cam off an all-time list is disrespectful, but leaving him off a list for a year where he was 1st in many categories isn’t. Yes. We have a disconnect. If you want to make up a criteria, which is what PFF did, and always does,  and it leaves the widely recognized best running QB not near the top, there is something wrong with the “formula”.  You have already stated Cam is the best running QB in th NFL. PFF just came up with the only criteria that would drop him that low. Why would anyone give a list like that any credibility? 

Idk man. Maybe they sat in a room and figured out a formula that would leave Cam off the top. They must have been looking to discredit him. 

[kungfoodude]

4 minutes ago, saints4lifeagain said:

Idk man. Maybe they sat in a room and figured out a formula that would leave Cam off the top. They must have been looking to discredit him. 

I am half ass considering buying a membership just to post the rest of the list and the lists over time. I bet it would kill this thread in a hurry.

[Toomers]

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

My biggest problem is that people are not even attempting to understand what they are doing with their grading system. That is what is so flabbergasting.

And why does it even matter that he isn't in the top 5 of their grading system? People are inferring a lot of things that the grade really isn't implying.

    Then please explain the grading system that leaves the best running QB completely off a list of top running QBs. Where the article? What’s the criteria? Do tell? I’d love to know the magic math that accomplished this. 

  Why does PFF put out a list of just 5 QBs and nothing else. Where are these “numbers” that led to this analysis. 

[Wyank]

I've tried several times to read that link but in the end just keep coming up with this poo doesn't matter.  Just reads to me as a vague general information on what they do without clarifying specific process on this ranking.  They give a plus or minus for individual performance on each play.  However knowing why they come up with the plus or minus is going to be their own business secret to keep their ranking system their own.  An example is how do they rank Cam's big run against the Vikings.  Some key blocks helped spring him to that big gain.  But at the same time a slow ass QB wouldn't of been able to get downfield in time for those big blocks to open up.  Did they all get the plus 2 or did Cam get a point docked for the big run not being possible without the block downfield.  What did the blocker downfield get?  Would the blocker downfield have the opportunity to even make that play without Cam's running ability getting to that point in the run.  Are scramble runs for positive gain considered a minus if they feel the QB missed an opportunity to pass the ball to an open receiver for a bigger gain than what the QB got for scrambling?  It seems like here is our grade just trust us on how we graded them.

Maybe they show more if you pay for it but I'm not paying for it and i'm fine not using their website.   

[Toomers]

7 minutes ago, saints4lifeagain said:

Idk man. Maybe they sat in a room and figured out a formula that would leave Cam off the top. They must have been looking to discredit him. 

  Ok. I see you ran out of logical reasons. No problem. 

[kungfoodude]

20 minutes ago, Wyank said:

I've tried several times to read that link but in the end just keep coming up with this poo doesn't matter.  Just reads to me as a vague general information on what they do without clarifying specific process on this ranking.  They give a plus or minus for individual performance on each play.  However knowing why they come up with the plus or minus is going to be their own business secret to keep their ranking system their own.  An example is how do they rank Cam's big run against the Vikings.  Some key blocks helped spring him to that big gain.  But at the same time a slow ass QB wouldn't of been able to get downfield in time for those big blocks to open up.  Did they all get the plus 2 or did Cam get a point docked for the big run not being possible without the block downfield.  What did the blocker downfield get?  Would the blocker downfield have the opportunity to even make that play without Cam's running ability getting to that point in the run.  Are scramble runs for positive gain considered a minus if they feel the QB missed an opportunity to pass the ball to an open receiver for a bigger gain than what the QB got for scrambling?  It seems like here is our grade just trust us on how we graded them.

Maybe they show more if you pay for it but I'm not paying for it and i'm fine not using their website.   

Yeah, that is what I have been saying this whole thread. They took classic scouting(always subjective) and are attempting to quantify it. They explain the rough outline of their system, which seems pretty logical but they don't delve into specifics for obvious reasons. We don't know if there is a grading standard or outline, if they have easily and readily defined criteria, or how stringent their oversight or third party reviews are. A lot of this we aren't going to know. It's gymnastics and figure skating judging for football players. It's also the basis for rankings for sports teams. Those are all subjective. Just because something is subjective doesn't mean it is valueless. It just means there is room for argument(clearly), whereas if you are arguing pure statistics, you just might end up looking dumb.

And, yeah, they post those graphics to drum up business. "Oh that's interesting! I would like to know more!" *paywall*

[saints4lifeagain]

21 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am half ass considering buying a membership just to post the rest of the list and the lists over time. I bet it would kill this thread in a hurry.

I've got the Elite subscription.

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, saints4lifeagain said:

I've got the Elite subscription.

Okay. Can you post the top 10 QB Run Grades for 2017? Actually, post it from 2013 to 2017. 

I am going put some of that side by side with some other rushing stats.

[Wyank]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, that is what I have been saying this whole thread. They took classic scouting(always subjective) and are attempting to quantify it. They explain the rough outline of their system, which seems pretty logical but they don't delve into specifics for obvious reasons. We don't know if there is a grading standard or outline, if they have easily and readily defined criteria, or how stringent their oversight or third party reviews are. A lot of this we aren't going to know. It's gymnastics and figure skating judging for football players. It's also the basis for rankings for sports teams. Those are all subjective. Just because something is subjective doesn't mean it is valueless. It just means there is room for argument(clearly), whereas if you are arguing pure statistics, you just might end up looking dumb.

And, yeah, they post those graphics to drum up business. "Oh that's interesting! I would like to know more!" *paywall*

I feel like Cam would be hard to grade with a standard system.  Cam's play is a pretty unique playstyle even for QBs that have great running ability.  I don't think he would grade out well for a standard made for QBs.  Doesn't mean he isn't an asset on the field for the Panthers and the Panthers are not screwed with their current QBs on the roster when a QB not named Cam steps on the field 

[kungfoodude]

6 minutes ago, Wyank said:

I feel like Cam would be hard to grade with a standard system.  Cam's play is a pretty unique playstyle even for QBs that have great running ability.  I don't think he would grade out well for a standard made for QBs.  Doesn't mean he isn't an asset on the field for the Panthers and the Panthers are not screwed with their current QBs on the roster when a QB not named Cam steps on the field 

That's kind of what I have been getting at. Cam might not do well in this system because we rely TOO heavily on his running ability and utilize him on designed runs much more than the rest of those QB's. If I had to wager, the rest of those guys would be more efficient and capable of sustaining a high level of "graded" plays for longer periods than Cam just because of the way we use him. Sort of like how JuJu Smith Schuster has such a high DVOA and QB Rating(referenced earlier in this thread) versus Antonio Brown. JuJu has higher efficiency numbers because in the lesser amount of opportunities, he has performed at a statistically high level. That doesn't mean he is a better receiver than Antonio Brown, however.

The PFF list is their top 5 "graded" running QB's. That doesn't mean he isn't the most dangerous running threat in football from that position, which he is. 

[saints4lifeagain]

12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Okay. Can you post the top 10 QB Run Grades for 2017? Actually, post it from 2013 to 2017. 

I am going put some of that side by side with some other rushing stats.

I can't pull up their actual grade, beyond this year. That's their cumulative grades for the year, all sorted by run grade. This is the grades for 2017, sorted by run as well.