Pro Football Focus individual grades for Patriots roster

[maineman209]

9/5C + 32 = F
5/9(F-32) = C

Even so, I know people who seriously believe that 0C is colder than 32F.

 

[maineman209]

Do you see DMC as a deep safety? maybe sometimes but he seems to play a lot more of a swiss army knife role here.

A couple weeks back Lazar or Sharp (I think) published some film-review based percentages on where both DMAC and Chung had been lining up. Both were a mix of split-safety, CB (more DMAC) and LB (more Chung).

In any case, Harmon played 61% of the snaps, nearly all of that at deep safety. When Harmon wasn't on the field (39% of the time), the Pats were most often in man on the boundaries, with the split safeties, an LB and often the nickel CB in pattern-matching zone (with no "deep safety").

 

[PP2]

Do you see DMC as a deep safety? maybe sometimes but he seems to play a lot more of a swiss army knife role here.

To a certain extent yes, and yes, he absolutely is in a swiss knife role in this defense except he does not cover the other team's best WR's so my argument is that in this regard, his twitchiness isn't as critical as overall, side to side speed.

 

[maineman209]

I just checked to confirm that Malcolm Brown wears No. 90. I am no stats guru by any stretch of the imagination, but yes, my eye test matches their stats - he is THAT BAD. You know that gaping hole that appears in the middle of the line in the run game inexplicably during most, or at least a portion of most, games this year? The hole is always right next to No. 90.

Hopefully filled by the LB who's assigned to it.

 

[maineman209]

To a certain extent yes, and yes, he absolutely is in a swiss knife role in this defense except he does not cover the other team's best WR's so my argument is that in this regard, his twitchiness isn't as critical as overall, side to side speed.

DMAC actually ended up doing exactly that on several plays during his "bad stretch" when they Pats were adjusting the pattern-matching zone scheme around available personnel. The DMAC of 2012/2013 probably would have prevented at least a couple of those 4 TDs he gave up.

 

[RobertWeathers]

To a certain extent yes, and yes, he absolutely is in a swiss knife role in this defense except he does not cover the other team's best WR's so my argument is that in this regard, his twitchiness isn't as critical as overall, side to side speed.

I agree.

 

[RobertWeathers]

DMAC actually ended up doing exactly that on several plays during his "bad stretch" when they Pats were adjusting the pattern-matching zone scheme around available personnel. The DMAC of 2012/2013 probably would have prevented at least a couple of those 4 TDs he gave up.

The coverage on those TEs was awful.

Another vet slated to make big bucks next year that might need to take a haircut if he wants to stay here

 

[Canuck]

I guess if you don't like the PFF numbers, there is the Madden Player Rating to compare to

 

[PP2]

DMAC actually ended up doing exactly that on several plays during his "bad stretch" when they Pats were adjusting the pattern-matching zone scheme around available personnel. The DMAC of 2012/2013 probably would have prevented at least a couple of those 4 TDs he gave up.

At this point, I'm just going to trust your memory more than I trust mine. You're more dialed into matters like this- I have to confess.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Indy will win. I want Houston to win because **** the Colts, and I'd rather play Houston than Baltimore or LA.

I think you might be in the wrong thread

 

[jah]

I think you might be in the wrong thread

Lmao u right

 

[PatsDeb]

Hopefully filled by the LB who's assigned to it.

Just watch when the guy is in the game on a big run play up the middle. They just push him out of the way and run right through the hole. Not sure who is supposed to be in the gap - a LB or Brown, but nobody is there, time and again. Maddening!!

 

[Shockt327]

Hold on. So, you were ok with PFF, but not anymore? I'm confused; am I misinterpreting or are you saying you were ok with them grading on a -2 to +2 scale? Or is the "basic number counting" you are referring to something totally different?

Yes he is. What he means is when PFF focused on "raw" numbers like coverage stats, pass rush stats and so forth instead of hyping up this one-size-fits-all grading scheme.

Ok, I'm still a bit confused over this because I feel like there are two parts to this criticism:
A) PFF attempting to create an "overall" grade by trying to somehow weight different parts of a player's game
B) PFF changing the metric it uses to present it's grades; from "-2 to +2" to "0-100."

But I can't help but think that these are minor reasons to go from support to outright dismissal of PFF.
Here's my reasoning:
1) PFF always took those -2 to +2 individual grades for each facet of a player’s game and put them together for an "overall" grade (i.e. +22.8 "overall"). It was done for the sole purpose of giving fans the (inherently flawed) ability to compare incomparable players at incomparable positions. Now I totally understand, and agree with this criticism of the "overall" grade, but I don't see how this flaw is any different than it ever was.
2) So, if you just want to ignore the "overall" grade and instead focus on grades for a "specific skillets;" PFF still offers this specific info. So, nothing has changed. Right? Now, I can't tell you for sure since it's a pay site, but I know I've seen them present rankings many times over and I see pics on the website.
3) So, the only real difference in PFF - whether its the "overall" grade or grading a specific skill set - is that, now, PFF takes that 2-to+2 grade and converts it to 0-100 instead. So, it's different metric, but it's the same idea, right? (presumably, so it's easier for a casual fan to understand the grade) If so, this change seems like semantics to me; is a "+22.8 grade as run blocker" really any more clear than what an "68.7 grade" as a run blocker means? I don't think so. It's still the same grading process; just presented differently.

So, if anything, if you were defending PFF when it first came out, how is any of the above going to change your mind? Because I can't help but think that all of the discussion points above are small potatoes compared to what it used to be: a bunch of common fans trying to break down aspects of the game that they do not understand, based on a TV broadcast that doesn't show you much. As opposed to now, where the NFL releases the All-22 & Cris Collinsworth has hired a bunch of former NFL scouts to do the grading.

 

[PatsFan2]

Phillip Dorsett above average is where I stopped reading. IF he was above average the Pats would use him more. Chis Hogan average?? Yeah he's had a off year but so as Brady: Hogan can't throw it to himself. Also Julian Edelman has had some timely drops but that should not detract from his rating he's flat out Good.

 

[Shockt327]

I agree that having trained eyes watch a lot of football is good. The problem is PFF removes all the richness of qualitative analysis in order to tap into the mystique of numbers and mathematical analytics, which has the unfortunate effect of collapsing a lot of the analytical nuance that PFF's scouts could talk about into near-meaninglessness.

Well, I agree with you on this part. I'd certainly be interested in write ups on what happened, too. An explanation is easier to understand then just a number. But I wouldn't entirely toss out the idea of PFF using a grading system to evaluate a player. NFL coaches/scouts "grade" players too. But as a fan, not all positions are like QB, HB, or WR where we have plenty of stats to look at and discuss. So, I think a PFF still has the right idea, even if it's flawed....

PFF wants you to believe that a 90 grade is a 90 grade, but what does that even mean? There's simply no way to parse or present in a meaningful way how a 89.6 differs from a 90.2 in their grading system. This isn't statistics, it's just crap marketed to look like statistics.

Now I disagree because really no one looks at PFF as an "objective stat", but rather a "player grade." PFF itself calls it just that; a player grade, too. Big difference. Grade means "to evaluate or rank," like teachers who grade their students. It's an evaluation process. An informed opinion. So, yes, I acknowledge I may disagree with PFF grades. Now, I know I disagreed with certain professors after they graded, say, my essay on an exam. But I'm still interested in their evaluation. Same for PFF.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Phillip Dorsett above average is where I stopped reading. IF he was above average the Pats would use him more. Chis Hogan average?? Yeah he's had a off year but so as Brady: Hogan can't throw it to himself. Also Julian Edelman has had some timely drops but that should not detract from his rating he's flat out Good.

There is a reason Dorsett sat.

Tom has thrown 11 picks this year. Of those 11, 3 were to Dorsett- highest on the team.

I d0nt know the "why" but that is concerning nonetheless.

 

[maineman209]

Well, I agree with you on this part. I'd certainly be interested in write ups on what happened, too. An explanation is easier to understand then just a number. But I wouldn't entirely toss out the idea of PFF using a grading system to evaluate a player. NFL coaches/scouts "grade" players too. But as a fan, not all positions are like QB, HB, or WR where we have plenty of stats to look at and discuss. So, I think a PFF still has the right idea, even if it's flawed....

Now I disagree because really no one looks at PFF as an "objective stat", but rather a "player grade." PFF itself calls it just that; a player grade, too. Big difference. Grade means "to evaluate or rank," like teachers who grade their students. It's an evaluation process. An informed opinion. So, yes, I acknowledge I may disagree with PFF grades. Now, I know I disagreed with certain professors after they graded, say, my essay on an exam. But I'm still interested in their evaluation. Same for PFF.

I think the main objection is that PFF grades players based primarily on generalized criteria, not within the context of what they're contributing in the context of a specific role, in a specific scheme, and a specific team.

For instance, I'm guessing that the four FBs rated/ranked ahead of Develin all have more receptions and receiving yards, and/or more carries and rushing yards, regardless whether or not they can block or not. If Develin is actually being ranked against other FBs who primarily block for other backs, that's a different story, but I kinda doubt that's the case.

 

[maineman209]

There is a reason Dorsett sat.

Tom has thrown 11 picks this year. Of those 11, 3 were to Dorsett- highest on the team.

I d0nt know the "why" but that is concerning nonetheless.

Dorsett out of position? Or Brady just missing him?

I know that one of those three was a very deep shot down the middle of the field into double-coverage against DET (low% throw to begin with). I think another was an intermediate depth seam route, on which a Miami defender read it and peeled back off the guy he was covering to get under Dorsett's route (good defensive play).

AFAIK, none of those three bounced off of, or went through, Dorsett's hands.

OTOH, there's the "bad luck charm" factor.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Dorsett out of position? Or Brady just missing him?

I know that one of those three was a very deep shot down the middle of the field into double-coverage against DET (low% throw to begin with). I think another was an intermediate depth seam route, on which a Miami defender read it and peeled back off the guy he was covering to get under Dorsett's route (good defensive play).

AFAIK, none of those three bounced off of, or went through, Dorsett's hands.

OTOH, there's the "bad luck charm" factor.

I remember the MIA one. That was a great play.

Who knows what the root cause of the 3 were. I saw that number in Kyed 2nd level stats today and it caught my eye.

I could be as simple as he didn't run the right option route or it was Tom that f-ed up. Dont know.

 

[maineman209]

I remember the MIA one. That was a great play.

Who knows what the root cause of the 3 were. I saw that number in Kyed 2nd level stats today and it caught my eye.

I could be as simple as he didn't run the right option route or it was Tom that f-ed up. Dont know.

I do remember that one deep throw, and was already in "WTF?" mode when Brady reared back to launch it. I was hoping that it would just go over everyone's head, but it was short and the two defenders had Dorsett boxed out from coming back for it.

IIRC, Dorsett did make the tackle before the defender could get real far, though. Same as he did on the Miami play.