Niners PFF scores: Week 5

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.

Justin Smith -10.6 run defense? What?

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:

Originally posted by Niners99:

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.

Because they quantify absoloutely nothing, supply no basis for their scoring system and no data or statistics to back it up. They are basically saying " trust us, were the smartest guys in the room".

Agree. It's an educated opinion, for sure, but still an opinion. Anybody relying on PFF and not watch the game (even if it's on TV) is missing half of what happened in the game.

Originally posted by 49erphan:

How does PFF objectively determine what a neutral score play is supposed to look like? How do they objectively* determine the degree to which a player has played above or below that neutral score? Is it some sort of algorithm? If so, what about the process of deriving the algorithm makes it objective?

*objective in the scientific sense usually has to do with making measurements that would be the same no matter who the observer is. What is it that PFF does that makes their assessments independent of the observer - that is, what process do they use to make sure that the assessment would be the same no matter what observer made the observation?

This is a critical question to be answered. but it cant be answered. The play is over and even if they recreated the play, it won't be replicated exactly as required by the scientific method.

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...

Excellent point.

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:

Good point, but even between similar 3-4 systems, like the 49ers vs Seadderall, there are differences in scheme. Look at all the WCO teams, they all run variants of the original Bill Walsh offense. They may look the same but they aren't.
And here is Brooks' 2013 grades by game. He got a 3.1 and 1.3 pass rush grade against GB and Car.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Justin Smith -10.6 run defense? What?

It's almost like they should take the top 3 players of all time at each position and build a weighted grading system that way...and then compare modern players to these standards. It still might not work b/c the schemes morph a lot but at least you'll have a better standard. The differences between a strong-side SAM OLB in the 3-4 OR 4-3 can be night and day...same from strong-side LDE and RDE in a 4-3. They should also look at each snap and where they line up...many times esp. in the 3-4, positions are interchangeable.

It seems pretty strange. -10 is quite a bit in the red. It just seems like they are saying he is one of the bottom tackles in run d. SO, that just isn't true. I wonder if they can explain it.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

It seems pretty strange. -10 is quite a bit in the red. It just seems like they are saying he is one of the bottom tackles in run d. SO, that just isn't true. I wonder if they can explain it.

There have been games when he's been run on esp. against power running teams and when he only had one arm. But -10?

Doesnt he get gteen when hes triple teamed? If 80% of runs are away from him does he get ppints for that?

Honestly. I can see on Brooks because he was very not active for playing and bad playing. He seem not smart to playing a football this year. I was piss off that Brooks was dumb for penalties alot than our team. He was dumb cost for penalties vs ravens championship about two years ago. Check it out again reply 49ers vs ravens championship. And Culliver was joke his active. Impossible! ! I don't know why Culliver was probably a rats and does same Moss! He didn't jump to catch the ball from 2 points. .. I was blame on Brooks and Culliver was active fake and fool playing.. Moss was f**kin rats..

Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Honestly. I can see on Brooks because he was very not active for playing and bad playing. He seem not smart to playing a football this year. I was piss off that Brooks was dumb for penalties alot than our team. He was dumb cost for penalties vs ravens championship about two years ago. Check it out again reply 49ers vs ravens championship.

I agree with you that Brooks is dumb for penalties. He has always been extremely dumb for penalties. It has been like this for years now.

Originally posted by BrianGO:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:

Honestly. I can see on Brooks because he was very not active for playing and bad playing. He seem not smart to playing a football this year. I was piss off that Brooks was dumb for penalties alot than our team. He was dumb cost for penalties vs ravens championship about two years ago. Check it out again reply 49ers vs ravens championship.

I agree with you that Brooks is dumb for penalties. He has always been extremely dumb for penalties. It has been like this for years now.

Thank you bro.