3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Production is more important than the passes.  An accurate pass in a tight window short of the sticks is an issue if a better qb would have hit the WR wide open downfield for a TD that wasn’t noticed.

This has nothing to do with Hurts, Allen, or Mahomes.  Baseball players may get scouted off quality swings and good contact…but when evaluating how stars are playing at the highest level, it’s real production that counts.  Hits, slugging, HRs, RBI, etc.  Grading good throw vs bad throw to rank qbs is just isolating one part of the job.  

 

 The decision is factored into their grades.

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Do they then look at the entire play and see the other wide open receivers on those dropped passes.  Just because a pass is dropped does not mean it is a good play, there may have been a better play to make.

yes

Just now, downundermike said:

Do they then look at the entire play and see the other wide open receivers on those dropped passes.  Just because a pass is dropped does not mean it is a good play, there may have been a better play to make.

That’s exactly what they do.  Grade every player on every play in every game regardless of where the play goes or how it turns out.  It’s not always correct and often counter-intuitive but it’s interesting and the NFL analytic teams pay close attention.

https://www.pff.com/grades

2 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

yes

 

Just now, Hawkeye said:

That’s exactly what they do.  Grade every player on every play in every game regardless of where the play goes or how it turns out.  It’s not always correct and often counter-intuitive but it’s interesting and the NFL analytic teams pay close attention.

https://www.pff.com/grades

So someone said screens or shovel passes or something are not accounted for.  How does PFF know the original play call, and that the QB audibles into the shovel pass which resulted in a a TD, and then by their metric is penalized for it.

I can’t wait for Tua to have led that epic comeback and throw 6 TD’s just to be ranked 11th by PFF.

PFFs grades feel, to me, like valuing launch angle over HR total to argue who the better major league power hitter is.

You want to use it to break down prospects or evaluate trends in pros, fine…but once you are at the highest level, there is no substitute for production, IMO.  I care less about how throws grade and more about how many yards and points they are racking up.  

5 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

They aren't grading outcome. Obviously you missed the 7 or 8 posts where I stated this including the two with the link that explains their grading system thoroughly. & other QBs made throws that cumulatively received higher grades. That's all. 

QB rating was great back in the '80s when there was no Sunday Ticket, All 22, internet, NFL Network, etc... and you had to wait until Monday to get your stats from the newspaper. But times have changed, old man. We have new technology and new resources and we can evaluate players in different ways. But if it helps, we can wait until tomorrow morning to discus this after you've had time to read your paper. 

If your new way is working out of assumptions and human error then knock yourself out bud. Be happy with some guy telling you what is a good or bad play. Don’t trust your eyes! Just follow the PFF BSmeter. 

6 minutes ago, Hawkeye said:

That’s exactly what they do.  Grade every player on every play in every game regardless of where the play goes or how it turns out.  It’s not always correct and often counter-intuitive but it’s interesting and the NFL analytic teams pay close attention.

https://www.pff.com/grades

This is why it’s a flawed system yet some put it on a pedestal like it’s gospel. It is a system based on a grading scale created by them evaluated by them. It clearly has far too many human intangibles for it to be considered gold standard for evaluating players. 

Let’s move away from QB and look at DE.

Graham and Barnett typically grade somewhere in between Reggie White and JJ Watt on PFF.  I know everyone loves BG because of his personality, longevity, and strip sack of Brady…but cmon.  Neither one of them have ever been a force.  
 

Eagles DEs have long since used a playing style that favored some glitch in the PFF edge rusher system.  Without subscribing or going back to check, it feels like we’ve had 2 in the top 5 every year forever.  And our edge rush has NEVER reflected that.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

PFFs grades feel, to me, like valuing launch angle over HR total to argue who the better major league power hitter is.

You want to use it to break down prospects or evaluate trends in pros, fine…but once you are at the highest level, there is no substitute for production, IMO.  I care less about how throws grade and more about how many yards and points they are racking up.  

I think all the different ways to evaluate QBs are fine. QB rating and QBR evaluate the player based on the outcome. PFF eliminates the outcome to evaluate just what the player is responsible for. What I don't understand is why this bothers some people so much. Are they afraid PFF is going to disprove a claim or opinion they shared about a player? 

 

I'm not going to sit here and argue that any of the existing systems are perfect. But they are all relevant, IMO, to discussion. 

5 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

PFFs grades feel, to me, like valuing launch angle over HR total to argue who the better major league power hitter is.

You want to use it to break down prospects or evaluate trends in pros, fine…but once you are at the highest level, there is no substitute for production, IMO.  I care less about how throws grade and more about how many yards and points they are racking up.  

In that case, Jalen Hurts is 7-2 in his last 9 starts.  Hard to be more productive than that.  Should he get a 5 year, $200 million dollar contract based on that productivity? 

2 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

This is why it’s a flawed system yet some put it on a pedestal like it’s gospel. It is a system based on a grading scale created by them evaluated by them. It clearly has far too many human intangibles for it to be considered gold standard for evaluating players. 

I don’t consider it the gold standard but I do think the analysis is insightful on many levels.  And again, NFL analytics departments use their data and then some to make critical evaluations of players so whether we appreciate it or not, it’s part of the picture. 

1 minute ago, Hawkeye said:

In that case, Jalen Hurts is 7-2 in his last 9 starts.  Hard to be more productive than that.  Should he get a 5 year, $200 million dollar contract based on that productivity? 

I think PFF should give him a major ding for beating a Washington QB who was bagging groceries or something two weeks earlier.

Just now, brkmsn said:

I think all the different ways to evaluate QBs are fine. QB rating and QBR evaluate the player based on the outcome. PFF eliminates the outcome to evaluate just what the player is responsible for. What I don't understand is why this bothers some people so much. Are they afraid PFF is going to disprove a claim or opinion they shared about a player? 

 

I'm not going to sit here and argue that any of the existing systems are perfect. But they are all relevant, IMO, to discussion. 

That’s fine.  Qb is the most important position in sports, yet also one of the most dependent ones.  
 

I can understand the desire to neutralize OL and wr across qbs by looking at good reads and throws.  But we are looking at very few throws per game, per season.  If a qb runs for his life all game, has no good throws to make, and aces the 2-3 chances he gets, then he’ll probably grade very highly.  While he may have excuses, that’s no substitute for actually producing, IMO.

3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Let’s move away from QB and look at DE.

Graham and Barnett typically grade somewhere in between Reggie White and JJ Watt on PFF.  I know everyone loves BG because of his personality, longevity, and strip sack of Brady…but cmon.  Neither one of them have ever been a force.  
 

Eagles DEs have long since used a playing style that favored some glitch in the PFF edge rusher system.  Without subscribing or going back to check, it feels like we’ve had 2 in the top 5 every year forever.  And our edge rush has NEVER reflected that.

Graham has been rated high (2020 I believe). Barnett has had games where he received good grades, but I don't recall him ever having a high "season" grade or rating. Again, they are rating individual performance. You know as well as I do that's it's been some time since we've had a reliable secondary that has helped sacks get home. I disagree with the "2 in the top 5" claim. We have not had that or anything close (at DE).

5 minutes ago, Hawkeye said:

In that case, Jalen Hurts is 7-2 in his last 9 starts.  Hard to be more productive than that.  Should he get a 5 year, $200 million dollar contract based on that productivity? 

Yes.  Wins are the ultimate production.  Of course, drawing the line at 9 starts is awfully arbitrary.  
 

If a qb has a massive winning percentage, but does it like Hurts/Lamar, they are still going to get a huge contract based on that productivity.

Would I like it?  No.

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

That’s fine.  Qb is the most important position in sports, yet also one of the most dependent ones.  
 

I can understand the desire to neutralize OL and wr across qbs by looking at good reads and throws.  But we are looking at very few throws per game, per season.  If a qb runs for his life all game, has no good throws to make, and aces the 2-3 chances he gets, then he’ll probably grade very highly.  While he may have excuses, that’s no substitute for actually producing, IMO.

QB rating and QBR would also be incredibly high for a QB with success on limited throws, right?

Packers up 17-7, that pass doesn’t count though, was a shovel pass

3 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Graham has been rated high (2020 I believe). Barnett has had games where he received good grades, but I don't recall him ever having a high "season" grade or rating. Again, they are rating individual performance. You know as well as I do that's it's been some time since we've had a reliable secondary that has helped sacks get home. I disagree with the "2 in the top 5" claim. We have not had that or anything close (at DE).

This is the second defensive coordinator in a row that gives a ridiculous cushion to the receivers. It was posted in the blog and it stated that there is no pass rush in the world that will get home giving that kind of cushion too receivers. We have the secondary this year and we still play off to far.

8 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Yes.  Wins are the ultimate production.  Of course, drawing the line at 9 starts is awfully arbitrary.  
 

If a qb has a massive winning percentage, but does it like Hurts/Lamar, they are still going to get a huge contract based on that productivity.

Would I like it?  No.

Halfway through last season when the Eagles figured out what they wanted to be offensively.  

Arbitrary but fair all things considered. 

My overarching point is that teams use multiple data points to make important personnel decisions and PFF data is part of the discussion. 

31 minutes ago, Hawkeye said:

Halfway through last season when the Eagles figured out what they wanted to be offensively.  

Arbitrary but fair all things considered. 

My overarching point is that teams use multiple data points to make important personnel decisions and PFF data is part of the discussion. 

You mean when the Eagles found out they had to run their offense reflecting the reality that their QB can't pass...

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

You mean when the Eagles found out they had to run their offense reflecting the reality that their QB can't pass...

Nevertheless…

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

Yes.  Wins are the ultimate production.  Of course, drawing the line at 9 starts is awfully arbitrary.  
 

If a qb has a massive winning percentage, but does it like Hurts/Lamar, they are still going to get a huge contract based on that productivity.

Would I like it?  No.

I think points vs quality opponents is a major measure for a QB.  Nearly every QB has flaws. Hurts certainly does. I do think his flaws get treated especially harshly here.  QBs who take bad sacks and commit turnovers don’t seem to get the same level of venom because somehow their style is seen as more desirable.  In any case Hurts hasn’t done well against good teams previously. If he does then I’ll view continued mechanics talk as hate and if he doesn’t do well then I won’t be buying excuses either

7 hours ago, Hawkeye said:

I don’t consider it the gold standard but I do think the analysis is insightful on many levels.  And again, NFL analytics departments use their data and then some to make critical evaluations of players so whether we appreciate it or not, it’s part of the picture. 

The PFF style is based on individuals looking at a play and making a judgment call on what is good or bad. It’s like an umpire calling balls and strikes. Different evaluators bring different viewpoints to the same scenarios. There is a far greater chance of human error than people want to admit.

2 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

The PFF style is based on individuals looking at a play and making a judgment call on what is good or bad. It’s like an umpire calling balls and strikes. Different evaluators bring different viewpoints to the same scenarios. There is a far greater chance of human error than people want to admit.

It's analytics. It's no different than: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34536376/2022-nfl-pass-rushing-run-stopping-blocking-leaderboard-win-rate-rankings-top-players-teams,

When you put a product out there, it has to be desirable if you want people to use it. If PFF and ESPN are just making crap up, they wouldn't have customers or repeat customers. It's in their best interest to be as accurate as possible. There would be no benefit to bias either --- for them or the players / teams. 

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

It's analytics. It's no different than: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34536376/2022-nfl-pass-rushing-run-stopping-blocking-leaderboard-win-rate-rankings-top-players-teams,

When you put a product out there, it has to be desirable if you want people to use it. If PFF and ESPN are just making crap up, they wouldn't have customers or repeat customers. It's in their best interest to be as accurate as possible. There would be no benefit to bias either --- for them or the players / teams. 

It's an entertainment product not a professional one.  It's in their interest to get as much attention as possible. Like the NFL top 100 list. That said I don't think they are doing that they just have college kids & interns watching tape I think (at least the used to).  It's all very subjective as the graders don't even know the assignment during the play