PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

A good article on PFF


Status
Not open for further replies.

patfanken

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
15,551
Reaction score
27,637
I know a lot of us have strong opinions about the various analytical sites like PFF, and rightfully so. But I was reading something on MMQB and saw a link to this article, and found it very informative.

I feel a bit warmer to PFF. Not necessarily because the information is totally accurate and their ratings are always on the money, but (based on this article) they acknowledge the flaws we always talk about, and over the years they have constantly upgraded the way they gather and interpret the data.

Right now there are 13 NFL teams that buy their services, so it can't be just be all crap. At any rate I should mention that the article was written in Jan 2015, so they've had 2 more years of data to improve their methods. BTW- the history of how they started and what they've evolved into is fascinating.

Pro Football Focus mines endless NFL data to find subtle advantages | The MMQB with Peter King.
 
I don't mind PFF as a tool to find out some attributes/weaknesses of certain players. It's very useful in that aspect.

I just hate it when I watch SNF lineups and each players PFF rating is shown and used as a meter for how good the player is. It shouldn't be used as an end-all unit of measurement.
 
The title of this thread is sarcastic, right? RIGHT? :)
 
They are a resource, not the gospel.
 
Interesting article. A few quotes for the click-averse or those that don't have time to go through the entire column. For the 31 teams that don't employ Ernie Adams, it is possible that their information may be of some use. Just wonder if there is an information overload at some point.



- But what the public sees on Pro Football Focus’s website is just a tidal pool compared to the ocean of information that NFL teams are paying very good money (PFF won’t disclose how much) to access.

It’s more than a data dump. Pro Football Focus will meet virtually any of its clients’ requests, such as measuring hang time to two decimal points for punts and kickoffs, and tracking which direction a center turns after the snap as a potential indicator of which offensive guard is the weaker link


- (Detroit Lions' Gunther) Cunningham still records some of the same statistics on his own, including time to throw or defensive targets (mostly out of habit), but he and defensive quality control coach Matt Raich lean on Pro Football Focus to shave time off their research. Before the Cowboys game, for instance, it took them less than 30 minutes to pull up all the shotgun plays Dallas had used during its previous five games. They were able to discern the personnel groups, in part, by looking at the play diagrams and corresponding video footage.

In his current role, Cunningham prepares scouting reports for the coaching staff. (A 600-page report on the Seahawks’ offense, unused after the Lions were eliminated, sits on his desk). - :eek: - [at what point do you have paralysis by analysis?]


- Vikings coach Mike Zimmer has been one of the site’s most vocal critics, calling out PFF in the opening statement of a press conference last summer. “I guarantee they don’t know who is in our blitz package and what they are supposed to do,” he said. “I would just ask everybody to take that with a grain of salt, including our fans.” Patriots coach Bill Belichick responded to a question last week about defensive sub-packages with a seeming dig, saying, “I’m sure there’s a bunch of websites that [track] that, Pro Football Extra or whatever they are.” :D


- Cunningham agrees with some of Zimmer’s criticism. Even after spending five seasons as the Lions’ defensive coordinator, Cunningham found it initially difficult to wrap his head around what everyone is supposed to be doing in Teryl Austin’s new system. So PFF analysts grading players without knowing the defensive call is one area, he says, “where they are a little bit short.” But Cunningham has also seen the reverse: coaches grading favorite players more easily, or giving themselves too much credit for placing a player in the correct position when he makes a play.


- He views PFF analysts as young scouts, and he views their reports like those that come out of the BLESTO and National scouting organizations: more information that can help.


- “Whether a team should go for it on fourth-and-1, there’s been some analysis of that,” Hornsby says. “But the truth of it is, what is the sample size of data for that game being played in Buffalo, at a particular temperature in December, with a right guard who has a dodgy hamstring and the halfback just broke up with his girlfriend the previous day? No amount of statistics can give you that answer. Only the coach can make that decision.

“But what we can do, we can say to a coach, ‘If you see Calvin Johnson lining up as the inside slot receiver on a play in Week 14, and in every other circumstance where he has lined up in that position he has run this route—would that be useful to you?’ ”​
 
13 teams buy data from PFF? Let me guess.

Browns, jets, jags, 49ers, panthers, eagles, bills, bengals, chargers, rams, bucs, bears, cardinals.
 
13 teams buy data from PFF? Let me guess.

Browns, jets, jags, 49ers, panthers, eagles, bills, bengals, chargers, rams, bucs, bears, cardinals.

BB does. They need toilet paper.

In all seriousness I take their stuff with a grain of salt. Some stats seem like reality and some are nutty.

For example. Was Malcom Brown really the 5th best DT in the NFL vs the run or was that because he received a ton of help from Branch?
 
So many seem to hate them but are fine with the opinions of many who post here. Newsflash - no-one here knows the play call, adjustments or roles on each play either.
 
I would not pay money to have access to the opinions of many who post here, either.
I wouldn't either. But you don't see people claiming the opinions here are worthless. I have no idea how good PFF is but I bet they look at each play much closer than anyone here.
 
I wouldn't either. But you don't see people claiming the opinions here are worthless. I have no idea how good PFF is but I bet they look at each play much closer than anyone here.

Exactly. Not only do they look at every player on every play, they look at every player on every team on every play. Safe to say none of the posters here has anything like that perspective.

And it's a new low for the fans here to denigrate the front offices of 13 NFL teams for purchasing PFF subscriptions. Echo chamber aside, that's laughable.

To an independent observer: Internet fan forum blowhard vs PFF is no contest.
 
I wouldn't either. But you don't see people claiming the opinions here are worthless. I have no idea how good PFF is but I bet they look at each play much closer than anyone here.

Depends on how you mean that, I'd imagine.
 
Exactly. Not only do they look at every player on every play, they look at every player on every team on every play. Safe to say none of the posters here has anything like that perspective.

And it's a new low for the fans here to denigrate the front offices of 13 NFL teams for purchasing PFF subscriptions. Echo chamber aside, that's laughable.

To an independent observer: Internet fan forum blowhard vs PFF is no contest.

I'd take the analysis of several people here, and on other football sites, over PFF, and it's not even a close call.
 
So many seem to hate them but are fine with the opinions of many who post here. Newsflash - no-one here knows the play call, adjustments or roles on each play either.
But no one here is selling their analysis and calling it complete.
 
PFF's ratings are fine as a thermometer to understand whether a player had a generally good or bad game or season or whatever, but it's sort of the worst of all possible worlds in terms of analysis. It takes qualitative analysis and tries to create a numerical scale out of it to give it the mathematical mystique so these numbers can be compared against each other, but that's just bad methodology.

Why? Well, as an example, say you have 49 apples and add 1 apple to them. You now have 50 apples. You know the exact difference between 49 apples and 50 apples. It's 1 apple. The unit here has parsimony. Similar for most other units you'll use arithmetic on. It's a scalar variable.

Some get a little more complicated, like the difference between 10 degrees and 20 degrees Celsius is not the same as the difference between 40 and 50 degrees on the Celsius scale are not the same in terms of heat produced, but that's because it's a logarithmic scale.

With the PFF scales, you've reduced qualitative observations ("this guy missed a block") to mathematical expressions ("-1 overall score"). There's no way to tell what the difference is between, say +49 and +50. Is it one missed block? Is it four missed blocks? Is it one offside penalty?

You can say that a guy with a +50 score has probably played well, but there's no way to know if he's actually played better than a guy with a +30 score in a different game because the unit change is totally opaque and subjective to the observer; methodologically it's inappropriate to compare scores to one another because each player's scale is completely different. In this analogy, in one game Tom Brady is Fahrenheit; Aaron Rodgers is Celsius; and Sam Bradford is Kelvin... and in the next game, the scales change again. (This analogy is very imperfect because with temperature scales there's still some scientifically observable fact underlying each scale, the amount of heat being measured, so there are equivalents on each scale, whereas with PFF scales it's just some guy's qualitative observations).

That won't stop them, of course, since it's not an academically-oriented statistics site but rather an entertainment site making money hand over fist. But the sad part is they probably do have some interesting insights just from watching every minute of every game each week, which most people simply don't. The problem is they then take this and turn it into ******** faux math rather than just doing a 'scouting report.'

They probably do measure a lot of quantitative stuff (like punt hangtime) that's very useful, though. But the headlines are always the ******** grades.
 
I mean instead of hiring an in-house stat and data guy and paying them a salary, some teams outsource that process to a firm that purports to do the same. It's like a company outsourcing customer service to India, no more, no less.

Given that they think a 30 yard pass into triple coverage that is miraculously caught by your receiver is a better play by a QB than a 5 yard wide open dumpoff to a back with 30 yards of YAC added before a defender touches him, their opinion about anything football related is worth less than nothing. It actively detracts from otherwise good conversations to have these pseudostats injected into threads, whether they are saying good or bad things about the Pats players.
 
I'd take the analysis of several people here, and on other football sites, over PFF, and it's not even a close call.

As you say, there are indeed several on this site that give insightful analysis on football (including you). However, I would argue that this list is headed up by the OP.

I have to admit I've never paid much attention to PFF (partially because it is widely dismissed on this forum), but if Ken is giving it a second look I may have to re-examine my pre-conceptions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Friday Patriots Notebook 5/10: News and Notes
MORSE: Draft Analysis and Thoughts on Patriots Rookie Mini Camp
Thursday Patriots Notebook 5/9: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 5/8: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 5/7: News and Notes
What Did Tom Brady Say During His Netflix Roast?  Here’s the Full Transcript
What Did Drew Bledsoe Say at Tom Brady’s Netflix Roast? Here’s the Full Transcript
What Did Belichick Say at Tom Brady’s Netflix Roast?  Here’s the Full Transcript
Monday Patriots Notebook 5/6: News and Notes
Tom Brady Sustains, Dishes Some Big Hits on Netflix Roast Special
Back
Top