Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question

This was a duplicate post, sorry.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
it's way overrated...especially considering the guy that founded it is a brit...that's like an american evaluating european soccer...

stick to tea time
 
ConvenientTruth said:
What are these guys resumes? What gives them the insight in evaluating these players? Are they former coaches, or staff....at any level with years of experience in understanding what is going on in each play? No, they are amateurs who charge people a premium to get an analysis based on their opinion on how a player did on each play.
Click to expand...
But as long as they're applying their evaluation criteria reliably across the league, the comparisons among players they make are reliable.

You're highlighting the difference between reliability and validity here. A bathroom scale could weigh people as five pounds under weight and therefore be totally invalid, but if it weighs every person who steps on it as exactly five pounds under their true weight, then the comparisons among people it generates are nonetheless reliable (i.e., Bobby weighs 20 more pounds than Susie).

Likewise, PFF evaluations might not be as valid as those made by coaches (i.e., they might be like a bathroom scale that's five pounds off), but if those evaluations are based on the consistent and unbiased application of evaluation criteria, they nonetheless permit reliable comparisons among players (i.e., Brian Hartline is X amount better than another player), and certainly much more reliable comparisons than we're making with our eyes alone, doing nothing systematic at all across the league.
 
ATL_PHIN_FAN said:
Yup, you've got an excellent point. However, there is a set of evaluators who have vastly more experience than others and who are paid well to an extreme for their guru-like knowledge. Coaches. Additionally, who of all people are more likely to guess right as to the intent of a particular play, or the player's responsibility on a particular play? Coaches. This is because coaches are more able to place themselves in the shoes of the coach who actually called the play for a particular situation, thus he's considering more variables more accurately than PFF does or ever could.
Click to expand...
See the post just above this one. You're making the same distinction between reliability and validity.

I'd say off hand that if coaches developed rating criteria and applied them in a consistent and unbiased manner to players across the league, they'd produce both reliable and valid evaluations. PFF probably produces evaluations that are reliable but somewhat invalid. We on the other hand probably produce evaluations that are both unreliable and invalid.

In other words, we can do a whole lot better than ourselves by considering PFF data. We won't do as well as we would if we had access to something similar to PFF but generated by coaches, but we'll do much better than we could on our own IMO. Our eyes alone are the worst of all worlds.
 
This was a duplicate post, sorry.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Joke" may have been harsh, but it is still extremely unreliable as the one's doing the evaluation have no ties to football. I'm pretty sure the Chief analysts do not have a football background and are simply attempting to apply some algorithm they developed for each position to determine if they have been successful or not. For me it is the same as a chemist determining what food taste better do to its chemical make up....
 
ATL_PHIN_FAN said:
Yeah, and I'd be OK with that as long as they let the reader know they are just kinda using it as a starting point for discussion, rather than the final say in a player's evaluation. Some people seem to view it as such.
Click to expand...

As you know, I like PFF and use them in a number of my threads. I believe them to be the best available source of player evaluation. The info I post is maybe 1% of total info on our Dolphins, let alone the NFL. Yet' posters take shots without ever having seen the site.

You say that fans should go with eyeball, and expert analysis to evaluate. Starters play, on average, around 6o plays a game, 900-1000 per year. How many do you, or any other fan, actually watch? How many players do we get expert analysis on? How many times do we think coaches sugar coat what a play is doing?

NFL , ESPN, and others rank teams and players on stats alone, and no one seems to have any problem with them. Does anyone honestly believe they are better?

IF you have a better option, I would really like to know what it is?
 
Southbeach 2 said:
As you know, I like PFF and use them in a number of my threads. I believe them to be the best available source of player evaluation. The info I post is maybe 1% of total info on our Dolphins, let alone the NFL. Yet' posters take shots without ever having seen the site.

You say that fans should go with eyeball, and expert analysis to evaluate. Starters play, on average, around 6o plays a game, 900-1000 per year. How many do you, or any other fan, actually watch? How many players do we get expert analysis on? How many times do we think coaches sugar coat what a play is doing?

NFL , ESPN, and others rank teams and players on stats alone, and no one seems to have any problem with them. Does anyone honestly believe they are better?

IF you have a better option, I would really like to know what it is?
Click to expand...
There are two kinds of posts here IMO: 1) venting, where people want to simply express themselves based on what they're seeing, and 2) deductive reasoning posts, where people are trying to discern something about the team's functioning in comparison to other teams.

If you're doing #1 vent away, and realize that the odds are greatly against your making reliable and valid deductive conclusions about the team's functioning in comparison to other teams based on your eyesight alone. If you're doing #2, enlist some source of objective data about the team such as that provided by PFF (or other sites), and realize that it's going to give you far more reliable information than your eyesight with regard to the team's functioning.
 
hooshoops said:
it's way overrated...especially considering the guy that founded it is a brit...that's like an american evaluating european soccer...

stick to tea time
Click to expand...

Yeah, and we should put that Pat from London guy on ignore as well. What can a guy coaching American football in England possibly know of NFL players? :)

As PFF almost always agrees with your post game analysis threads (although in much more detail), are you overrated as well? JK/LOL
 
shouright said:
There are two kinds of posts here IMO: 1) venting, where people want to simply express themselves based on what they're seeing, and 2) deductive reasoning posts, where people are trying to discern something about the team's functioning in comparison to other teams.

If you're doing #1 vent away, and realize that the odds are greatly against your making reliable and valid deductive conclusions about the team's functioning in comparison to other teams based on your eyesight alone. If you're doing #2, enlist some source of objective data about the team such as that provided by PFF (or other sites), and realize that it's going to give you far more reliable information than your eyesight with regard to the team's functioning.
Click to expand...

Let's look at an example of Mike Wallace, who has been up on this board recently.

I can go to PFF and see his stats as a receiver along with drops, missed tackles caused, YAC, blocking, penalties, etc. I can also see who he was matched up against and how he did vs each one. I can see directional receiving, which shows his stats over 20 yds, 10-19 yds, 0-9 yds, behind the line, and to the left, middle, and right.

I can also see his grades on the above from a knowledgeable person doing it, as well as a rank compared to all other WR's in the NFL, again based on a knowledgeable person supplying the info. I can do this on his entire career.

Or, I can read where he has bad hands (not true), that he cannot go over the middle (not true), and that we are not throwing short to him (not true).

Yeah, I like what I get for less than $30 a year. :)
 
shouright said:
But as long as they're applying their evaluation criteria reliably across the league, the comparisons among players they make are reliable.

You're highlighting the difference between reliability and validity here. A bathroom scale could weigh people as five pounds under weight and therefore be totally invalid, but if it weighs every person who steps on it as exactly five pounds under their true weight, then the comparisons among people it generates are nonetheless reliable (i.e., Bobby weighs 20 more pounds than Susie).


Likewise, PFF evaluations might not be as valid as those made by coaches (i.e., they might be like a bathroom scale that's five pounds off), but if those evaluations are based on the consistent and unbiased application of evaluation criteria, they nonetheless permit reliable comparisons among players (i.e., Brian Hartline is X amount better than another player), and certainly much more reliable comparisons than we're making with our eyes alone, doing nothing systematic at all across the league.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying but this analogy in not valid either. I think the difference in some cases is more like 100 lbs off. Therefore, what PFF says is almost useless in that case, and could also mislead fans as to the value of a certain player.

The reason PFF can be that far off on some evaluations is that they may misinterpret either the intent of the play itself, or if they do get the intent right, then they might misinterpret the player's responsibility on a play. That's two important variables they must get right for their judgment to be valid in the least. Therefore, it doesn't matter if they are consistently worthless, does it? Except that it could lead those who don't know the details astray, if they give PFF too much credence.
 
ATL_PHIN_FAN said:
I see what you are saying but this analogy in not valid either. I think the difference in some cases is more like 100 lbs off. Therefore, what PFF says is almost useless in that case, and could also mislead fans as to the value of a certain player.

The reason PFF can be that far off on some evaluations is that they may misinterpret either the intent of the play itself, or if they do get the intent right, then they might misinterpret the player's responsibility on a play. That's two important variables they must get right for their judgment to be valid in the least. Therefore, it doesn't matter if they are consistently worthless, does it? Except that it could lead those who don't know the details astray, if they give PFF too much credence.
Click to expand...

You ask for the impossible, and blame PFF for not supplying it. Unless coaches go to twitter, telling fans the play calls, and what each player is supposed to do, you will never see what you ask for. It makes no sense.

Accept PFF for what they are, the best player evaluation in this day and age, and much better than anyone else doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom