Niners PFF scores: Week 5

can somebody link me to the Week 4 grades...I tried searching for it and couldn't find it

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I still don't see it. How can it be "Brooks' only job is pretty much rushing the passer" when he is rushing the passer on less than half his snaps?

Niners99 said he talked to the guy a yer ago. so he's probably misquoting him a bit.

Originally posted by Disp:

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I still don't see it. How can it be "Brooks' only job is pretty much rushing the passer" when he is rushing the passer on less than half his snaps?

Niners99 said he talked to the guy a yer ago. so he's probably misquoting him a bit.

That may be the most likely explanation, because as it was stated, it doesn't seem right.

I also noticed that PFF had Culliver rated at 0.8 in pass coverage and Cox 0.3. I don't see how Culliver has been more than twice as good in pass coverage as Cox. They also have Ward rated at 0.4, which is better than Cox. ???

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I also noticed that PFF had Culliver rated at 0.8 in pass coverage and Cox 0.3. I don't see how Culliver has been more than twice as good in pass coverage as Cox. They also have Ward rated at 0.4, which is better than Cox. ???

PFF said Russell Wilson was the 28th best QB in the nfl. I just don't think analytics like these work in football. Then again I don't understand them that well either.

Originally posted by MCrabs15:
PFF said Russell Wilson was the 28th best QB in the nfl. I just don't think analytics like these work in football. Then again I don't understand them that well either.

That's absurd, cause the last time I checked Russell Wilson should be the MVP of the entire league; All-Pro, and maybe a free GMC min-van.

Not even PFF could screw up Lynch's impact. Lynch is a monster out there.

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I also noticed that PFF had Culliver rated at 0.8 in pass coverage and Cox 0.3. I don't see how Culliver has been more than twice as good in pass coverage as Cox. They also have Ward rated at 0.4, which is better than Cox. ???

That's just for this past week. Cox is the 3'rd rated CB in the league for pass defense on the year.

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Basically, if you are going to use stevie 5 times, then trade him...for a lamppost, or something. Having that kind of talent on the bench is the sign of two coaches, HC and OC, that have no idea what to do with the unbelievable talent they have. This was a criticism 3 yrs ago, 2 yrs ago and now. IT has not gotten one whit better. Shame on you Coach H. Romn..,.he just doesn't know better.

Great idea!!! Trade the receiver who gets a touchdown when they throw him the ball! Someone call Baalke quickly and give him the suggestion.

Lol, missing the point.

Originally posted by Disp:

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I also noticed that PFF had Culliver rated at 0.8 in pass coverage and Cox 0.3. I don't see how Culliver has been more than twice as good in pass coverage as Cox. They also have Ward rated at 0.4, which is better than Cox. ???

That's just for this past week. Cox is the 3'rd rated CB in the league for pass defense on the year.

Oops, okay, thanks.

Originally posted by theduke85:

DeSean Jackson caught 5 passes for 157 yards and a touchdown and finished with a -0.9 score for the game. What!? (According to PFF, "two drops hurt his score"). PFF is great, but you've certainly got to take the grades with a grain of salt!

lol you guys dont seem to get how the grading system works.

Jacksons TD catch got the bulk of his yards on one play. The score is cumulative based on every play. So his one big catch was likely one of the few positive plays he made all day. If he sucked at everything else that night, his total will be mediocre.

Originally posted by 49erphan:

Originally posted by Disp:

Originally posted by 49erphan:
I still don't see it. How can it be "Brooks' only job is pretty much rushing the passer" when he is rushing the passer on less than half his snaps?

Niners99 said he talked to the guy a yer ago. so he's probably misquoting him a bit.

That may be the most likely explanation, because as it was stated, it doesn't seem right.

I was exaggerating. He basically told me that A LOT of what Ahmad Brooks is asked to do is based around rushing the passer, and that for the amount of times he attempted to rush the QB, he failed A LOT. So his success rate was terrible, which is what got him such terrible scores.

This was also about last season, not this season. His role may be slightly different this year due to our LB depth issues.

The PFF guy who responded was very confident in his answer. Everything he said left me with no real room for a counter.

BTW, in 2012 Brooks was getting great scores. Its just been since last season that hes been getting negatives every week.

I dont know why some of you guys cant wrap your mind around the grading system, or that a group of scouts analyzing every play is somehow not as credible as you watching the game drunk.

Major sports networks use PFF to analyze and report information. This isnt some kid in his basement nerding out and being biased. These are football scouts who know what to look for in plays.

You have preconceived notions about certain players, so when a guy you thought had a great game gets a mediocre score, you just trust your own eye and say "PFF is high". But if you broke the game down, and you saw how many blocks a guy missed, or a LB not holding his gap integrity and allowing a RB to cut back for a huge run, the scores would make more sense. PFF actually looks at each player on each play. Theres no way you can see even half of that watching the game once on TV.

Originally posted by 49erphan:

Originally posted by Disp:

Originally posted by 49erphan:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Also, notice Brooks in dead last again on D. I talked to a PFF guy last year about how Brooks could keep drawing terrible scores, and he basically told me that Brooks' only job is pretty much rushing the passer, and hes been terrible. He accumulates pressures and sacks out of pure volume of attempts, but his success rate is terrible.

That doesn't sound right. You mean PFF doesn't think an outside linebacker's ability to set the edge doesn't make much of any difference?

Nah, that's not what they mean. Last year Aldon's snaps were basically 55% pass rush/10% pass defense/35% run defense (306/51/225 snaps). Brooks was 45% pass rush/20% pass defense/35% run defense (467/129/387 snaps). Brooks rushes the passer almost as much as Aldon; only difference is he plays a little more coverage.

I still don't see it. How can it be "Brooks' only job is pretty much rushing the passer" when he is rushing the passer on less than half his snaps?

PFF has about as much science to it as "power rankings". It is kinda of interesting to read where you are it in some cat's opinion from time to time, but it means virtually nothing.