Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Weak Links (According to PFF Ratings)
#24
(10-20-2017, 09:57 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I don't subscribe to PFF, but perhaps you could help me out?

I would be curious to see how the 2015 roster rated, in their eyes, as far as "number of players away".

I didn't see them do an analysis of it...but we could extrapolate it.

In the one above we had 1 Elite player and 3 Good.

In 2015, we had 2 Elite players in Atkins and Green. We then had 8 guys rated as Good (Burfict, Dunlap, Jones, Dansby, Whitworth, Zeitler, Eifert, and Dalton).

Then guys like Iloka who had a 79.7 and Boling who had a 79.4 were ranked Above Average but 80 is considered good. Williams and Bernard were Above Average too.

Boling, Kirkpatrick, and Michael Johnson were graded Poor.

Given that 40% of your starters need to be Elite/Good to compete in a Super Bowl then we're right at 10. And then we have 4 Above Average guys.

Note: I can't see Jones, Sanu, and Nelson's ratings...but I assume they'd be atleast Above Average. And Maualuga is missing who generally grades out as Poor.

The 2015 team was so far superior to 2017 where we have like 8 guys that are graded Poorly. Really Center and DE with Michael Johnson were the only issues on that team...potentially along with Maualuga.

I couldn't see them thinking we were more than 1 or 2 players away. The failure that year was clearly Coaching. You could blame the Dalton injury too...but we had a chance to win a few games at the end of the year to get a Bye and failed. The Steelers were without Leveon Bell too.

As I've contended...upgrading the Center position that year before the season may have reaped huge benefits.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Weak Links (According to PFF Ratings) - THE PISTONS - 10-20-2017, 10:12 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)