Do you believe that Pro Football Focus is any good at grading players?

[K9Texan]

I'm not qualified to say. As an Ohio State fan I always enjoy reading the grades players received after each game. There is no way for the average fan to truly know how well ALL of the individual players played.

For instance, a former Ohio State coach created his own podcast and he obtains game videos and breaks them down for fans and essentially grades the players' performances. For a rabid fan, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Does anyone do that for K.C. games?

Anyway, PFF DOES and so my question is, again, do you believe they're any good at it?

[duncan_idaho]

Short answer: Nope

They’re consistently trash.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

Believe it or not what they are analysing isn't that difficult. Pff grades are largely about efficiency they are not getting super technical did the Linemen move the los, did the running break a tackle or make somebody miss, was the pass accurate etc

What the assignment was is most irrelevant outside of the obvious.

Stop being obtuse

This is bullshit. The only reason you are defending PFF is because the company was started by some English moron who had never played 1 down of football in his entire life and was able to create something that other nerds thought broke down the most complex game in all of sports to a number. If the company had been created by Tyrone Jones from the Bronx, you wouldn't give 2 shits about defending them.

[Danguardace]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

This is bullshit. The only reason you are defending PFF is because the company was started by some English moron who had never played 1 down of football in his entire life and was able to create something that other nerds thought broke down the most complex game in all of sports to a number. If the company had been created by Tyrone Jones from the Bronx, you wouldn't give 2 shits about defending them.

What did i say that was bullshit? Please be specific or you come across as uneducated.

I worked for pff very briefly (2 seasons) but i have no loyalty to them at all and as somebody who has coached this sport I am very much old school when it comes to analytics. My only point is that the notion that you cant analyse a play because you don't know the specific assignment is reductive at best.

[ThyKingdomCome15]

Obviously it's not a perfect science but when it comes to grading players nothing is. I like PFF overall, especially their draft content and draft board.

Also when the Chiefs sign some aging veteran like Mike Pennel I like to see what they generally excelled at over the years. Overall PFF definately has their uses.

The year the Chiefs drafted Chenal, George, and McDuffie a guy on their draft show called them the "PFF Kansas City Chiefs." They drafted the highest player on their board three out of the first four selections and it was a home run draft. That's a huge feather in their cal.

The Chiefs did have a moment like that in the last draft too. The safety they took in the fourth round knocked the PFF guys off their feet. They loved it, instantly declared one of the biggest steals in the draft. Fun times.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

What did i say that was bullshit? Please be specific or you come across as uneducated.

I worked for pff very briefly (2 seasons) but i have no loyalty to them at all and as somebody who has coached this sport I am very much old school when it comes to analytics. My only point is that the notion that you cant analyse a play because you don't know the specific assignment is reductive at best.

You can't analyze a play if you don't know the assignment. For instance, you brought up pass accuracy as a metric. You don't know the QB progression, the routes called, if the receiver made the correct route adjustment based on the defense, etc... All these things can play into the accuracy of a pass.

Football is too complex with too many pieces to be analyzed in that way and broken down to a number.

[Danguardace]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

You can't analyze a play if you don't know the assignment. For instance, you brought up pass accuracy as a metric. You don't know the QB progression, the routes called, if the receiver made the correct route adjustment based on the defense, etc... All these things can play into the accuracy of a pass.

Football is too complex with too many pieces to be analyzed in that way and broken down to a number.

You know as well as I do what an accurate pass looks like, what a good route looks like, what separation looks like.

PFF grades from my understanding is largely a measurement of efficency they are not trying to overly analyse scheme.

Box scores, QBR, and any other statistics by your argument are useless because football is "too complex"

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

You know as well as I do what an accurate pass looks like, what a good route looks like, what separation looks like.

PFF grades from my understanding is largely a measurement of efficency they are not trying to overly analyse scheme.

Box scores, QBR, and any other statistics by your argument are useless because football is "too complex"

Box scores are facts. YPC, as an example, is a measurable stat that can be put up against others over a long period of time.

I'll give you a good example of how PFF is shitty. There was a play in the Chiefs vs. Ravens AFC Championship game where Travis Kelce admitted he didn't agree with the play call being changed and he freelanced a route that wasn't in the play call. He admits this put Patrick in a bad position where he ended up having to scramble around and then end up throwing to Kelce late out of desperation. Kelce had to make an amazing diving catch for the completion. On that play, Mahomes would have been downgraded because the pass wasn't "accurate" because some jackass at PFF who doesn't understand shit about the game saw that Kelce had to dive to make the catch.

So, **** off with your "I coached the game" and that makes PFF legitimate bullshit.

[TLO]

PFF loved William Bartee.
(Probably)

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

Believe it or not what they are analysing isn't that difficult. Pff grades are largely about efficiency they are not getting super technical did the Linemen move the los, did the running break a tackle or make somebody miss, was the pass accurate etc

What the assignment was is most irrelevant outside of the obvious.

Stop being obtuse

Complete BULLSHIT. The called play means everything . You have no ****ing clue who's at fault without the assignment most of the time.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

You can't analyze a play if you don't know the assignment. For instance, you brought up pass accuracy as a metric. You don't know the QB progression, the routes called, if the receiver made the correct route adjustment based on the defense, etc... All these things can play into the accuracy of a pass.

Football is too complex with too many pieces to be analyzed in that way and broken down to a number.

Exactly. I wouldn't expect a Limey to understand it, so I'm not sure why he is arguing with us. He should stick to soccer.

[Danguardace]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

Box scores are facts. YPC, as an example, is a measurable stat that can be put up against others over a long period of time.

I'll give you a good example of how PFF is shitty. There was a play in the Chiefs vs. Ravens AFC Championship game where Travis Kelce admitted he didn't agree with the play call being changed and he freelanced a route that wasn't in the play call. He admits this put Patrick in a bad position where he ended up having to scramble around and then end up throwing to Kelce late out of desperation. Kelce had to make an amazing diving catch for the completion. On that play, Mahomes would have been downgraded because the pass wasn't "accurate" because some jackass at PFF who doesn't understand shit about the game saw that Kelce had to dive to make the catch.

So, **** off with your "I coached the game" and that makes PFF legitimate bullshit.

Is that the best you've got???

Whatever reerun, go back trying to turn your tv on with the calculator.

Christ you're a stupid ****

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

Box scores are facts. YPC, as an example, is a measurable stat that can be put up against others over a long period of time.

I'll give you a good example of how PFF is shitty. There was a play in the Chiefs vs. Ravens AFC Championship game where Travis Kelce admitted he didn't agree with the play call being changed and he freelanced a route that wasn't in the play call. He admits this put Patrick in a bad position where he ended up having to scramble around and then end up throwing to Kelce late out of desperation. Kelce had to make an amazing diving catch for the completion. On that play, Mahomes would have been downgraded because the pass wasn't "accurate" because some jackass at PFF who doesn't understand shit about the game saw that Kelce had to dive to make the catch.

So, **** off with your "I coached the game" and that makes PFF legitimate bullshit.

Probably coached Euro trash "football "

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

Is that the best you've got???

Whatever reerun, go back trying to turn your tv on with the calculator.

Christ you're a stupid ****

You are wrong

[PHOG]

Originally Posted by Danguardace

What did i say that was bullshit? Please be specific or you come across as uneducated.

I worked for pff very briefly (2 seasons) but i have no loyalty to them at all and as somebody who has coached this sport I am very much old school when it comes to analytics. My only point is that the notion that you cant analyse a play because you don't know the specific assignment is reductive at best.

[Danguardace]

People fear what they do not understand

Pff grades are purely a measurement of efficiency but you rednecks get your kunts all bloody about it.

Totally pathetic