PFF Thru Raiders Game

[Forever Spinning Vinyl]

(11-23-2021, 04:47 PM)ochocincos Wrote: They do a hard number, and they've stated in the past that 60.0-69.9 is considered "solid starter" level.

It's technically possible (although improbable) that more than half of the players at a position could be above or below "average."

I think you actually kinda hit it right on the head in your grading school system analogy.

Think of 60-69 as a C, which is considered a passing grade. The entire class could get that grade if they perform well enough.

If you're looking for a week-to-week spread of numbers by position that then calculates a mean or something like that, they don't have that to my knowledge (at least not for free or for the tier pricing that I pay for).

Also, I don't appreciate the attitude of "get your hearing checked" comment. I don't know what prompted you to be snarky with me, as I was not trying to be that way toward you.

I admire your loyalty to other people's opinions but all I did was say that there needs to be a comparative system because sometimes I find their ratings to be comical and your first response is "So what I'm hearing is...you're gonna start the competitor to PFF?"


I'd rather trust my eyes than some lone guy assigned to evaluate the game.  If there is a comparative system for me to observe, I'd be more likely to accept some of these ratings in a "Maybe they're seeing something I'm not" kind of way. I don't hate PFF but I do get annoyed with people's faith in their accuracy. On a previous board, one poster would almost never post on Gamedays and most of Monday but suddenly became full of opinions on Sunday's game an hour after the PFF ratings release.

MLB average batting averages via google
2017 - .255
2018 - .248
2019 - .252
2020 - .245

Now it would be easy to say that the league average for those 4 years is .250 or even simpler and lazy like PFF to say .245 to .255 is average batting average for a MLB player. But a .250 average in 2018 and 2020 would be in the upper half of the league. In 2017 and 2019, that same .250 average would put you in the lower half of the league. Your level of play didn't change at all but the entire league fluctuated. You can never really tell that with the numbers that I've seen posted from PFF.

Which is why I brought up Mike Hilton. He is listed in your post as 39th, which is a higher rating than at least 25 other starting #1 or #2 CBs, including Eli Apple. These numbers would mean more to me if I knew how much higher his 66.8 is from the midpoint. Is he in a 10 way tie with one percentage point ahead of the league average or is he alone in 39th, ten full points ahead of the league average?