2013 Rotoworld Offensive Line Ratings (Cowboys 27th Overall)

[CF74]

I am still annoyed we didn't draft a 2nd OL in suck a deep draft. A team the prioritizes a 2nd TE behind a hall of famer over fixing a horrendous line deserves to be 27th.

Forget deserves, it's just simply what it is, abysmal...

 

[cowboy_ron]

So rotoworld can rate a unit before the camp battles have even begun..they're awesome

 

[TheCount]

After Winters, there was a huge drop off in talent. I'd rather draft guys who will contribute than a bunch of Arkins.

I'm betting Escobar starts day one. Heck, I'd put money on Escobar being in the game for our first snap of the year.

Defining a starter by whether he's on the field for the first snap is arguing semantics, I think you know what I meant.

Escobar is a fine player, I've got no problem with the kid and I think he'll make plays. I just question our priority, and it's not based off this draft alone. We've consistently rated offensive linemen in rounds lower than they end up going. And often, when we so take a lineman somewhat early, it's a guy out of left field with limited upside.

There have been clear signs that the staff has a very hard time judging offensive line talent over the years and clear signs they don't prioritize them according to a scale the majority of the league utilizes.

I'm greatful we took Fred this year, even if it was early, that's for sure.

 

[Doomsday101]

2013? I did not know they already played the season. Umm. interesting.

 

[Idgit]

How anyone could claim we have the #7 run block ratings when you are 31st in the NFL in Rushing is something to wonder about.

Or even 11th in pass blocking.

None of these so called metrics are worth a bucket of warm spit.

I agree. The variance between those two posted rankings tells you all you need to know about the accuracy of measuring OL play this way.

 

[jterrell]

27th sounds about right.

Only one guy played above average and that was Livings.

A couple guys were close to average: Smith and Cook.

Bern was below average, treading on bad. Free was bad.

It is a 2013 projection.
It would be criminal to take the ratings they offer and turn that into 27 when of the 4 rankings none were lower than 25.

So they are saying we'll be worse than last year....

 

[jterrell]

I am still annoyed we didn't draft a 2nd OL in suck a deep draft. A team the prioritizes a 2nd TE behind a hall of famer over fixing a horrendous line deserves to be 27th.

this didn't turn out to be a deep OL draft.

it was a very heavy draft at the top for OL.

 

[Califan007]

2012 Run Block Rankings: 7 (Pro Football Focus), 22 (Football Outsiders)
2012 Pass Block Rankings: 25 (Pro Football Focus), 11 (Football Outsiders)

Quite a difference in rankings between Pro Football Focus and Football Outsiders lol...

 

[jterrell]

We'll see who's starting and who's not, but immediate starter has nothing to do with my critique. When is Escobar gonna start?

game 1 play 1.

 

[Nation]

It is a 2013 projection.
It would be criminal to take the ratings they offer and turn that into 27 when of the 4 rankings none were lower than 25.

So they are saying we'll be worse than last year....

It's a projected ranking of the quality of each offensive line. They aren't using Football Outsiders or PFF's rankings as their baseline, just as a comparison point.

Football Outsiders pass protection ratings are based on Sacks per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent. Obviously Romo being elusive in the pocket improves their F.O. ranking whereas the Rotoworld rating rightly removes that from consideration.

 

[jterrell]

It's a projected ranking of the quality of each offensive line. They aren't using Football Outsiders or PFF's rankings as their baseline, just as a comparison point.

Football Outsiders pass protection ratings are based on Sacks per pass attempt adjusted for down, distance, and opponent. Obviously Romo being elusive in the pocket improves their F.O. ranking whereas the Rotoworld rating rightly removes that from consideration.

Actually they address that saying the rankings are 'relevant' and 'valued' but they are 'projecting' for 2013.

They are saying Dallas will be worse than last year.
That's pretty silly imho, but it is what they are saying.

---" While PFF and FO's data is relevant and valued, keep in mind the goal of this column is to project the effectiveness of 2013 NFL offensive lines, as opposed to rank them based solely upon what occurred last season."

 

[Nation]

Actually they address that saying the rankings are 'relevant' and 'valued' but they are 'projecting' for 2013.

They are saying Dallas will be worse than last year.
That's pretty silly imho, but it is what they are saying.

---" While PFF and FO's data is relevant and valued, keep in mind the goal of this column is to project the effectiveness of 2013 NFL offensive lines, as opposed to rank them based solely upon what occurred last season."

I think they are suggesting that our PFF & FO rankings from 2012 are inflated, as the actual article calls the line below-average in 2012 with little to no reason to think it made significant gains.

Pro Football Focus does their rankings on a per-play basis, with no adjustment for situation, and grades individually as opposed to the line as a unit. Football Outsiders accounts for things other than the actual offensive line, such as quarterback escapeability. These rankings are an attempt to look at the offensive line in a vacuum.

 

[burmafrd]

I think they are suggesting that our PFF & FO rankings from 2012 are inflated, as the actual article calls the line below-average in 2012 with little to no reason to think it made significant gains.

Pro Football Focus does their rankings on a per-play basis, with no adjustment for situation, and grades individually as opposed to the line as a unit. Football Outsiders accounts for things other than the actual offensive line, such as quarterback escapeability. These rankings are an attempt to look at the offensive line in a vacuum.

and they are both worthless

might as well talk to jerruh about abstinence from alchohol and you would get more out of it

 

[jterrell]

I think they are suggesting that our PFF & FO rankings from 2012 are inflated, as the actual article calls the line below-average in 2012 with little to no reason to think it made significant gains.

Pro Football Focus does their rankings on a per-play basis, with no adjustment for situation, and grades individually as opposed to the line as a unit. Football Outsiders accounts for things other than the actual offensive line, such as quarterback escapeability. These rankings are an attempt to look at the offensive line in a vacuum.

What you are suggesting and what they actually say are clearly two different things.

Not only logically (they provide that data for a reason) but also explicitly (as they state they value the data and that it is relevant to the discussion).

They didn't just rank Dallas. They ranked everyone and Dallas fell out below what they were slotted via metrics last year. They never challenge those metrics AT ALL. You are the one doing that and thus putting words into their mouths.

End of the day this is an insanely early ranking. There are many quality OL still available in FA. Rookies haven't played a snap. We don't have real depth charts yet. So it is what it is and should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

It seems rather silly/odd/questionable to knock PFF/FO then place much emphasis on a gut feeling early projection by rotoworld. I'd say that in fact that may be an agenda talking. For those who believe Dallas had the 27th best OL last year I am going to assert that they didn;t watch much football. 2012 was one of the worst ever years for OLs collectively. Outside the read option guys OLs were flat torched around the league.