Originally posted by Disp:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Agreed...they need to have weighted-play systems and be fully aware of responsibilities (i.e. like the differences between a SAM's job and a WILL)...same concept for DE's in a 4-3. Slot CB's vs. outside. Single-high S vs. other man-coverage schemes. There is just too much. I don't get the impression teams analyze their players this way, so why does PFF? A perfect example of this is Fangio talking about how unheralded Brooks is (esp. last year) and does everything that's asked of him at a very high level. If sacks are such a high value, what was Brooks grade in the post season when he lead all players in sacks? This grading system reminds me of the NFL and their official stats...back in the day where our own, Cyclops, would get about 8 extra tackles a game by just being in the general vacinity of the play. Seriously. We used to count ourselves...
They do. 3-4 and 4-3 front 7's are analyzed differently because they have different responsibilities. The stats go far more in depth than the score summaries that people are posting. All the scores are lumped together in the end, but here are their categories:
And here is Brooks' 2013 grades by game. He got a 3.1 and 1.3 pass rush grade against GB and Car.
Thanks Disp...I used to reference these myself...what they don't do is factor out responsibilities or weigh critical plays IIRC. How does a Probowl, 2nd team all-pro end up with a -4.2 for the year when he lead all 3-4 SAM's in the 3-4 in sacks and ALL OLB's (SAM's & WILL's) in the playoffs? And sacks are his secondary...sometimes not EVEN a responsibility of many of his assignments. PFF is on their way, but again, they still have a ways to go IMHO for assignment players like these. Other positions seems to be much more accurate. I agreed with about 1/2 of their grades for the Niners OL this pre season which seems about right for this type of system.