Ok we agree. There are targets. That is a raw stat.
No it is not, not for a defender. Unless you know the coverage, how do you assign a target to a defender? Who was the defender on the Hogan TD? Who 'got that target"? The corner sat like he had a short zone, and the safety was nowhere to be seen. Who that target, catch, 37 yards and TD is assigned to is an analytic.
There are catches. That is a raw stat. If PFF is saying that Revis is responsible for allowing the receiver to catch the ball or deflecting/defending the throw then I am accepting their assessment of the play. I am not accepting their analysis if Revis is good or not. The action of determining if the CB is good or bad is done by me.
All of their assessments are based upon the analysis. You are taking the numbers that come out of those assessments and using them to judge Revis as a top 5 corner because PFF wrote an article comparing him to 15 other corners they selected and said he was top 5 in stats based upon their analysis.
You are doing nothing to determine whether the corner is good other than quoting PFF contrived and flawed stats, and an article that didn't even say what you thought it did.
You have made zero comment about your determining whether he is a good corner or not, just saying he is top 5 based on stats and analysis that are solely created by PFF.
I said their rating systems were flawed. I never said their raw stats were.
Once again, judging what defender is considered the 'target' is analysis. Those stats are not raw, they are manipulated by the judgment of PFF.
I said comp % against was not a PFF stat. Its generic.
100% wrong. PFF is the only place that does that. They are the only place that uses passing stats as defender stats by using THEIR ASSESSMENT of who to charge the coverage to. If you do not know the coverage, how do you assess a large chunk of the plays, such as Hogans?
Comp % against is an opinion, and the only people who use that opinion statistic are PFF.
The link I sent you and its data was from PFF. PFF does not have a copyright on the CB comp % against metric.
I don't know if they copyright it, but they are the only ones who use it. That is why I knew if was PFF garbage stat when you were denying it.
Official NFL stats are raw. Things that only PFF does is analysis.
I defended the raw stats and their assessment if a player was defending the play.
But you agree they suck, unless it suits your purpose and then you agree with their assessment.
If their ratings are terrible, why would you have any confidence in their ability to determine who was in coverage? Granted there are many plays where it is clear, but there are far too many that are not to give any credence to their numbers.
Look- you think PFF sucks and Revis was a good- not elite CB in 2015 then that is your perrogative. Lets move on.
Elite shouldn't even be in the discussion. Pretty much every top WR he faced lit him up (Dez Bryant didn't because he was injured and Kellen Moore was the QB). You have to watch the games and not rely on PFF. Good is subjective. I know I wouldn't want him one on one with a top WR all day if he was on my team, because the results speak for themselves. Against a team without a real #1, he seems to do fine, but I don't how he would do if they used him differently. I think what is obvious is that he simply can no longer take away a WR.