Offensive Line Ratings from the Giants game...

[MichaelWinicki]

Then the grades are even more nonsensical. So a guy does his job all game, 40+ snaps, gets a zero grade for each of those plays. Then he has a questionable holding call against him and on the next play gives up a questionable sack. Some guy eating a box of donuts in his moms basement decides to give him a -1 and a -1 for those two plays.

You're telling me that now, the guy who had done his job all game long, gets a game score of -2?

That's just a joke.

I think you make some valid points...

But up to this point we haven't gotten anything from anyone else as far as any sort of ratings. Lot's of folks express a negative point of view and it's well within their rights to do so, however the PFF ratings are all we have because no one else has shared anything from any other source.

And while their individual game grades can cause some consternation, looking over their cumulative ratings for an entire season, i.e. 2011 or 2012, and you would find the players that are generally considered the games better players are near the top of the scale and the guys who do not has as good a reputation amongst fans and media are at the bottom of the scale. In other words you weren't going to find a 2012 Bernadeau or Free amongst the games top 32 at their respective positions... So from that standpoint the PFF ratings do have some sort of relevance.

Taking your example a step further... you have one guy that has say 58 snaps... and say he does do an "average" job on all but two. On those other two snaps he commits very bad errors... He commits a penalty and gives up a sack. Those two play-endings are very destructive for an offense. They certainly deserve a negative rating. A "questionable" penalty? To me a penalty is a penalty as it impacts the offense. The offense loses something because of that penalty no matter how ticky-tack.

I'm not sure what a "questionable" sack is. If it's a sack where the QB held the ball too long, then the QB is going to get most of the blame. If the QB drops back five steps and the DE immediately hits him... Well that's not questionable.

So say this lineman commits two grievous errors which stymie the offense and he ends up with a -2.0 for the game.

Now say the other 4 offensive lineman perform perfectly average on all of their 60 snaps... No negative plays. So would it be fair to give all of them the same grade? Of course not. The guy that botched two plays needs to be held accountable. And no matter what rating system you use he is going to end up with a worse grade than his four other compatriots– and rightfully so.

 

[AbeBeta]

Don't be stupid when interpreting their grades. First, "average" should be more of a range. -0.5 is certainly in the average zone. Second,

i don't think the grade suggest he played bad, I'm assuming because I don't know for sure that 0 is a good grade, anything over 0 is very good. So -0.5 translates he played a solid game, not great, not bad... that's how I read it but I could be wrong and anyone who knows for sure please feel free to clarify.

I also don't think the grades take into consideration who you did it against and the reason what Smith did was so impressive is because he did it against their best defensive linemen. Again I'm just speculating so any clarification is welcome

People are putting too much emphasis on the zero point being "average" - a better way to think of this is that anything around zero is average. So, say -0.5 to 0.5 grades out as average.Over 50% of the grades fall in that range so it is a good place to be.

The other important piece here is that grading out as average-ish against a very good interior DL is absolutely awesome for a rookie in his first game. Rookie OL tend to get brutalized for a good portion of their first year. This is a great start.

 

[iceman117]

Don't be stupid when interpreting their grades. First, "average" should be more of a range. -0.5 is certainly in the average zone. Second,


People are putting too much emphasis on the zero point being "average" - a better way to think of this is that anything around zero is average. So, say -0.5 to 0.5 grades out as average.Over 50% of the grades fall in that range so it is a good place to be.

The other important piece here is that grading out as average-ish against a very good interior DL is absolutely awesome for a rookie in his first game. Rookie OL tend to get brutalized for a good portion of their first year. This is a great start.

I know that's basically what I said while replying to someone saying that the grade implies Fredricks played poorly because of his -.05 grade.

 

[iceman117]

Don't be stupid when interpreting their grades. First, "average" should be more of a range. -0.5 is certainly in the average zone. Second,


People are putting too much emphasis on the zero point being "average" - a better way to think of this is that anything around zero is average. So, say -0.5 to 0.5 grades out as average.Over 50% of the grades fall in that range so it is a good place to be.

The other important piece here is that grading out as average-ish against a very good interior DL is absolutely awesome for a rookie in his first game. Rookie OL tend to get brutalized for a good portion of their first year. This is a great start.

I'm Stupid? I would question your intelligence for calling me stupid and then saying the same thing I said with a different set of words.

 

[AbeBeta]

I know that's basically what I said while replying to someone saying that the grade implies Fredricks played poorly because of his -.05 grade.

My response to your post is below where I've quoted you.

 

[AbeBeta]

I'm Stupid? I would question your intelligence for calling me stupid and then saying the same thing I said with a different set of words.

Just in the way you are interpreting my post.

 

[iceman117]

Just in the way you are interpreting my post.

lol, I was confused for a second

 

[percyhoward]

For a good in-depth analysis of the OL, check out "Word of Muth" at Football Outsiders. The Cowboys are one of the teams he's following this year, but jimnabby usually posts them here anyway.

I love PFF for all the raw information they have that most sites don't, but their ratings are terrible

 

[Pottsville Maroons]

Actually please do keep posting since I don't want to pay for it and appreciate the information. It doesn't take a scooter scientist to figure out what + and - mean.

+1

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

pff is about as worthwhile as your average public opinion poll provided that the poll is given to one person.

Strongly disagree - disagree - neither - agree - strongly agree

(-2) - (-1) - 0 - 1 - 2

Add them up and voila you have your score. Nor is it normalized by the number of snaps denoting efficiency. All in all it is misleading and not worth much in my book.

A statistic is only as useful as what it measures and in this case it is one man's opinion.

 

[Risen Star]

I think you make some valid points...

But up to this point we haven't gotten anything from anyone else as far as any sort of ratings. Lot's of folks express a negative point of view and it's well within their rights to do so, however the PFF ratings are all we have because no one else has shared anything from any other source.

Why do you need ratings to tell you who can and can't play?

 

[Texas_Pete]

BTB commented on PFF's reason for Smith not having the best OL grade v. Giants:

Both tackles did a good job, with Free grading out better than Smith (two penalties hurt his overall grade) while the interior O-line struggled to get a push in the run game. Word around Valley Ranch is that Brian Waters could be ready for action against the Chiefs, and judging by these grades, that would likely benefit the overall performance of the line.

Interesting grade on TFred:

Travis Frederick (79 of 79 snaps, -0.5 grade) proved to be up to the task in his first NFL game. There was one bungled snap with Tony Romo, but Frederick looked good otherwise, allowing one QB hit and one hurry. It may not be anything to write home about yet, but Frederick graded out as the 15th out of 32 centers.

More good stuff at LINK.

 

[BlindFaith]

Now say the other 4 offensive lineman perform perfectly average on all of their 60 snaps... No negative plays. So would it be fair to give all of them the same grade? Of course not. The guy that botched two plays needs to be held accountable. And no matter what rating system you use he is going to end up with a worse grade than his four other compatriots– and rightfully so.

So how would you really know anything about the player in the following if you just looked at the overall game rating?

A. Game Score 0 - +.5,0,+.5,0,+.5,0,0,0,0,-1.5
B. Game Score 0 - 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
C. Game Score 0 - 0,0,-1,0,+1,0,-1,0,+1,0

Who would you want on your team an why?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Why do you need ratings to tell you who can and can't play?

Why do you think you can tell who can and cannot play with no qualification beyond a ton of couch scouting?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

So how would you really know anything about the player in the following if you just looked at the overall game rating?

A. Game Score 0 - +.5,0,+.5,0,+.5,0,0,0,0,-1.5
B. Game Score 0 - 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
C. Game Score 0 - 0,0,-1,0,+1,0,-1,0,+1,0

Who would you want on your team an why?

Quite honestly BF... I would suggest you contact PFF and direct your questions to them as I feel
this is an endless loop.

 

[BlindFaith]

Quite honestly BF... I would suggest you contact PFF and direct your questions to them as I feel
this is an endless loop.

They weren't the ones posting the stats. And I know from past posts that you are a fairly strong supporter of their work. I'm simply providing a logical alternative to their "expert" analysis.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

They weren't the ones posting the stats. And I know from past posts that you are a fairly strong supporter of their work. I'm simply providing a logical alternative to their "expert" analysis.

I'm a supporter of their work because there is no one else's work to support! LOL!

And I feel at a disadvantage trying to dig too deep into a system of grading or scoring that I have a limited knowledge of.

Plus they are accessible to anyone... A simple email will do the trick I'm sure.

 

[Primetime42]

I happen to find their numbers to be very subjective. Not exactly my go-to spot.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Why do you think you can tell who can and cannot play with no qualification beyond a ton of couch scouting?

Isn't coach scouting what PFF is doing?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

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.

well, their ratings is better than nothing, but it also doesn't account for assignments in each play. they make a lot of assumptions.

I think Smith did great, going one on one most of the game against JPP.

I thought leary did good. in a few plays, I saw him make initial double block and once he saw his man was under control he quickly switched to pick up the next rusher.