PFF & Cowboys Players

[xwalker]

Is there any chance that we can all agree that PFF ratings of NFL players are worthless?

I wanted to address this at the point that PFF has given good ratings to multiple Cowboys players.

They have 4 Cowboys rookies in their top 25 for the preseason and D.Wilson as #1.

Anytime someone criticizes PFF, someone else responds:

• You are only criticizing them because they gave Cowboys players bad ratings.
• You will love PFF when they give Cowboys players good ratings.

I like the rookie Safety Wilson.

• I'm happy if he has performed great in the preseason.
• PFF ratings are still meaningless.

Concept

• Great concept of an exact number grade for each player.
• However, PFF's ability to do that accurately is terrible.

PFF does keep some stats that have value.

• Example: Charting pass locations.
  • PFF charts passes as right, middle, left and short, deep.
  • They provide completion % on each of those groups.
  • They provide QB ratings for each location group.
  • This is the type of work they are good at accomplishing.

Back to NFL Player Ratings

• They publish their ratings of NFL players within 24 hours of games.
• That's 32 teams per week (non bye weeks) and 46 players per game.
• Total players 32*46 = 1472 players.
• Teams average about 70 snaps on each of offense & defense.
• Total snaps per week 140*32=4480 (special teams not included)
• That would require 100 plus "analysts" in that short time frame.
• Getting consistent ratings across 100 "analysts" is almost impossible.

The qualifications to be a "football analyst" at PFF are shown below.

Also resume of PFF analyst. Prior experience was paint sales.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

They hire people to chart the games and score players when they have ZERO idea what their actual assignment is. Fun to look at but pretty useless.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Figures the eagle fan would agree with you. Not the best company to keep. There are other stats that you don't take into consideration. Especially with QB's. Big play throws, and turnover worthy throws. You keep posting a resume from 2012. It's tiresome, because you have been proven wrong on this front like every time you bring it up. If you look at where they rank players it's pretty spot on. I mean you could always look at the tape and tell us based on your extensive experience which player is better than who.

 

[Sydla]

They hire people to chart the games and score players when they have ZERO idea what their actual assignment is. Fun to look at but pretty useless.

This has been a big problem with me and has been called out by others. I recall one was a PFF writeup that criticized Quenton Nelson's play in a game as a rookie saying he missed some blocks, etc. One of the Colts writers, went back and looked at the game and plays and noted that in some cases, PFF knocked Nelson for missing a block when the scheme on that play didn't call for him to block that guy.

As you said, often times, their "graders" aren't even aware of what the play is and what a particular player's responsibility is.

I think there is probably some value in PFF, but I wouldn't consider it some sort of great player ranking/rating system. On top of the inexperience of some of their graders, there is also little consistency from grade to grade because their graders can often interpret a play differently.

I mean I give them credit for trying to approach this from a different angle, but their system still has flaws.

 

[Hennessy_King]

This has been a big problem with me and has been called out by others. I recall one was a PFF writeup that criticized Quenton Nelson's play in a game as a rookie saying he missed some blocks, etc. One of the Colts writers, went back and looked at the game and plays and noted that in some cases, PFF knocked Nelson for missing a block when the scheme on that play didn't call for him to block that guy.

As you said, often times, their "graders" aren't even aware of what the play is and what a particular player's responsibility is.

I think there is probably some value in PFF, but I wouldn't consider it some sort of great player ranking/rating system. On top of the inexperience of some of their graders, there is also little consistency from grade to grade because their graders can often interpret a play differently.

I mean I give them credit for trying to approach this from a different angle, but their system still has flaws.

They have senior people that go over the grades as well. Missing one or two plays a game is whatever it's not perfect. Do you think him being graded 3rd best guard in the league behind shaq mason and zach martin is correct? I do.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Pretty upsetting to see undrafted rookie DT Ricky Walker be ranked in PFF's Top 25 rookie preseason performers, but yet, rookie 2nd round pick Trysten Hill was not even mentioned. Great job, Marinelli.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Pretty upsetting to see undrafted rookie DT Ricky Walker be ranked in PFF's Top 25 rookie preseason performers, but yet, rookie 2nd round pick Trysten Hill was not even mentioned. Great job, Marinelli.

Xwalker will tell you that it wasn't fair because he was double teamed and got driven 5 yards back when he was lol.

 

[Sydla]

They have senior people that go over the grades as well. Missing one or two plays a game is whatever it's not perfect. Do you think him being graded 3rd best guard in the league behind shaq mason and zach martin is correct? I do.

As I said, there is probably some value in these grades but I wouldn't put a ton of credibility into it. I think their rankings near the the top are somewhat decent............... so having Nelson rated 3rd overall isn't terrible. Some of their rankings are totally squirrely however.

I, personally, find the ratings entertaining but I often bristle when someone tries to argue how good or bad a player is because, "PFF said so..........."

 

[Pharoah]

Again the Hill kid is a Measurables Pick based on potential. His on field was not better than Wise or Walker who both played power 5. It's too early to know if he is a good pick, however there is no reason to believe he is "currently"a better player than those 2.

 

[buybuydandavis]

Is there any chance that we can all agree that PFF ratings of NFL players are worthless?

No.

Imperfect does not mean worthless. The fact that the PFF grades for preseason have extra imperfections compared to season grades doesn't make them worthless either.

Take them for what they are, an evaluation of how well a player fared in the snaps played. Obviously that's related to his talent but not entirely determined by it.

 

[xwalker]

Pretty upsetting to see undrafted rookie DT Ricky Walker be ranked in PFF's Top 25 rookie preseason performers, but yet, rookie 2nd round pick Trysten Hill was not even mentioned. Great job, Marinelli.

Tony Pollard not on the list.

Nate Hall was on the list.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Is there any chance that we can all agree that PFF ratings of NFL players are worthless?

I wanted to address this at the point that PFF has given good ratings to multiple Cowboys players.

They have 4 Cowboys rookies in their top 25 for the preseason and D.Wilson as #1.

Anytime someone criticizes PFF, someone else responds:

• You are only criticizing them because they gave Cowboys players bad ratings.
• You will love PFF when they give Cowboys players good ratings.

I like the rookie Safety Wilson.

• I'm happy if he has performed great in the preseason.
• PFF ratings are still meaningless.

Concept

• Great concept of an exact number grade for each player.
• However, PFF's ability to do that accurately is terrible.

PFF does keep some stats that have value.

• Example: Charting pass locations.
  • PFF charts passes as right, middle, left and short, deep.
  • They provide completion % on each of those groups.
  • They provide QB ratings for each location group.
  • This is the type of work they are good at accomplishing.

Back to NFL Player Ratings

• They publish their ratings of NFL players within 24 hours of games.
• That's 32 teams per week (non bye weeks) and 46 players per game.
• Total players 32*46 = 1472 players.
• Teams average about 70 snaps on each of offense & defense.
• Total snaps per week 140*32=4480 (special teams not included)
• That would require 100 plus "analysts" in that short time frame.
• Getting consistent ratings across 100 "analysts" is almost impossible.

The qualifications to be a "football analyst" at PFF are shown below.

Also resume of PFF analyst. Prior experience was paint sales.

You’ve been exposed and corrected on this stupidity numerous times. The fact you’re unwilling to accept the actual facts is a reflection on you.

PFF goes into specific detail as to how it grades including usage off All-22.

https://www.pff.com/pff-player-grades

Your previous response to this was “they’re lying.”

 

[big dog cowboy]

Pretty upsetting to see undrafted rookie DT Ricky Walker be ranked in PFF's Top 25 rookie preseason performers, but yet, rookie 2nd round pick Trysten Hill was not even mentioned. Great job, Marinelli.

Because all rookies careers should be judged 4 months after the draft.

Good grief.

 

[HungryLion]

I know I’ve used the phrases meaningless when describing PFF pre season games. Largely because pre season production itself is almost meaningless IMO.

Overall I don’t think PFF’a grades are meaningless. They are just one more tool, in the toolbox, to use when you want to evaluate a player.

I’m not a huge advanced metric guy. I put a lot of stock personally into the more traditional statistics. Such as: Completion percentage, Yards per attempt, QB rating. TD/int ratio.

Total yards and yards per carry for RB.

Catches/yards, yards per catch for receivers etc.

I even like a few advanced metrics like success rate for runs for instance.

But yeah PFF grades are not the end be all. They are just more information to take into consideration about a player.

Another example: I thought they have a few QB’s ahead of Dak, that I truly believe Dak is better than, or just as good as. But I agreed with him being 3rd tier. So they weren’t that far off.

I believe they had Zeke like 30th for running backs. Sorry Charlie. No way Zeke is 30th for running backs. I don’t know if everything that goes into their running back ratings. But there has to be some kind of flaw if Zeke isn’t at least top 10. Moreso top 5.

 

[Hennessy_King]

As I said, there is probably some value in these grades but I wouldn't put a ton of credibility into it. I think their rankings near the the top are somewhat decent............... so having Nelson rated 3rd overall isn't terrible. Some of their rankings are totally squirrely however.

I, personally, find the ratings entertaining but I often bristle when someone tries to argue how good or bad a player is because, "PFF said so..........."

Which rankings would you say are squirrely? The ones you disagree with? lol

 

[CATCH17]

Just learn football and take anything PFF says with a grain of salt.

 

[xwalker]

No.

Imperfect does not mean worthless. The fact that the PFF grades for preseason have extra imperfections compared to season grades doesn't make them worthless either.

Take them for what they are, an evaluation of how well a player fared in the snaps played. Obviously that's related to his talent but not entirely determined by it.

As @Sydia posted, people have analyzed PFF grades and have found major flaws.

He gave a specific example of OL Nelson with the Colts and the Colts writer determined it was not his responsibility on the blocks they claimed he missed. I believe this was a writer that reviewed the play with the OL coach.

They have been NFL coaches that spoke up about PFF being completely wrong about grading some of their players. Some (maybe all) of the coaches that have mentioned it were shown the PFF grades by a media person in their area and asked about the details of the play.

Broaddus asked the coaches about the play where Dak got sacked on what many people thought was a missed block by Pollard. The coaches said Pollard was not at fault. That play likely got charted by PFF as being the fault of Pollard. Their system makes it difficult for that type of play not to be blamed on Pollard.

Fans/media have a "need" to believe something labeled as an official grade for players. PFF has exploited that need.

It"s too bad because as I said they do chart stats that have value. It requires watching game footage to chart pass locations but it"s difficult to get that wrong. If a pass is right on the border between the right zone and middle zone it does not really matter if PFF was off by 1 foot and put it down a right when it was really middle.

Legit football people/organizations do buy their stats; however, no legit football people care about their rankings of NFL players. PFF uses their stats business to claim credibility to market their player analysis business.

Many people have done articles where they showed the extreme flaws in PFF reports about player performances.

It would be great to just look up player performance ratings and get an exact number. Unfortunately that is just not possible for anybody other than the coaches of those players to "grade film" with that type of accuracy.

The method PFF uses to "grade film" is not like the method used by NFL coaches.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

32 different people making independent judgment calls each week and then comparing those across the board as if they are apples to apples. What could go wrong?

 

[buybuydandavis]

As @Sydia posted, people have analyzed PFF grades and have found major flaws.

He gave a specific example of OL Nelson with the Colts and the Colts writer determined it was not his responsibility on the blocks they claimed he missed. I believe this was a writer that reviewed the play with the OL coach.

They have been NFL coaches that spoke up about PFF being completely wrong about grading some of their players. Some (maybe all) of the coaches that have mentioned it were shown the PFF grades by a media person in their area and asked about the details of the play.

Broaddus asked the coaches about the play where Dak got sacked on what many people thought was a missed block by Pollard. The coaches said Pollard was not at fault. That play likely got charted by PFF as being the fault of Pollard. Their system makes it difficult for that type of play not to be blamed on Pollard.

Fans/media have a "need" to believe something labeled as an official grade for players. PFF has exploited that need.

It"s too bad because as I said they do chart stats that have value. It requires watching game footage to chart pass locations but it"s difficult to get that wrong. If a pass is right on the border between the right zone and middle zone it does not really matter if PFF was off by 1 foot and put it down a right when it was really middle.

Legit football people/organizations do buy their stats; however, no legit football people care about their rankings of NFL players. PFF uses their stats business to claim credibility to market their player analysis business.

Many people have done articles where they showed the extreme flaws in PFF reports about player performances.

It would be great to just look up player performance ratings and get an exact number. Unfortunately that is just not possible for anybody other than the coaches of those players to "grade film" with that type of accuracy.

The method PFF uses to "grade film" is not like the method used by NFL coaches.

"Imperfection does not mean worthless."

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

As long as they conveniently parallel the narrative I’m building in my head, they’re great.

The second they stray from my biased opinion, they’re hacks.