Pro Football Focus gives its highest rating to Brady...

[BSR]

The belief that double coverage is "not as smart" to throw into than single coverage stems from the erroneous belief that two times the defender equals twice the chance to defense the ball. It doesn't work like that. There is either a right pass or there isn't, and most QBs tend to just ignore the situation all together. But that's mathematically ignorant.

I'm not sure what you think is erroneous about the assertion. The only time that anyone should throw into double coverage is under a few circumstances when there are no other choices due to the high risk of causing a turnover. Statistics show that turnovers have the greatest correlation to winning and losing after all.

The other factor that makes the notion of attributing no points to passing to open receivers is that it puts no value to pre snap reads or being able to move quickly through a progression tree. If a QB is throwing to double covered receivers because they are too slow to make it to their fourth progression then that is a problem, but PFF rewards them for it.

 

[Trey]

I'm not sure what you think is erroneous about the assertion. The only time that anyone should throw into double coverage is under a few circumstances when there are no other choices due to the high risk of causing a turnover. Statistics show that turnovers have the greatest correlation to winning and losing after all.

The other factor that makes the notion of attributing no points to passing to open receivers is that it puts no value to pre snap reads or being able to move quickly through a progression tree. If a QB is throwing to double covered receivers because they are too slow to make it to their fourth progression then that is a problem, but PFF rewards them for it.

You make the assumption that throwing into double coverage inherently produces more turnovers.

You make the assunption that the only reason to throw into double coverage is because "**** it, there's nothing better."

You make the assumption that QBs only arrive at double coverage as their best option if they fail in their progression.

There is no risk if the pass is good enough.

I cannot comment on the rest of that because I'm not intimate with the weighting of PFF's formulas. I merely disagreed that passing into double coverage should be penalized because it is an intrinsically inferior option.

 

[Trey]

You are making an obviously false assertion with regards to single coverage v. double coverage. I don't know how else to put it without being accused of being mean to you.

I don't think that I am. Degree of difficulty, or getting a pass through double coverage, is usually such because the reward is greater. If you can complete the pass through double coverage, you are generally better rewarded than the single coverage options. One option is not inherently "smarter" to throw into. Less risky, sure, though such a factor would be irrelevant if the quarterback was sufficiently able, which is what PFF's formulas are measuring.


I do not doubt you are capable of disagreeing and offering counter arguments civilly.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think that I am. Degree of difficulty, or getting a pass through double coverage, is usually such because the reward is greater. If you can complete the pass through double coverage, you are generally better rewarded than the single coverage options. One option is not inherently "smarter" to throw into. Less risky, sure, though such a factor would be irrelevant if the quarterback was sufficiently able, which is what PFF's formulas are measuring.


I do not doubt you are capable of disagreeing and offering counter arguments civilly.

You concede to the less risk. That's the end of the story, and PFFs formula isn't analyzing presumed risk on each and every pass via an equivalency breakdown of each single/double/triple covered throw. You just killed your own argument.

I assume that was civil enough.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

That same guy would probably give Romo a perfect rating for that pick he threw to Revis.

...on the numbers, dude!

 

[crowell33]

...on the numbers, dude!

Romo's pick was not on the numbers, as I recall it was towards Revis left shoulder.

 

[BradyManny]

Its a free world. We are allowed to dismiss PFF readily should we choose.

If the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, WEEI, Christopher Price, Ian Rapoport, Shalise Manza Young, Mike Reiss of ESPN Boston or ESPN National, NESN, and Sport Illustrated want to quote Pro Football Focus every week, again its a free world. Who cares ?

Who ever wants to follow them great, whoever doesn't great. I don't get the passionate venom.

It's the blind leading the blind. SMY is the only one of the above who regularly quotes them, and she's a fool for doing so. I've yet to see Reiss quote PFF, I've only seen Forsberg do it (on Reiss' blog).

I'm assuming you have some connection to PFF - perhaps you were one of those people that traded their amateur scouting services for a membership back when they started, and yes that's what they did when they started - but your refusal to objectively talk about their grading process renders your opinion on the matter rather moot.

 

[RayClay]

You are right, I meant subjectification. My apologies.

However, I disagree that passing into single coverage is inherently "smarter" than passing into double coverage.

But that is really the point about these statistical analysis sports sites. There is no quantifiable judge of which pass in a given situation is better.

Although it's laughable to penalize a quarterback for running a well designed offense and hitting the open man, or not throwing the risky pass except in extreme situations, it's just as inaccurate to reward a qb for getting an 80% completion percentage by only throwing 3 yard passes.

These things are not quantifiable. They rely on assumptions and subjective judgments. The fancier the analysis, the more subjective material must underly it.

The most useful statistics are the ones which rely on the least interpretation. To come up with a formula which overrides Brady's positive outcomes/negative (INTs for example) is so obviously flawed, it doesn't merit even analyzing, it's back to the drawing board.

Is a three yard pass better than a 70 yard completion into double coverage? It depends. If you're on the 2 yard line in overtime and the 70 yard pass is in garbage time in a three TD loss, yes. Flip the situations and the opposite is true.

These things simply are not quantifiable.

Yards, TDs, INT percentage, etc. are less subjective, but still need context. Winning QBs often don't have impressive numbers.

Statistics in football, a team sport, are usually best used when they are very specific and situational, not part of some grand all inclusive formula.

 

[RayClay]

I don't think that I am. Degree of difficulty, or getting a pass through double coverage, is usually such because the reward is greater. If you can complete the pass through double coverage, you are generally better rewarded than the single coverage options. One option is not inherently "smarter" to throw into. Less risky, sure, though such a factor would be irrelevant if the quarterback was sufficiently able, which is what PFF's formulas are measuring.


I do not doubt you are capable of disagreeing and offering counter arguments civilly.

I would disagree with that. Being that the other team still has only 11 players, throwing into double coverage indicates some failure on reading the defense since, all other things being equal, you are throwing where the defense is prepared to defend and missing an option, even if it means you should have run, that would have taken advantage of that defensive call.

When you limit the analysis to 11, being how many men the defense can deploy, that increases the value of your statistical analysis.

The idea is for them to have that one extra defender not be in the area you pass/run to.

 

[Ivan]

I cannot comment on the rest of that because I'm not intimate with the weighting of PFF's formulas. I merely disagreed that passing into double coverage should be penalized because it is an intrinsically inferior option.

Passing into double coverage shouldn't be penalized but turnovers should be, on the other hand what PFF does is reward passing into double coverage, which makes no sense and as others have pointed out penalizes QB's smart enough to read defenses and take the open man.

PFF rated Kareem McKenzie the best player in football, they should be completely ignored for that alone, they have no credibility and should be treated as such.