PFF Grades - what are the deficiencies of the players

Guys - It's interesting to see the PFF grades. But I'm most curious about where players are showing deficiencies causing low grades, and likewise what they need to improve. Then over the season are those things improving for the players.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/194233-49ers-saints-grades-worst-counts/

For example, this week:
Mac Jones = 58.6 -- Passer rating of 113 is good -- I thought he played better than expected, and showed more movement in the pocket than expected. So were there just a few plays like the fumble that drives a grade down?

Pearsall = 66.8 -- seemed like he played a good game? But a mediocre grade - so what drags it down? Then all the other receivers were in the 40s and 50s -- that's not good. I'd be curious how Bourne graded.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
Guys - It's interesting to see the PFF grades. But I'm most curious about where players are showing deficiencies causing low grades, and likewise what they need to improve. Then over the season are those things improving for the players.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/194233-49ers-saints-grades-worst-counts/

For example, this week:
Mac Jones = 58.6 -- Passer rating of 113 is good -- I thought he played better than expected, and showed more movement in the pocket than expected. So were there just a few plays like the fumble that drives a grade down?

Pearsall = 66.8 -- seemed like he played a good game? But a mediocre grade - so what drags it down? Then all the other receivers were in the 40s and 50s -- that's not good. I'd be curious how Bourne graded.

PFF has a Premium option that will do that. Most professional analysts use that platform, among others.

use your eyes

Originally posted by lamontb:
use your eyes

Your eyes tell you more than PFF.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
Guys - It's interesting to see the PFF grades. But I'm most curious about where players are showing deficiencies causing low grades, and likewise what they need to improve. Then over the season are those things improving for the players.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/194233-49ers-saints-grades-worst-counts/

For example, this week:
Mac Jones = 58.6 -- Passer rating of 113 is good -- I thought he played better than expected, and showed more movement in the pocket than expected. So were there just a few plays like the fumble that drives a grade down?

Pearsall = 66.8 -- seemed like he played a good game? But a mediocre grade - so what drags it down? Then all the other receivers were in the 40s and 50s -- that's not good. I'd be curious how Bourne graded.

Here's my personal thoughts & recommendation on PFF, throw everything out the window with them, they don't know anything, the way they do these ratings isn't really known, but why a guy who plays a handful of snaps gets a great grade vs the best FB in the NFL getting a low grade, just an example of what I've seen with them, I tried out there premium service, not worth the money IMO, I'd rather go off of what I see when I watch the 49ers, I don't go and critique every player, so PFF can't be seeing everything happening, unless they have 32 people who watch all the games, even then it's so flawed IMO.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
Guys - It's interesting to see the PFF grades. But I'm most curious about where players are showing deficiencies causing low grades, and likewise what they need to improve. Then over the season are those things improving for the players.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/194233-49ers-saints-grades-worst-counts/

For example, this week:
Mac Jones = 58.6 -- Passer rating of 113 is good -- I thought he played better than expected, and showed more movement in the pocket than expected. So were there just a few plays like the fumble that drives a grade down?

Pearsall = 66.8 -- seemed like he played a good game? But a mediocre grade - so what drags it down? Then all the other receivers were in the 40s and 50s -- that's not good. I'd be curious how Bourne graded.

It's PFF...never take their subjective grades with any real merit

Originally posted by jcs:
It's PFF...never take their subjective grades with any real merit

That's right. I agree.

I always think its funny how people use pff to confirm bias but also crap on it when it doesnt fit their narratives...and a lot of these people dont actually watch film beyond what they see on broadcast (which isnt film, you dont see any WR routes unless on replays and also dont see DBs)

PFF is a tool. It's very useful, but it's also not an instance of absolute truth. I know some people who only talk football in PFF grades, and its weird talking to them.

My advice- see grades relative to other players. I'd ignore the actual numeric grade because ever since they "normalized" the grading system and made it so its not available to public the actual numeric grade has been sus to me. Ie, 40.7 or whatever or 55.3 - dont bother with the difference, it could just be doctored.

Fun story- when PFF used to be small and niche outlet, they had a very transparent scoring system. They rated every snap on a scale of -2 to +2, the -2 and 2 being either extremely bad or extremely good plays, respectively. That system, you could trace every snap and see what they actually thought of every play and then they just added the score up. While the system like any other had its flaws and it obviously was still very subjective, it was transparent and understandable.

Once PFF sold out to Collingsworth and became big, I think they realized how some of their grades made some elite players look worse and some bad players look better. After all, their system generally was favorable to players who were "steady eddys" and not "russell westbrooks" of football with utter brain farts but also big impactful plays.

Now with scoring hidden, they can just assign whatever score and make it higher. Some of those decimal scores are just...ugh.

Also they used to wait until all-22 film would come out to grade, but once they got big they started grading off broadcast feeds and then modifying grades once they went over film...Ive looked specifically and as years went by they modified grades after film less and less...the emphasis was placed on getting grades out early for people to consume. Nowadays film comes out fast so its a moot point, but before that, it always felt they sacrificed quality of analysis for speed.

With all that being said, I still will trust PFF grades over eyes of biased people who only watch one team play week in and week out and catch highlights of other teams, and who generally don't watch film. At the very least PFF graders see many players at same positions and at least can compare them to other players.

The 9ers played with a ton of heart and grit. But dang, the PFF grades seem to reflect the struggling players.

McKivitz, Puni, Farrell, Colby -- all terrible grades - Even TW was low at 65.
Stout and Winters had terrible grades. And Sigle

The OL I understand they were giving up penetration on both run and pass plays. But on Defense, what caused Winters and Stout performance to plummet? Was it missed assignments (on them) are great offensive scheme that put them in a bind?

Mac Jones having a 66 overall grade IIRC after the game he had was really weird IMHO.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
The 9ers played with a ton of heart and grit. But dang, the PFF grades seem to reflect the struggling players.

McKivitz, Puni, Farrell, Colby -- all terrible grades - Even TW was low at 65.
Stout and Winters had terrible grades. And Sigle

The OL I understand they were giving up penetration on both run and pass plays. But on Defense, what caused Winters and Stout performance to plummet? Was it missed assignments (on them) are great offensive scheme that put them in a bind?

They grade every player on every play. So, if a given player performs well on 70% of the snaps but poorly on the other 30%, some of which fans don't see, they will get marked down. They also claim to weight the value of a given play but how they do that is not known.

All I know is that PFF is an oft-quoted source by NFL broadcast and press journalists. If they all are using it, it must have some merit. Personally, I like the comparative rankings of players. That helps me focus on certain match-ups during the game. Yes, I'm one of those...

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by lamontb:
use your eyes

Your eyes tell you more than PFF.

....with alll22. And unlimited replay.

Here is how dunb PFF grades are. I assume you as a player are being graded on your assignment. Highly unlikely based on what I see from PFF. If that is the case Austin Pleasants and Matt Hennessy both received 60s for their 3 snaps and were both part of the 5 lowest graded offensive players. I mean 3 snaps in Victory formation and somehow they didn't do that very good according to PFF.

Originally posted by leakyfausett:
Here is how dunb PFF grades are. I assume you as a player are being graded on your assignment. Highly unlikely based on what I see from PFF. If that is the case Austin Pleasants and Matt Hennessy both received 60s for their 3 snaps and were both part of the 5 lowest graded offensive players. I mean 3 snaps in Victory formation and somehow they didn't do that very good according to PFF.

I get it but how do you grade a victory formation? Since they do snap counts they have to grade each snap. The players execute the play but rarely engage with a player so a 60 seems fair to me.

when a player only has a few snaps it's best to ignore the grades.

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by leakyfausett:
Here is how dunb PFF grades are. I assume you as a player are being graded on your assignment. Highly unlikely based on what I see from PFF. If that is the case Austin Pleasants and Matt Hennessy both received 60s for their 3 snaps and were both part of the 5 lowest graded offensive players. I mean 3 snaps in Victory formation and somehow they didn't do that very good according to PFF.

I get it but how do you grade a victory formation? Since they do snap counts they have to grade each snap. The players execute the play but rarely engage with a player so a 60 seems fair to me.

when a player only has a few snaps it's best to ignore the grades.