PFF Thru Raiders Game

[*ochocincos*]

(11-23-2021, 08:42 PM)Forever Spinning Vinyl Wrote: 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?

I didn't mean for "So what I'm hearing is...you're gonna start the competitor to PFF?" to be snarky. 
I actually was meaning it as serious. I think it could be valuable for PFF to have a similar, comparable rating system competitor. There seem to be quite a number of people who disagree with PFF's ratings, so I think there would be enough interest from people willing to join and contribute to such an effort if someone started it up.

As for the average, I got your point, but there is no easily-broadcasted "average" by PFF.
Perhaps it's an enhancement they could do, but it probably would have to be manually calculated by someone right now.
I would say the best way to do it is to take the scores of all the eligible players and divide by the number of players to get the collective's average. But that's quite a bit of effort to do it for every position, especially year-by-year, and it would require the highest tier to see previous years for collective player grades.

Going on a tangent now - batting average is going by the wayside now. It's all about OPS now.