PFF Ranks Dolphins OL at #14 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

PFF Ranks Dolphins OL at #14

So Be

So Be

Active Roster
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
16,572
Reaction score
2,216
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...econd-quarter/

PFF has the Phins OL graded at a negative 0-1 for the year but, this places them at #14 in the NFL, and if you click on "first quarter" you will see that they had us at #21 for the first quarter of the season. ARE THEY FRAKIN NUTS?

This is not answered as easily as one would think. They grade and rank OL's by the blockers doing what they are asked to do, including how long the QB holds the ball as well as the RB's hitting the holes, and do not over-rate the sacks. They also do the same for every OL in the NFL, and there are MANY a bad OL on the field this year.

I focus on the OL every time I watch the game the second time, and can see their grade on how they base it. It's not on the OL as a whole but the individual play averaged out.

Pouncey and Cog have high grades and ranks, and Jerry is above average. On the other side, Clabo and Martin have low grades, and the subs like Garner, Brenner, and now McKinnie have played well.

When you add them all together, it should average out to around a 0 or average but, this does not tell the tale of the OL as a group in it's overall play as 5 average guys would likely be better as a whole.

Your opinion?
 
How do we reconcile this with PFF's grade of Ryan Tannehill as the 7th-best quarterback in the league? :unsure:
 
shouright said:
How do we reconcile this with PFF's grade of Ryan Tannehill as the 7th-best quarterback in the league? :unsure:
Click to expand...

As with all of their ranks/grades, you can agree or disagree.
 
Those guys are on crack.
 
Hayden Fox said:
Metrics are dumb. Watch the film.
Click to expand...
When you're watching "the film," how do you know you're not experiencing the following and thereby making conclusions based on distorted perceptions?

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position.

Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
 
Hayden Fox said:
Ummm....I have no idea what your Billy Beane/Yoda quote is about. I have, however, seen John Jerry get whipped in pass pro and do nothing in the run game.
Click to expand...
Then I'd encourage you to look into it a bit more, since it's something to which we're all prone in making conclusions about the kinds of things we're talking about here. :up:
 
shouright said:
When you're watching "the film," how do you know you're not experiencing the following and thereby making conclusions based on distorted perceptions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Click to expand...

You do understand that many of their "metrics" are made via watching film? Some are subjective in nature. As much as football people try to make an industry as Sabremetricians in baseball, it will never work.
 
Hayden Fox said:
You do understand that many of their "metrics" are made via watching film? Some are subjective in nature. As much as football people try to make an industry as Sabremetricians in baseball, it will never work.
Click to expand...
Their player grades are reliable to the extent that their evaluation criteria are applied across players with consistency and without bias.

I have no idea whether that's the case, which is why I prefer PFF's objective statistics, rather than its player grades.
 
Southbeach 2 said:
As in anything, and anybody.
Click to expand...
Well, we know one can do that, but there's an inherent inconsistency embedded in that approach. One either believes PFF's grades to be reliable, or one does not. One can't tout its grades as reliable in buttressing one's argument that Ryan Tannehill is underrated, yet at the same time believe Ryan Tannehill is held back by a horrendous offensive line, when the same entity (PFF) is calling the offensive line slightly above average in the league.
 
shouright said:
Well, we know one can do that, but there's an inherent inconsistency embedded in that approach. One either believes PFF's grades to be reliable, or one does not. One can't tout its grades as reliable in buttressing one's argument that Ryan Tannehill is underrated, yet at the same time believe Ryan Tannehill is held back by a horrendous offensive line, when the same entity (PFF) is calling the offensive line slightly above average in the league.
Click to expand...

As I said in the OP, you need to understand the basis of their rank on the OL, and the same of all team ranks. It is based on individual grades, which are not the same as a group or team's success or failure. You can have three All Pro HOFers on the OL but, if the other two suck, the OL as a whole is going to have problems. We've seen that in pass protection. The interior was fine but, Clabo and Martin were far from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom