Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

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?

I don't have a better option. I do NOT give NFL network or ESPN more credence than anyone else because I know it is unlikely they have looked closely at the film either. Exceptions might be where someone like Dilfer takes a bit to review film and comment on it, like he did a few weeks ago for us.

I DO think the very best sources are our own coaches, despite the fact they sometimes sugar coat, and competent beat writers. Unfortunately, we don't have any decent beat writers at this time. None that don't work for the Dolphins, whose opinions aren't much better than hearing it from the coaches/players themselves. Some have decent analysis as to what our team might do in the near future though.

 

[hoops]

That's an awfully silly criticism of it.

yeah cause it's probably worse...i doubt there's much american football being played by kids growing up in the uk

 

[hoops]

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

i let my eyeballs tell me what i need to know...always have...if their analysis concides with what i see well then good on em...but i don't put any weight in thier player rankings...and they seem to think cog is gods gift to the left guard position...when really he should be a right guard if anything in this system...

for instance all i kept hearing was clabo was a top 5 tackle in 2012...the falcons didn't just walk away from a guy still playing in his prime...they saw the writing on the wall...well all we got is a shell of a player in miami...the stiffness was apparent as hell in the preseason even...pff sure didn't validate anything

 

[Austin Tatious]

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.

However, the bathroom scale is an objective measurement. PFF is still subjective. Each score it provides is limited. If PFF is "off" on one guy, it does not mean it is equally "off" on another guy. There is no basis to say that everything is normalized because they will be off the same way across the board. They could be off haphazardly on rating a wide variety of players. Furthermore, there is bias amongst the graders. Presumably, they don't have one grader (if they did, that would be even worse from a work overload standpoint). No matter how objective they try to make it with their rules, grader A may see Jonathan Martin one way and grader B may see Nate Solder another. Lastly, it is human nature for a grader to see what they want to see.

 

[Zounds]

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.

Those are stats. What Coyle is referring to is grades.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

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.

I've not blamed anyone for anything in this entire thread. It was good to hear the opinion of a real DC concerning the issue. And that is the point of this thread.

I'm only pointing out that some give PFF too much credence when, per Coyle, they should probably view it's evaluations as a not too valid source, rather than the final say. Just because it is usually our only source besides watching the game ourselves, it does not make it a valid source for most NFL evaluations, IMO.

 

[So Be]

i let my eyeballs tell me what i need to know...always have...if their analysis concides with what i see well then good on em...but i don't put any weight in thier player rankings...and they seem to think cog is gods gift to the left guard position...when really he should be a right guard if anything in this system...

for instance all i kept hearing was clabo was a top 5 tackle in 2012...the falcons didn't just walk away from a guy still playing in his prime...they saw the writing on the wall...well all we got is a shell of a player in miami...the stiffness was apparent as hell in the preseason even...pff sure didn't validate anything

They have Cog at #10 in pass protect, and #21 on the run, hardly Gods gift but,he has played well.

PFF also agrees on Clabo, saying that he has lost a step, and is not the player he was a year ago. Where are they/you wrong?

 

[hoops]

They have Cog at #10 in pass protect, and #21 on the run, hardly Gods gift but,he has played well.

PFF also agrees on Clabo, saying that he has lost a step, and is not the player he was a year ago. Where are they/you wrong?

so i guess that +8 or something i saw for cog isn't all that great a number...anyways i don't really care where they have anyone any more...imo let your eyes tell you what you need to know...

like for instance ed reed is washed the hells up in houston...i don't care where he's rated that guy is a corpse now

 

[hoops]

b/t anybody see that underhanded toss pick by weeden yesterday??? ha ha...down 7 5 minutes left he decides to try and throw from almost the pocket mind you a underhanded lollipop all the way to the sideline for a gift int by the lb...

assanine...thank god that clowns not my qb...better be on cmon man tonight...

sorry this is ot but i had to say it...i was watching that game yesterday and about spit up my beer

 

[Shouright]

I've not blamed anyone for anything in this entire thread. It was good to hear the opinion of a real DC concerning the issue. And that is the point of this thread.

I'm only pointing out that some give PFF too much credence when, per Coyle, they should probably view it's evaluations as a not too valid source, rather than the final say. Just because it is usually our only source besides watching the game ourselves, it does not make it a valid source for most NFL evaluations, IMO.

Valid, perhaps not, but more reliable than what we can muster ourselves, I'd put money on it. :)

---------- Post added at 12:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 PM ----------

However, the bathroom scale is an objective measurement. PFF is still subjective. Each score it provides is limited. If PFF is "off" on one guy, it does not mean it is equally "off" on another guy. There is no basis to say that everything is normalized because they will be off the same way across the board. They could be off haphazardly on rating a wide variety of players. Furthermore, there is bias amongst the graders. Presumably, they don't have one grader (if they did, that would be even worse from a work overload standpoint). No matter how objective they try to make it with their rules, grader A may see Jonathan Martin one way and grader B may see Nate Solder another.

Right. Like I said, the evaluation criteria would have to be applied consistently and without bias to generate reliable data overall.

Lastly, it is human nature for a grader to see what they want to see.

Ah, but you don't think that happens here, do you? :unsure:

 

[So Be]

I've not blamed anyone for anything in this entire thread. It was good to hear the opinion of a real DC concerning the issue. And that is the point of this thread.

I'm only pointing out that some give PFF too much credence when, per Coyle, they should probably view it's evaluations as a not too valid source, rather than the final say. Just because it is usually our only source besides watching the game ourselves, it does not make it a valid source for most NFL evaluations, IMO.

What did you expect Coyle to say? Some players and agents disagree, saying that PFF is close to what teams do, and is a valid source of info. I do agree that they are very far from perfect, just better than anyone else. It is the only source, regardless of watching the game, because no one is gonna spend the time to do what they do.

When all is said and done at the end of a year, their top ranked players are at least 95% of those most fans think of.

 

[mnphinfan]

People can take the numbers from PFF but they also need to incorporate watching the film or vice versa. You can only get so much from either. This has been a problem lately on this board where neither side is willing to budge. On a strictly personal point, if I am 100% honest with myself at what I am watching, I tend to give more credence to what my eyes are telling me, opposed to what other's people numbers tell me.

 

[So Be]

so i guess that +8 or something i saw for cog isn't all that great a number...anyways i don't really care where they have anyone any more...imo let your eyes tell you what you need to know...

like for instance ed reed is washed the hells up in houston...i don't care where he's rated that guy is a corpse now

They do say that Cog is playing well, which I agree with.

As to Ed Reed, they rank him #42 in coverage, and #64 vs the run. Is that the same as you were saying?

 

[So Be]

People can take the numbers from PFF but they also need to incorporate watching the film or vice versa. You can only get so much from either. This has been a problem lately on this board where neither side is willing to budge. On a strictly personal point, if I am 100% honest with myself at what I am watching, I tend to give more credence to what my eyes are telling me, opposed to what other's people numbers tell me.

Not sure you are familiar with what PFF does. They grade and rank based on their eyeball test of watching every player on every play. It is not numbers.

 

[TheWalrus]

yeah cause it's probably worse...i doubt there's much american football being played by kids growing up in the uk

Criticizing anyone's analysis -- not just PFF's -- because of where they grew up is asinine and the very definition of an ad hominem attack. Weak sauce.