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

[yseJ]

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

you have nothing to say besides calling them nerds
I was listening, and didnt hear anything convincing from you. you prolly think anyone who watches all-22 film is a nerd

 

[yseJ]

They usually go over the All-22 tape when it comes out, and adjust the gradings where necessary.

yea but they rarely do it...I dont see how you can even start grading them without seeing coverages

 

[SoulController]

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.

hypotheticals

i read the article, and they lost me there.they earn a -10 for this week

 

[yseJ]

They admit they can't take into account intangibles when really that's what makes Rodgers so great. If you can't assign points for proper pre-snap reads, extending plays with maneuverability, and accurate throws on the run then you aren't capturing what makes him the best qb in the league.

nothing in their grading says hes NOT the best qb in the league. I believe he is the best qb by wide margin in their grading over last several years and it hasn't been particularly close

pff grading system is far, far from perfect but its as good as any other advanced (or not advanced) system there is. some calls on the grades will be somewhat subjective, and thats understandable.

but the more tape you see, the more educated your 'guesses' on plays being called and coverages being called you see.

you can see that something like

or this

is pretty much a slight variation of this

 

[yseJ]

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.

hypotheticals

i read the article, and they lost me there.they earn a -10 for this week

so basically you think that if for example jay cutler throws the ball into double coverage and it doesnt get picked off when two defenders collide, he shouldnt be hit with a negative grade for that snap ?

 

[SoulController]

so basically you think that if for example jay cutler throws the ball into double coverage and it doesnt get picked off when two defenders collide, he shouldnt be hit with a negative grade for that snap ?

the play they talked about wasnt that bad, Mauga is an oaf with no ball skills and Rodgers knows that. so the grade on that snap is stupid

 

[BuddahMAC]

Yeah, the non-interception counting as a negative takes too much subjectivity into what's supposed to be sports math w/ numbers & facts. Who decides what's the degree of a poor throw? What % is on a receiver running a route incorrectly or not playing through to a ball worked into the QB's negative #s? Wouldn't you have to have their playbook to properly decide that factor? Is throwing in the direction of a defender with bricks hands added into the equation? Who else was open on the play? Do you work them into to math?

Those are all very subjective statistics that can vary wildly based on who is analyzing the footage. It's one thing to just leave it an incomplete pass and have that be a negative in itself. It's another to count it as a bigger negative because someone should have intercepted it and they could have, should have, would have run it back.

I'm fine with using analytics to try to further break down the game, but when you start getting into this fuzzy subjective math, you start losing me. Overanalyzing the game in this manner means that throwing into a tight window for a completion can now be a negative b/c there was someone more open for a higher percentage completion throw. But they made the play, and that's what should count. The defender didn't make the play, there wasn't a pick, the only negative should be the incompletion.

 

[STAN JONES]

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/lets-discuss-pff-for-a-second.359326/

Like I said in the above thread, all it takes is an understanding on how they grade a player's performance and PROPER context. It's basically the 'eye test', without overvaluing big plays.

but what I don't understand is if their system is basically the eye test then how in the world did Rodgers get a negative grade?

Did he have a average or slightly below average game going by your own personal eye test?

 

[JYoung24]

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

That's basically every Brady game that people hype up

 

[STAN JONES]

Yeah, the non-interception counting as a negative takes too much subjectivity into what's supposed to be sports math w/ numbers & facts. Who decides what's the degree of a poor throw? What % is on a receiver running a route incorrectly or not playing through to a ball worked into the QB's negative #s? Wouldn't you have to have their playbook to properly decide that factor? Is throwing in the direction of a defender with bricks hands added into the equation? Who else was open on the play? Do you work them into to math?

Those are all very subjective statistics that can vary wildly based on who is analyzing the footage. It's one thing to just leave it an incomplete pass and have that be a negative in itself. It's another to count it as a bigger negative because someone should have intercepted it and they could have, should have, would have run it back.

I'm fine with using analytics to try to further break down the game, but when you start getting into this fuzzy subjective math, you start losing me. Overanalyzing the game in this manner means that throwing into a tight window for a completion can now be a negative b/c there was someone more open for a higher percentage completion throw. But they made the play, and that's what should count. The defender didn't make the play, there wasn't a pick, the only negative should be the incompletion.

I had a debate on Twitter a couple months back with one of the PFF dudes about this same stuff

It was about some bs stat they made up about "interceptable passes"

Basically passes that could've or should've been intercepted

The problem is its all subjective and these dudes are biased as fukk

2 qbs can make the same exact throw and they will call one a perfect pass while saying the other couldve been intercepted had the db turned his head or some bullshyt like that

 

[Trojan 24]

the play they talked about wasnt that bad, Mauga is an oaf with no ball skills and Rodgers knows that. so the grade on that snap is stupid

I actually thought that would have been a dope interception If he made that. Any one have a replay of that? From the other angle, it looked like he almost had to one had snag that thing. Maybe I saw it wrong though.

 

[fact]

Listen to yesterdays Dan Lebatard show on the podcast and hear Stugotz talk about this right here. He has a 45 minute hot take on it.

 

[King Kreole]

Yeah, the non-interception counting as a negative takes too much subjectivity into what's supposed to be sports math w/ numbers & facts. Who decides what's the degree of a poor throw? What % is on a receiver running a route incorrectly or not playing through to a ball worked into the QB's negative #s? Wouldn't you have to have their playbook to properly decide that factor? Is throwing in the direction of a defender with bricks hands added into the equation? Who else was open on the play? Do you work them into to math?

Those are all very subjective statistics that can vary wildly based on who is analyzing the footage. It's one thing to just leave it an incomplete pass and have that be a negative in itself. It's another to count it as a bigger negative because someone should have intercepted it and they could have, should have, would have run it back.

I'm fine with using analytics to try to further break down the game, but when you start getting into this fuzzy subjective math, you start losing me. Overanalyzing the game in this manner means that throwing into a tight window for a completion can now be a negative b/c there was someone more open for a higher percentage completion throw. But they made the play, and that's what should count. The defender didn't make the play, there wasn't a pick, the only negative should be the incompletion.

I see what you're saying, but not every bad throw is subjective. If a QB throws it way over the head of his WR and it sails into the hands of a safety who drops it, that throw should not be graded the same as a slightly inaccurate throw just out of the reach of a WR. Not every incomplete or interception is equal. Some are good passes that are bobbled by the wr, some are terrible passes that had no chance of being completed.

 

[BuddahMAC]

I see what you're saying, but not every bad throw is subjective. If a QB throws it way over the head of his WR and it sails into the hands of a safety who drops it, that throw should not be graded the same as a slightly inaccurate throw just out of the reach of a WR. Not every incomplete or interception is equal. Some are good passes that are bobbled by the wr, some are terrible passes that had no chance of being completed.

Why was it over his head though? Did the WR flatten out when the route was to continue upfield? Did an adjustment of the DB change the WR's route between the ball's release point and when it reached where the WR should have been? Did pressure in the pocket or contact initiating with the QB as he's throwing affect the throw? There are too many factors in there to put gradients on the pass beyond it just being an incompletion and, because of that, there's no way to make that into a statistical model.

For example, you see a pass land 5 yards to the left of a guy down the field. Some fictional model has that as a "bad pass" over just an incompletion, so it's -3 over -1 in numbers if you only watch the play. When seeing everyone come back to the line of scrimmage, you see the QB motion to the WR angrily hooking his hand inside seeming like that's the route he should have run. So, it seems the WR ran the route wrong, and, looking back at the play, you see if the WR followed the route the QB motioned at the point of release, he more than likely would have had a catch w/ YAC.

So is it back to -1? Is it now a positive play in the QB's numbers because it was a potential completion (like the potential interception) and the WR gets all the negatives? If the WR ran the route properly, how do you know the DB wouldn't recover and jump/block/disrupt the route? If the cameras don't catch that interaction between the players, you don't even know the WR busted the play &, without knowing the play yourself, you're just taking the QB's reaction as proof he did. And on top of all that, maybe the QB's out of the pocket and throwing to an open spot b/c there's no play to be had b/c the player ran the route wrong (which is still a "bad pass" but done for a specific reason to move on to the next play). Outside of the result of the play being an incomplete pass, everything else is all subjective guesswork on a pass that simply looks bad on the surface.

And that's just the problems in breaking down a "bad incomplete pass" vs an "incomplete pass". It's grading on hypotheticals and/or subjectives (like "interceptable passes" or "bad incomplete pass" ) I have an issue with when it's hard enough to break down, interpret and put numbers to what actually happened on the field. Some things, like incompletions, might have to remain a pretty broad statistic by necessity and breaking them down further more a subject of conversation than something to put into numbers.

 

[Maschine_Man]

SMH, I hate this new age of over analysis and analytics and nonsense. EVERYONE has their own "criteria" for grading ppl nowadays

fukk all that shyt, I watched the game and that dude is the best in the League by far.