Kyle Williams doubts outsiders can know if he’s playing well
Posted by Michael David Smith on November 30, 2016, 9:28 AM EST
Bills defensive tackle Kyle Williams had an interesting response to being told he was ranked as one of the best players in the NFL: He doubted how anyone would know.
Williams was told by Tim Graham of the Buffalo News that in 2010, Pro Football Focus ranked him as the third-best player in the NFL. Williams responded that he doesn’t buy into such rankings.
“I don’t even know what that means, to be honest with you. How do they know how to grade me if they don’t even known what I’m supposed to be doing?” Williams asked.
In Williams’ view, even if you watch him on every single play of an entire season, you still don’t know how well he was playing unless you also know what the Bills’ defensive play call was. Williams points out that what constitutes a good play in one defense could be a bad play in another defense based on what the defensive tackle is asked to do, and those outside the Bills facility won’t know what the defensive tackle was asked to do on any given play.
“If you don’t know what my assignment is or what the O-line’s trying to do, I mean . . . Good Lord, especially in this defense,” Williams said. “I don’t know how anybody would know how to begin to grade this defense if they didn’t know exactly what our job is on a certain play. We have some interesting jobs in this defense that I’ve never been asked to do in other ones. So to grade that on some kind of scale? I don’t know how they could do that.”
There’s certainly some value in tape scouting even if you don’t know a player’s assignment. After all, that’s what every NFL team does when scouting players on opposing teams. But Williams raises a fair point about the limitations of watching a team from the outside.
The obvious inference I draw from this article is no one can grade players except for those inside the building... I guess we should all shut up and just watch because our opinions are worthless since we don't know what they are doing...
For the millionth time, I will take PFFs grades over message board chatter and opinion every day of the week. The PFF guys actually watch every player on every play unlike message board coaches and GMs who won't even tune in to watch their team finish a game but will dish out their deflated ball without thought...
or...unless you know the play calls, any inferences we draw from watching the TV broadcasts are limited in value. We can discuss them, but unlike many people here believe, they aren't gospel.
Obviously some things can be judged, for example: In the Bears zone blocking sometimes the G to the back side is responsible to slow the DE/DT opposite him before heading into the second level so that the OT to the backside has time to get his head/shoulders on the DE/DT. If this isn't done right, the OT has no chance to keep the DE/DT from crashing down the LOS and making the tackle from the backside if the RB hesitates or tries to cut back.
In that case we can say (with relative certainty) that the G and OT didn't do their assignments properly.
or
On a pass play Cutler takes his drop and is hit right as he finishes his drop. Poor blocking by the OT? Maybe not. If Cutler drifted left or right on his drop, or if he didn't take the step up that is required at the end of the drop, he ends up right where the OT is taking the DE/OLB.
The TV broadcast doesn't even give the full picture on most plays. What are the safeties doing? Where exactly are the WRs routes being run and to what depth? What coverage was called? cover-2? Quarters? man? zone?
Sites like PPF have value, but when multiple NFL professionals say that the rankings are somewhat meaningless, maybe, just maybe the professionals know something we/PFF don't.
The obvious inference I draw from this article is no one can grade players except for those inside the building... I guess we should all shut up and just watch because our opinions are worthless since we don't know what they are doing...
For the millionth time, I will take PFFs grades over message board chatter and opinion every day of the week. The PFF guys actually watch every player on every play unlike message board coaches and GMs who won't even tune in to watch their team finish a game but will dish out their deflated ball without thought...
I'm not saying we can't have opinions...but they are just that...opinions. The difference between us and PFF is we aren't charging anyone for our opinions...they're free. I'm just saying I take PFF grades with a grain of salt. They're nice...but at the end of the day they have slightly more of a clue than I do, and thats only because they watch film(which if I wanted to pay the NFL for the all 22 look I could do to). After that we're even.
Again imo PFF has value only for the team who can take their input and use it to add to what they have.
PFF is next to useless for fans b/c their information on it's own is next to useless. Which is why you get gems like Webb is by far better then Bushrod, and that Shea is the best DE on the Bears, or that Conry is doing a great job.
The obvious inference I draw from this article is no one can grade players except for those inside the building... I guess we should all shut up and just watch because our opinions are worthless since we don't know what they are doing...
For the millionth time, I will take PFFs grades over message board chatter and opinion every day of the week. The PFF guys actually watch every player on every play unlike message board coaches and GMs who won't even tune in to watch their team finish a game but will dish out their deflated ball without thought...
I'm not saying we can't have opinions...but they are just that...opinions. The difference between us and PFF is we aren't charging anyone for our opinions...they're free. I'm just saying I take PFF grades with a grain of salt. They're nice...but at the end of the day they have slightly more of a clue than I do, and thats only because they watch film(which if I wanted to pay the NFL for the all 22 look I could do to). After that we're even.
1st: the content that's posted here from PFF is free. 2nd: PFF's grades, like everything discussed with football (my opinion, your opinion, Bigg's articles etc), amount to a grain of salt. We're talking about a fricking sport: entertainment, a television show, after all. 3rd: They have far more of a clue than you (even if you used the ALL-22) because the people doing the evaluations aren't JUST watching the Bears and grading them, they're watching every play and every player from multiple games and evaluating them using a standardized system. 4th: Kyle William's argument AND rics argument are valid, but IMHO they have at least one serious flaw: fan's communication rarely (if ever) takes into account a player's role in any given play. Instead, we look for global screw ups and global successes. How many sacks did he get? How many impact plays did he make? How many yards did he gain? Those are the elements we discuss here. Similarly, that's what PFF grades. However, they actually pay attention to all players and compare them across the league with a standardized system to 'simplify' a comprehensive look at a player's performance.
Once I start seeing posts that sound like: "it looked like his role on that particular run stuff was to hit X gap and steer his blocker to the right and attempt to turn his body before penetrating into the backfield and it looked like he executed that in an average way." I'll start denigrating PFF. Until then, their numbers are far more informative than ric's post game drunken ramblings, or MOTM's hyperbolic focus on one blown play followed by the latest fad in drafting for that position next season, or Rosenbloom's incoherent bitching, or even Brad Bigg's historical insider's 10 thoughts columns (though those are pretty good too).
For what it's worth...probably nothing to ya'll which brings us back to the second point in this typed out time suck.
I figure as fans it's okay whatever we think. I actually get a kick out of people supporting a player they like. Soul has defended Cutler, DavidL CornWash, heck, last year I defended Shea McClellan. It doesn't mean that any of us is right. But hey, we're fans - short for fanatics - and I figure we're allowed to defend players we like.
PFF is just another source for evaluating players. I think they get it right sometimes, and other times they may not. I like Football Outsiders too. I bring up the J'Marcus Webb ratings on PFF as a joke, but Webb actually DID have a number of solid games against solid D's. His problem was consistency (at least that's my memory of him).
I'm not saying we can't have opinions...but they are just that...opinions. The difference between us and PFF is we aren't charging anyone for our opinions...they're free. I'm just saying I take PFF grades with a grain of salt. They're nice...but at the end of the day they have slightly more of a clue than I do, and thats only because they watch film(which if I wanted to pay the NFL for the all 22 look I could do to). After that we're even.
1st: the content that's posted here from PFF is free. 2nd: PFF's grades, like everything discussed with football (my opinion, your opinion, Bigg's articles etc), amount to a grain of salt. We're talking about a fricking sport: entertainment, a television show, after all. 3rd: They have far more of a clue than you (even if you used the ALL-22) because the people doing the evaluations aren't JUST watching the Bears and grading them, they're watching every play and every player from multiple games and evaluating them using a standardized system. 4th: Kyle William's argument AND rics argument are valid, but IMHO they have at least one serious flaw: fan's communication rarely (if ever) takes into account a player's role in any given play. Instead, we look for global screw ups and global successes. How many sacks did he get? How many impact plays did he make? How many yards did he gain? Those are the elements we discuss here. Similarly, that's what PFF grades. However, they actually pay attention to all players and compare them across the league with a standardized system to 'simplify' a comprehensive look at a player's performance.
Once I start seeing posts that sound like: "it looked like his role on that particular run stuff was to hit X gap and steer his blocker to the right and attempt to turn his body before penetrating into the backfield and it looked like he executed that in an average way." I'll start denigrating PFF. Until then, their numbers are far more informative than ric's post game drunken ramblings, or MOTM's hyperbolic focus on one blown play followed by the latest fad in drafting for that position next season, or Rosenbloom's incoherent bitching, or even Brad Bigg's historical insider's 10 thoughts columns (though those are pretty good too).
For what it's worth...probably nothing to ya'll which brings us back to the second point in this typed out time suck.
I agree with everything you said except for your 4th. There are plenty of posters (myself included from time to time) who make specific claims about a specific player during a specific play and assign blame (OL pass blocking, QB reads, WR routes, and breakdowns in coverages being the 4 most common.) Its not a bad thing, its really the only option we/they have. We don't have all-22, we don't watch hours of football a week, we haven't played at a high enough level to understand the nuances and responsibilities--so we all make assumptions and then post them. Fans typically (at least here) don't make global judgments, they make specific judgments that are influenced by their assumptions and biases toward players. Look at the crap that Cutler and Jeffery get.
My favorite comment was the poster who said that Floyd almost blew the Packer game singlehandedly when he almost muffed the fumble recovery in the end-zone.
We all have our blind spots, the fun part is sharing it!! God I hate Amos, and Fox, I really, really hate Fox (I've been diagnosed with irrational Anti-Fox Syndrome.) I hate Fox almost as much as I hated Tucker. and boy did I hate Tucker.
Post by tragicslip on Nov 30, 2016 21:32:34 GMT -6
PFF has limitations. that is all. Football isn't stat friendly like baseball because the number of plays is less. it would be hard to say anything statistically meaningful about most guys that just play on one contract.
QB is a great example: you can have good numbers and not be able to win games because the defense doesn't have to respect certain throws. that is why scouts always find some Boller like kid to go ga-ga over. they tend to overrate the arm talent and ignore reads outside of system qb or not.
1st: the content that's posted here from PFF is free. 2nd: PFF's grades, like everything discussed with football (my opinion, your opinion, Bigg's articles etc), amount to a grain of salt. We're talking about a fricking sport: entertainment, a television show, after all. 3rd: They have far more of a clue than you (even if you used the ALL-22) because the people doing the evaluations aren't JUST watching the Bears and grading them, they're watching every play and every player from multiple games and evaluating them using a standardized system. 4th: Kyle William's argument AND rics argument are valid, but IMHO they have at least one serious flaw: fan's communication rarely (if ever) takes into account a player's role in any given play. Instead, we look for global screw ups and global successes. How many sacks did he get? How many impact plays did he make? How many yards did he gain? Those are the elements we discuss here. Similarly, that's what PFF grades. However, they actually pay attention to all players and compare them across the league with a standardized system to 'simplify' a comprehensive look at a player's performance.
Once I start seeing posts that sound like: "it looked like his role on that particular run stuff was to hit X gap and steer his blocker to the right and attempt to turn his body before penetrating into the backfield and it looked like he executed that in an average way." I'll start denigrating PFF. Until then, their numbers are far more informative than ric's post game drunken ramblings, or MOTM's hyperbolic focus on one blown play followed by the latest fad in drafting for that position next season, or Rosenbloom's incoherent bitching, or even Brad Bigg's historical insider's 10 thoughts columns (though those are pretty good too).
For what it's worth...probably nothing to ya'll which brings us back to the second point in this typed out time suck.
I agree with everything you said except for your 4th. There are plenty of posters (myself included from time to time) who make specific claims about a specific player during a specific play and assign blame (OL pass blocking, QB reads, WR routes, and breakdowns in coverages being the 4 most common.) Its not a bad thing, its really the only option we/they have. We don't have all-22, we don't watch hours of football a week, we haven't played at a high enough level to understand the nuances and responsibilities--so we all make assumptions and then post them. Fans typically (at least here) don't make global judgments, they make specific judgments that are influenced by their assumptions and biases toward players. Look at the crap that Cutler and Jeffery get.
My favorite comment was the poster who said that Floyd almost blew the Packer game singlehandedly when he almost muffed the fumble recovery in the end-zone.
We all have our blind spots, the fun part is sharing it!! God I hate Amos, and Fox, I really, really hate Fox (I've been diagnosed with irrational Anti-Fox Syndrome.) I hate Fox almost as much as I hated Tucker. and boy did I hate Tucker.
PFF watches a lot, but the reality is they don't know the nuances b/c they haven't coached/played at high enough lvl's also.
When they watch and grade, they don't take into account scheme, so while they grade everyone equally, that equality evaluates some players incorrectly.