Why Aaron Rodgers Grade Was Just Average Versus The Chiefs (PFF Article)

Agree or Disagree with the article?


  • Total voters
    30

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,644
Reputation
6,962
Daps
91,519
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers ended last night’s game with a -0.8 grade overall. This isn’t a bad game, just because the number begins with a minus, but it is an average grade very close to zero for a player who threw five touchdown passes, which seems crazy on the face of it. It’s not.

On the surface, Rodgers’ raw statistics paint the picture of one of the best games of the season. 333 passing yards, five touchdown passes, no interceptions, a 138.5 passer rating; Rodgers’ should be supplanting Carson Palmer in our team of the week as the top quarterback, not earning a grade with a minus in front of it, right?

Well, not if you dig a little deeper into Rodgers’ performance on a play-by-play basis. Looking first at his touchdown passes offers a view on how raw stats inflate the perception of a solid performance. Two of his touchdown passes were good or very good throws. His first touchdown pass on a whip to Ty Montgomery was a good throw leading his receiver away from the coverage for the score, so it earned a positive grade. His third touchdown pass to James Jones was a good throw on a back-shoulder pass yet again taking advantage of a free play, so it earned a positive grade.

The other three touchdowns, however, were passes thrown short of the end zone on speed outs to Randall Cobb. Were they bad throws? No, they were expected throws with the credit going to Cobb for fighting through contact or defeating the coverage with speed to the edge. That makes these zero-graded throws: Three passes that have a massive effect on Rodgers’ statistical performance but do not increase his grade.

However, those touchdown passes aren’t the story of what takes Rodgers’ grade from a grade with a plus in front of it to a grade with a minus in front of it. The story of what takes Rodgers’ grade below zero are two plays that you aren’t likely to see mentioned anywhere else today, but are taken into account of in a play-by-play grading system.

1. Rodgers had a fumble, which displayed poor pocket management, with 8:39 remaining in the second quarter. That play earned a negative grade.

2. With 12:58 remaining in the third quarter, Rodgers forced a pass that Josh Mauga could and possibly should have been returned for six points for Kansas City. If Mauga makes this interception, it would have tacked an ugly interception onto Rodgers’ stat line. Instead, Rodgers maintained his interception-less streak at Lambeau field, but it is a negatively graded play regardless. These are poor plays on Rodgers’ part that bring his game grade down that won’t show up on any widely quoted statistical analysis of his performance.

Context is crucial with everything in football, and if you believe we are saying that Rodgers had a poor game last night because his grade has a minus in front of it, then let me set your mind at ease; I do not think Rodgers played a poor, subpar game last night and neither does anybody else at Pro Football Focus. Rodgers did his job last night, but his job was executing simple throws, putting the ball quickly in the hands of receivers like Randall Cobb in favorable matchups on short throws, and allowing others to do the heavy lifting.

But for a couple of poor plays, his overall grade would have matched the sort of grade that you would be expecting to see from him, but those poor plays, coupled with the relative ease of some of his scores mean his performance last night was far closer to average than it was to the fantastic performance the box score suggests. The context surrounding his grade is crucial.

The greatness of Rodgers’ performance last night was in the intangibles. Recognizing the blitz, drawing the defense offsides, catching the Chiefs in bad situations and exploiting those scenarios with simple passes to open receivers. But you cannot — and we do not try to — quantify intangibles, or what comes pre-snap. Our system grades what can be graded — the execution of the play post-snap — and in that regard Rodgers did not stand out in the same way that his statistics did.

Why Aaron Rodgers graded so low versus Chiefs | ProFootballFocus.com
 
  • Dap
Reactions: jeh

yseJ

Empire strikes back
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
47,577
Reputation
2,919
Daps
70,324
Reppin
The Yay
They're still shyty at times. So shifty you don't even bother defending what they did

their grades just are, their criteria is simple - they favor consistency over big plays and they emphasis PER SNAP, not PER GAME aggregation.

the fact that their grading scale have a ceiling and floor for each snap means someone who played 50 snaps and had three amazing, once-in-a-lifetime plays for TDs, can score a max of +6 on those plays, and can easily earn a negative grade overall if they got -.5 for like 10 plays they didnt give enough effort/missed their block on and a couple of bad plays for -1 and the rest average/making plays theyre supposed to (which is grade of 0)

their grades are per snap, and while they have some context, its still not enough context to have their grades being the focal point of a discussion.

the problem is the layman doesnt understand this. the layman thinks its a madden overall score for the game. its not. not to mention, there's always subjective points here and there.

in general, PFF is as good as any source of advanced analysis. the only thing I cant really fukk with is them grading defensive backs without seeing the all-22 first. that just doesnt sit right with me, some dudes guessing what the coverages were supposed to do off a tv cam :scusthov:...but other than that, I have no beef with their grades. I have no beef with their evaluation of arod here. it's consistent with their grading system.
 

yseJ

Empire strikes back
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
47,577
Reputation
2,919
Daps
70,324
Reppin
The Yay
lol I just went and took a look- this article gathered like 600 comments when their usual articles average around 5 and a half

PFF getting big can be a double edged sword for them- they now have to explain their grading system and dumb it down for the general redneck with internet :mjlol:

they wont have to do it for much longer tho- starting next month they will have a 0-100 scale like madden especially for such audience, Im not even kidding :heh:
 

MegaTronBomb!

Power is in my hair nikka
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
14,302
Reputation
2,545
Daps
44,666
Reppin
From The Westside With Love
The problem with analytics like this, is that it's being preached to a audience that does not really understand/care about analytics.

PFF really did bring this on itself,cause now they're gonna have to sit up and defend their system everytime somebody has a great game, that doesn't really fit into the parameters of what they're grading on.

or maybe they're elite level nerds, and knew that this would eventually happen...and drive their traffic way up. :lupe:
 

duncanthetall

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
45,566
Reputation
4,551
Daps
150,875
Reppin
WHODEY/BIGBLUE/SNOWGANG/MIDNIGHTBOYZ
lol I just went and took a look- this article gathered like 600 comments when their usual articles average around 5 and a half

PFF getting big can be a double edged sword for them- they now have to explain their grading system and dumb it down for the general redneck with internet :mjlol:

they wont have to do it for much longer tho- starting next month they will have a 0-100 scale like madden especially for such audience, Im not even kidding :heh:
Why are you gobbling up these fukking nerds so much? They don't know what the play call was. They don't know what Rodgers told his WR to do. They don't know what fukkin audibles were made at the line or just how he outsmarted the opposing defense or threw fake shyt out there to confuse them. They give more points for throwing a dumb pass into tight coverage that is complete instead of throwing a short pass that gets the man open to maneuver for a TD. They take away points for shyt like taking sacks, but don't give points for drawing opponents offsides.

PFF isn't unfukkwitable breh. Stop acting like its some high-brow bullshyt. Just a bunch of nerds applying nerd shyt to man shyt. At times its useful. Other times, like now, its fukking RETARDED
 

yseJ

Empire strikes back
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
47,577
Reputation
2,919
Daps
70,324
Reppin
The Yay
Why are you gobbling up these fukking nerds so much? They don't know what the play call was. They don't know what Rodgers told his WR to do. They don't know what fukkin audibles were made at the line or just how he outsmarted the opposing defense or threw fake shyt out there to confuse them. They give more points for throwing a dumb pass into tight coverage that is complete instead of throwing a short pass that gets the man open to maneuver for a TD. They take away points for shyt like taking sacks, but don't give points for drawing opponents offsides.

PFF isn't unfukkwitable breh. Stop acting like its some high-brow bullshyt. Just a bunch of nerds applying nerd shyt to man shyt. At times its useful. Other times, like now, its fukking RETARDED
I'm not gobbling up anything. The point is they have a grading system that is very specific in how it works. It doesnt represent any real life model. However it's consistent. And when people have problems with their grades, people really should have problems with the system. But people as usual pick and choose and only raise up a storm when the eye test doesn't match a particular grade. No system is perfect, especially one with arbitrary scale like theirs. My point is either you accept the system and it's flaws or you don't completely. People will point to pff grades when it suits their narratives and /or players but act indignant when they don't. Nah breh - you have to be consistent.

And you are wrong about them giving more points to a dumb pass that is complete. If this was true cutler would get an extremely positive grade for his career. He doesn't.

You are right tho in that they don't know what the call was or what he told his wrs to do. But neither do you. Pff isn't about results-oriented grading. A team can blow another team out yet only few players can be graded positively, because grades are cumulative over all snaps, even the ones that come in garbage time.
 

yseJ

Empire strikes back
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
47,577
Reputation
2,919
Daps
70,324
Reppin
The Yay
And honestly your assessment of how they grade qbs show me that you have no clue about their grades. Just in the same article they talked about a bad forced pass that earned arod a negative grade that fell incomplete.

The system ain't got no face. You know me, I love short safe passes. I'm a firm believer you don't have to throw a deep ball at all to be a very competent qb. And yet I'm fine with their system giving it a zero grade because it's consistent. Rodgers, peyton, alex smith or flacco will get the same grade with the same throw in pff system. That won't be the case on thecoli where everyone has an a$$hole, I mean their qb agenda :pachaha:

Consistency is key. As long as you have the same criteria for every player, the system is valuable in some ways and not very valuable in others. If there's no consistency and just results oriented system, the system is worthless in all ways.
 

Gil Scott-Heroin

Veteran
Bushed
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
89,679
Reputation
10,241
Daps
241,471
Why are you gobbling up these fukking nerds so much? They don't know what the play call was. They don't know what Rodgers told his WR to do. They don't know what fukkin audibles were made at the line or just how he outsmarted the opposing defense or threw fake shyt out there to confuse them. They give more points for throwing a dumb pass into tight coverage that is complete instead of throwing a short pass that gets the man open to maneuver for a TD. They take away points for shyt like taking sacks, but don't give points for drawing opponents offsides.

PFF isn't unfukkwitable breh. Stop acting like its some high-brow bullshyt. Just a bunch of nerds applying nerd shyt to man shyt. At times its useful. Other times, like now, its fukking RETARDED
Did you even read the article?
 

duncanthetall

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
45,566
Reputation
4,551
Daps
150,875
Reppin
WHODEY/BIGBLUE/SNOWGANG/MIDNIGHTBOYZ
And honestly your assessment of how they grade qbs show me that you have no clue about their grades. Just in the same article they talked about a bad forced pass that earned arod a negative grade that fell incomplete.

The system ain't got no face. You know me, I love short safe passes. I'm a firm believer you don't have to throw a deep ball at all to be a very competent qb. And yet I'm fine with their system giving it a zero grade because it's consistent. Rodgers, peyton, alex smith or flacco will get the same grade with the same throw in pff system. That won't be the case on thecoli where everyone has an a$$hole, I mean their qb agenda :pachaha:

Consistency is key. As long as you have the same criteria for every player, the system is valuable in some ways and not very valuable in others. If there's no consistency and just results oriented system, the system is worthless in all ways.

Did you even read the article?
blah blah blah. nikkas. Stop. The capes are unnecessary. Everyone knows this shyt is trash especially for a performance like this. Their attempt at defending their shyt system is fukking fugazi but y'all are just eating it up. For shame
 

Slystallion

Live to Strive
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
13,106
Reputation
-10,504
Daps
17,425
Good Lord they probably have eli at -2000 if A-Rod is throwing five tds and getting a negative number
 

Gil Scott-Heroin

Veteran
Bushed
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
89,679
Reputation
10,241
Daps
241,471
blah blah blah. nikkas. Stop. The capes are unnecessary. Everyone knows this shyt is trash especially for a performance like this. Their attempt at defending their shyt system is fukking fugazi but y'all are just eating it up. For shame
Yeah, looks like you didn't read the article.
 
Top