From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
Like I said. All Packfn23 and I did was ask a question of why PFF graded the way they did.
To put Stokes at "above average" and King at Elite grading is strange. LIkely due to the high grade of the INT and low snap count. But when just looking at the grade and comparing it other players, it doesn't do the evaluation justice.
Nothing wrong with questioning grades and evaluations.
Any idea whether they include STs snaps to those grades? If yes, could explain some grades that look weird when considering only O or D snaps.
I also think grading down to a decimal point is kinda hilarious. Patrick Taylor played a total of 4 snaps, 3 on O and one on STs. Getting a 62.9 grade sounds awfully specific for 4 snaps. I kinda imagine the grader going "Now that's a play worth -0.1 points!"
They do include ST's.
Their grading scale for each play I believe goes from a -2 to a +2 with 0 being a neutral.
So with King, he has limited snaps but likely got a 2.0 grade on the INT. He also had no negative plays or at the least would only have minor limited plays.
Therefore, he gets an elite grade because of the low snap count and game changing play. I wish PFF would somehow qualify that in their rankings.
King had 1 ST snap, Stokes had 0.
They used to inherently qualify low snap counts before they normalized their grades on a 0-100 scale. Before, it was tough for a player who didn't play a lot to have a high grade as they simply didn't accumulate enough "points," so to speak.
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 16 Nov 2021 12:29, edited 1 time in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Therefore, he gets an elite grade because of the low snap count and game changing play.
it's more then just that, his play excelled on the other 19 plays as well.
people here rag on PFF grades a lot, I just get a kick out of forum members who think they know more because they think there a more astute evaluator then people at PFF, 400 guys trained in what to look when doing there evaluations.
people should read up about PFF before discounting there ability to give us a pretty accurate assessment of individual plays.
The PFF grading system is target-driven at the coverage level, crediting or deducting from all players involved either at the catch point or after the catch. Players away from the catch point will receive grading adjustments based on down and distance and other situational expectations.
so OK, they don't get to see everything, but those 800 eyes don't miss much.
Therefore, he gets an elite grade because of the low snap count and game changing play.
it's more then just that, his play excelled on the other 19 plays as well.
people here rag on PFF grades a lot, I just get a kick out of forum members who think they know more because they think there a more astute evaluator then people at PFF, 400 guys trained in what to look when doing there evaluations.
people should read up about PFF before discounting there ability to give us a pretty accurate assessment of individual plays.
The PFF grading system is target-driven at the coverage level, crediting or deducting from all players involved either at the catch point or after the catch. Players away from the catch point will receive grading adjustments based on down and distance and other situational expectations.
so OK, they don't get to see everything, but those 800 eyes don't miss much.
yoop. I said King played well or at least didn't have negative grades on his other 19 snaps the sentence prior. You cherry picked a sentence on me.
My whole point was comparing King to Stokes. Both had great games and yet King is voted as Elite and Stokes is evaluated as above average.
You literally changed your vote when I brought snap counts in because you at first took PFF's grade at face value and didn't think beyond that. Now you're doubling down again saying I don't know how PFF grading works.
I have read how they grade. I bet many here have.
Why are you responding to me and then insinuating I am ragging on PFF's grades? Why isn't digging deeper and asking questions on their data reasonable?
Yeah and I think I saw King get beat deep by Metcalf a few times. He probably had safety help, but still.
You might rightly point out that Metcalf does that against good CBs from time to time, and fair enough, but I feel like you draft a 6'2/4.4 guy in King expressly to eliminate that guy, and you admit it did not work out when you draft an Eric Stokes even after bringing King back.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
)