Fins offense per PFF | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Fins offense per PFF

NBP81

NBP81

Its what you know for sure... that just aint so...
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
17,649
Reaction score
45,578
Location
Montreal
So I bought a one month sub just to take a deeper look at it, I find myself disagreeing alot with some rankings posted in random articles so what the hell, if Im going to bitch about something, it's a good idea to actually look at the whole deal before forming an opinion. I think the fairest thing I could say is its a nice tool to have but not a hill you should die on in any particular argument on its own.

All that said, I will not renew for another month so I'll just post some observations while I have access for those interested.

WRs receiving grades: (the grade is for receiving, the rank is position overall) ie. Gesicki's receiving grade is 79.4, and he's rated 8th TE overall in the NFL.

Gesicki: 79.4(8th)
DeVante Parker: 77(30th)
Myles Gaskins: 75.3(25th)
Durham Smythe: 74.4(28th)
Jakeem Grant: 71(60th)
Matt Breida: 70.6
Lynn Bowden: 65.1(70th)
Preston Williams: 64.7(83rd)
Adam Shaheen: 64.1(34th)
Isaiah Ford: 60.7(105th)

OL's blocking grades: pb/rb

Ted Karras: 67.8/62.3(18th)
Jesse Davis: 62.1/58.6(58th)
Ereck Flowers: 73.8/58(32nd)
Austin Jackson: 53.3/49.6(70th)
Solomon Kindley: 54.1/50.4(70th)
Robert Hunt: 65.2/74(52nd)

Running backs' rushing grades:

Myles Gaskin: 74.4(25th)
Salvon Ahmed: 70.5(36th)
Matt Breida: 67
Patrick Laird: 55.5
D. Washington: 63.6

Comparing the 3 rookie QBs supporting cast.

A quick glance shows that Burrow had the worst of it by far. While the OL is somewhat comparable to the Fins, in term of grades, he only had 3 of his receiving options over a 70 grade(Tee Higgins: 79, Tyler Boyd: 75.5 and Auden Tate: 71). For comparison sake, Tua had 6 of his receiving options over a 70 grade.

Meanwhile, Herbert had 7 receiving options with a rating over 70 and 4 of them over a 80 rating but had the worst OL of the bunch by far.

That's it for now and keep in mind, none of what I wrote in this post is my opinion, I'm just describing the ratings as is...
 
NBP81 said:
So I bought a one month sub just to take a deeper look at it, I find myself disagreeing alot with some rankings posted in random articles so what the hell, if Im going to bitch about something, it's a good idea to actually look at the whole deal before forming an opinion. I think the fairest thing I could say is its a nice tool to have but not a hill you should die on in any particular argument on its own.

All that said, I will not renew for another month so I'll just post some observations while I have access for those interested.

WRs receiving grades: (the grade is for receiving, the rank is position overall) ie. Gesicki's receiving grade is 79.4, and he's rated 8th TE overall in the NFL.

Gesicki: 79.4(8th)
DeVante Parker: 77(30th)
Myles Gaskins: 75.3(25th)
Durham Smythe: 74.4(28th)
Jakeem Grant: 71(60th)
Matt Breida: 70.6
Lynn Bowden: 65.1(70th)
Preston Williams: 64.7(83rd)
Adam Shaheen: 64.1(34th)
Isaiah Ford: 60.7(105th)

OL's blocking grades: pb/rb

Ted Karras: 67.8/62.3(18th)
Jesse Davis: 62.1/58.6(58th)
Ereck Flowers: 73.8/58(32nd)
Austin Jackson: 53.3/49.6(70th)
Solomon Kindley: 54.1/50.4(70th)
Robert Hunt: 65.2/74(52nd)

Running backs' rushing grades:

Myles Gaskin: 74.4(25th)
Salvon Ahmed: 70.5(36th)
Matt Breida: 67
Patrick Laird: 55.5
D. Washington: 63.6

Comparing the 3 rookie QBs supporting cast.

A quick glance shows that Burrow had the worst of it by far. While the OL is somewhat comparable to the Fins, in term of grades, he only had 3 of his receiving options over a 70 grade(Tee Higgins: 79, Tyler Boyd: 75.5 and Auden Tate: 71). For comparison sake, Tua had 6 of his receiving options over a 70 grade.

Meanwhile, Herbert had 7 receiving options with a rating over 70 and 4 of them over a 80 rating but had the worst OL of the bunch by far.

That's it for now and keep in mind, none of what I wrote in this post is my opinion, I'm just describing the ratings as is...
Click to expand...

Problem is you can't remove the QB from the equation.

You can make the argument "Tua made a bunch fringe guys 'look good'" and also at the same time Gesicki didn't earn his rating catching Tua's throws and we all saw Parker last year or w Fitz this year. Maybe Burrow didn't have high grades from so many guys but that probably means he actually went for and completed his 1st and 2nd options more often.

Herbert probably held on to the ball too long and got sacked a lot same Burrow because they can take the sacks.

I know Gesicki and Parker would have done much better w Fitz.
 
Other than Gesicki and Parker when he is healthy, I wouldn’t want any of the other receivers listed above on the roster next year except Bowen’s as possible the 5th WR on the roster. This chart really only proves how ridiculous the ratings of PFF really are. I can’t believe anyone actually takes these ratings seriously.
 
Stills&Landry said:
Problem is you can't remove the QB from the equation.

You can make the argument "Tua made a bunch fringe guys 'look good'" and also at the same time Gesicki didn't earn his rating catching Tua's throws and we all saw Parker last year or w Fitz this year. Maybe Burrow didn't have high grades from so many guys but that probably means he actually went for and completed his 1st and 2nd options more often.

Herbert probably held on to the ball too long and got sacked a lot same Burrow because they can take the sacks.

I know Gesicki and Parker would have done much better w Fitz.
Click to expand...
From PFF's explanation, player's are graded on every snap, if that's the case, it doesnt matter if the player was targeted or not. I mean the whole point of their model is to filter out outside influence to come up with a grade that pretty much means "All else being equal, this is what this player is".
 
Hoot said:
Well, according to this, our entire offense sucks lol.
Click to expand...
Well, it kind of did.

That, however, isn't an indictment of the future. Assuming the young Oline guys can progress, which there is a very good chance, the skills are actually fairly easy to address, given our high number of early picks.

PFF ratings are bereft of any context whatsoever. As @hoops put it, the ratings are made in a vacuum.
 
PFF is trash, outside of punters and kickers I put minimal if any value in these ratings. Without knowing the actual play, these ratings are far too subjective.
 
NBP81 said:
From PFF's explanation, player's are graded on every snap, if that's the case, it doesnt matter if the player was targeted or not. I mean the whole point of their model is to filter out outside influence to come up with a grade that pretty much means "All else being equal, this is what this player is".
Click to expand...
That's impossible. What if you're never given opportunities at the things you're best at? Like contested catches. I mean if we grade Gesicki on just blocking and 'getting open' then he sucks. It's only when you put it up there just in the right spot that Gesicki shines and if you never attempt that throw then that's gone.

Same w Parker
 
NBP81 said:
From PFF's explanation, player's are graded on every snap, if that's the case, it doesnt matter if the player was targeted or not. I mean the whole point of their model is to filter out outside influence to come up with a grade that pretty much means "All else being equal, this is what this player is".
Click to expand...
I think you just hit on one of the major flaws.

Nothing is ever "equal", and without context, individual grades can be misleading at best, downright laughable at worst.

It isn't anything conscious though. It's just the way statistics by themselves, are in general, not always the the whole story.
 
Mach2 said:
Well, it kind of did.

That, however, isn't an indictment of the future. Assuming the young Oline guys can progress, which there is a very good chance, the skills are actually fairly easy to address, given our high number of early picks.

PFF ratings are bereft of any context whatsoever. As @hoops put it, the ratings are made in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
While its far from perfect, it does have value IMO... I dont like the rating system and how its purely subjective. But otoh, its really hard for me to take the opinion of casual fans who watch a couple of games a weekend over a site like this who have a clear way of doing things and review every single snap multiple times.

Now I dont intend to use the site any longer than this one month, and Im not saying its gospel, but I cringe when I hear couch warriors calling it trash... Its not trash at all imo... If it were free, I'd use it as it at least gives you a ballpark when you dont have time to watch all the games all the time.

ie. They got it wrong on some players on the Fins IMO, but their overall picture of the Fins offense as a whole is spot on, they ****ing suck...lol!
 
Stills&Landry said:
That's impossible. What if you're never given opportunities at the things you're best at? Like contested catches. I mean if we grade Gesicki on just blocking and 'getting open' then he sucks. It's only when you put it up there just in the right spot that Gesicki shines and if you never attempt that throw then that's gone.

Same w Parker
Click to expand...
Of course its impossible... Again, Im not trying to sell PFF subs here, dont **** on the messenger...lol!
 
At least as far as their ability to high point the ball, Gesicki is Gronk-esque. He'll probably go down to no contact after, the mid air collision while making the catch is enough to put him down but he'll make it.
 
Last edited:
NBP81 said:
While its far from perfect, it does have value IMO... I dont like the rating system and how its purely subjective. But otoh, its really hard for me to take the opinion of casual fans who watch a couple of games a weekend over a site like this who have a clear way of doing things and review every single snap multiple times.

Now I dont intend to use the site any longer than this one month, and Im not saying its gospel, but I cringe when I hear couch warriors calling it trash... Its not trash at all imo... If it were free, I'd use it as it at least gives you a ballpark when you dont have time to watch all the games all the time.

ie. They got it wrong on some players on the Fins IMO, but their overall picture of the Fins offense as a whole is spot on, they ****ing suck...lol!
Click to expand...
I agree. Many of those that see "PFF", and just dismiss it as "trash" are either not believers in analytics, or are insulted because their favorite players are not rated as highly as the think they should be.

From what I've seen from the site (second hand), my reaction is generally "MEH". Opinions are like......well you know the rest.

It is interesting to an extent, and may occasionally induce me to look at a player (from another team) a little more closely, but they aren't some sort of "bible" of football philosophy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom