Offensive Line Ratings from the Giants game...

[Tabascocat]

That +2/-2 stuff is PER PLAY.

The final game grade can (and is many times) greater than +2.0 or less than -2.0

That equates to Bernie sucking twice over!

 

[ufcrules1]

OK, here's some info...

3) How Do We Grade?
Each grade given is between +2 and -2, with 0.5 increments and an average of 0. A positive intervention in the game rates a positive grading and vice-versa. Very (very) few performances draw a +/-2 rating. In fact, the distribution of non-zero grades is like this:
.
+2.00.01percent
+1.50.3percent
+1.016percent
+0.537percent (unbalanced because of the way WRs and HBs are rated)
-0.524percent
-1.022percent
-1.50.5percent
-2.00.01percent
.
The grading takes into account many things and effectively brings “intelligence” to raw statistics.
.
For example, a raw stat might tell you a tackle conceded a sack. However, how long did he protect the QB for before he gave it up? Additionally, when did he give it up? If it was within the last two minutes on a potentially game-tying drive, it may be rather more important than when his team is running out the clock in a 30-point blowout.
.
The average grade, or what we would typically expect of the average player, is therefore defined as zero. In reality, the vast majority of grades on each individual play are zero and what we are grading are the exceptions to this.
.
A seal block on the backside of a play, for example, is something that it is reasonable to expect to be completed successfully. Consequently, it receives a zero grade, whereas the differentiation between a good and poor block is a heavy downgrade for a failed seal block to the backside of a running play.

Ah.. thank you. Now we finally have some context to work with!

 

[BlindFaith]

That +2/-2 stuff is PER PLAY.

The final game grade can (and is many times) greater than +2.0 or less than -2.0

What difference does it make if its per play? If the end rating is based on an average of the scores from each play, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the majority of individual grades are close to the average? If Free, and 13 other players had a total game rating of over +2, wouldn't that mean that there were a majority of individual plays resulting in a score of over +2, thereby invalidating what you just said?

Nonsense I say, nonsense.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

What difference does it make if its per play? If the end rating is based on an average of the scores from each play, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the majority of individual grades are close to the average? If Free, and 13 other players had a total game rating of over +2, wouldn't that mean that there were a majority of individual plays resulting in a score of over +2, thereby invalidating what you just said?

Nonsense I say, nonsense.

Huh? All it would take would be to stack several outstanding efforts together or (several underwhelming ones) to exceed the +2.0/-2.0 threshold.

 

[BlindFaith]

Huh? All it would take would be to stack several outstanding efforts together or (several underwhelming ones) to exceed the +2.0/-2.0 threshold.

Huh is right. So what are you saying? +2 per play is rare or +2 per game is rare?

Stacking several outstanding per play efforts together, sounds like to me, is what you said was rare.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Huh is right. So what are you saying? +2 per play is rare or +2 per game is rare?

Stacking several outstanding per play efforts together, sounds like to me, is what you said was rare.

This...

Each grade given is between +2 and -2, with 0.5 increments and an average of 0. A positive intervention in the game rates a positive grading and vice-versa. Very (very) few performances draw a +/-2 rating. In fact, the distribution of non-zero grades is like this:
.
+2.00.01percent
+1.50.3percent
+1.016percent
+0.537percent (unbalanced because of the way WRs and HBs are rated)
-0.524percent
-1.022percent
-1.50.5percent
-2.00.01percent
.
The grading takes into account many things and effectively brings “intelligence” to raw statistics.

Applies to each play... not to the overall grade for the game.

 

[BlindFaith]

This...

...is nonsense.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

...is nonsense.

Then quit posting in this thread if it's not your cup of tea.

 

[Rack]

From Profootballfocus.com (you can subscribe yourself for $26.99)

Smith +0.3
Leary -2.0
Frederick -0.5
Bernadau -4.5
Free +2.3

No surprises to me... I thought Free played a heck of a game.

Proof that PFF's OL numbers are USELESS>

NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE played better than Smith.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Proof that PFF's OL numbers are USELESS>

NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE played better than Smith.

OK.

 

[Texas_Pete]

From Profootballfocus.com (you can subscribe yourself for $26.99)

Smith +0.3
Leary -2.0
Frederick -0.5
Bernadau -4.5
Free +2.3

No surprises to me... I thought Free played a heck of a game.

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. Especially Bern having a -4.5. Bern almost got Romo killed on a few occasions. Even though he was only sacked (officially) once, but he was hit and/or knocked down at least a dozen times. That's gotta stop or Romo won't make it to week 10. Bern is an inconsistent liability out there.

I think PFF got it right, but what's your take on the below from the mothership?

I know the Cowboys want Waters to play but if he’s not ready, did Bernadeau do well enough to get by another week?

Broaddus: The eyeball test would have you believe that Mackenzy Bernadeau did not play all that well against the Giants, but that wasn’t the case at all. The film actually told a different story, and if he had to start another week, that would not be an issue. The Chiefs play a 3-4 front, so he will be uncovered the majority of the game. This offense will need his bulk to help Travis Frederick with Dontari Poe, who can be a load inside.

LINK

Seems to be a spin job by Broaddus, but then again, I'm not a scout. I still hope BW is ready to play v. KC.

 

[CowboyDiver]

Proof that PFF's OL numbers are USELESS>

NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE played better than Smith.

It is interesting to say the least....Smith was the best by far and has the toughest assignment. Free played well as did Frederick. I'd have rated Berny worse. Surprised that Free is as high considering we couldn't run at all to the right.

 

[CowboyDiver]

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. Especially Bern having a -4.5. Bern almost got Romo killed on a few occasions. Even though he was only sacked (officially) once, but he was hit and/or knocked down at least a dozen times. That's gotta stop or Romo won't make it to week 10. Bern is an inconsistent liability out there.

I think PFF got it right, but what's your take on the below from the mothership?

LINK

Seems to be a spin job by Broaddus, but then again, I'm not a scout. I still hope BW is ready to play v. KC.

There is no way you could watch the film and think Berny was better than your initial impression.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

What difference does it make if its per play? If the end rating is based on an average of the scores from each play, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the majority of individual grades are close to the average? If Free, and 13 other players had a total game rating of over +2, wouldn't that mean that there were a majority of individual plays resulting in a score of over +2, thereby invalidating what you just said?

Nonsense I say, nonsense.

The grades are cumulative. For example if Frederick scored a .5 on one play, and a 1 on the other and then left the game, his score would be a 1.5, not a .75.

 

[honyock]

That +2/-2 stuff is PER PLAY.

The final game grade can (and is many times) greater than +2.0 or less than -2.0

That makes more sense. I thought I had seen game scores higher and lower than +/-2 in the past.

 

[Zekeats]

Free let up a sack, and Tyron didn't, so why is Free rated two whole points higher, which also seems like a lot with the grading system?

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Free let up a sack, and Tyron didn't, so why is Free rated two whole points higher, which also seems like a lot with the grading system?

Smith had a false start and a holding I think, and the sack he gave up, it may have been "decided" that Romo held the ball too long, not sure really don't remember the play. But again, penalties are a big minus.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

This is copyrighted stuff from PFF, we can't post everything. If you want deeper info, I would greatly suggest spending the $26.99 and subscribing to their site.

So you think it's ok to post the actual grades but not what they mean?

Great thread.

 

[newlander]

From Profootballfocus.com (you can subscribe yourself for $26.99)

Smith +0.3
Leary -2.0
Frederick -0.5
Bernadau -4.5
Free +2.3

No surprises to me... I thought Free played a heck of a game.

WOW....I haven't re-watched it yet (will try tonight) but it was obvious Smith played real well. Then I would've picked Frederick and THEN Free.....man.....I will keep an eye on Doug when I re watch it. That's great news.

 

[perrykemp]

So you think it's ok to post the actual grades but not what they mean?

Great thread.

Go to Pro Football Focus yourself and do a little reading.

Let me help -- use this thing called Google and type the following in the little search box: "PFF Grades".

The top result might be helpful in your quest for insights on what the PFF grades mean.