Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by MichaelWinicki, Sep 10, 2013.
That equates to Bernie sucking twice over!
Ah.. thank you. Now we finally have some context to work with!
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.
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.
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:
+0.537percent (unbalanced because of the way WRs and HBs are rated)
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.
Then quit posting in this thread if it's not your cup of tea.
Proof that PFF's OL numbers are USELESS>
NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE played better than Smith.
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?
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.
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.
There is no way you could watch the film and think Berny was better than your initial impression.
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.
That makes more sense. I thought I had seen game scores higher and lower than +/-2 in the past.
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.
So you think it's ok to post the actual grades but not what they mean?
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.
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.