Posts: 405
Threads: 3
Reputation:
2221
Joined: Jun 2015
(05-20-2019, 06:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: FootballOutsiders has a formula they use to try and separate the RB skills from the O-line skills when grading run blocking. They penalize the O-line for tackles for loss or zero gain, and give the RBs more credit for yards gained more than 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. It is called "adjusted line yards". Based on just the standard "avg per carry" the Bengals 4.7 avg ranks 8th in the league, but their "adjusted line yards" is only 4.1 and ranked 22nd. We averaged 4.7 per carry because our RBs ranked 11th in "second level yards per carry" (5 to 10 yards past line of scrimmage) and 3rd in "open field yards per carry" (10+ yards past line of scrimmage).
They also rank O-lines on "power success" (3rd or 4th down with 2 yards or less to go, and anything within 2 yard line). The Bengals actually di very well in this category ranking 7th in the league.
Finally they calculate an "adjusted sack rate" that takes into account sacks and intentional groundings per attempt adjusted for down distance and opponent. Bengals ranked 19th in this metric.
So while these numbers are bad, they are not as bad as some people here seems to think. Lots of people here claimed we had one of the worst O-lines in the league last year and claim we will be bottom 5 in 2019.
I am hoping Price will be a different player with a healthy offseason to work out and get stronger, plus we added the best O-lineman in the draft. I don't think we will have a great O-line next year, but it should be easily in the top half of the league.
Here are all the rankings......https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
Power success... the stat doesn't show the sample size. You can easily inflate stats with smaller samples. Therefore, we may also have had the fewest 3rd/4th and shorts... and also the fewest 1st downs. Looking at the stats we were bottom in both. We were ranked 23rd in 1st downs snaps and 26th in 3rd downs attempted. We may have finished 7th in power success but our attempts at such a stat were lower than most teams. Even our success rate at 4th down wasn't at the high end of the league.
While I am impressed we had anything close to what you reported... the games showed something else. And good stats for a crappy offense can be explained as easily as sample size.
I think the thing that people fail to realize is that while we were bad and it was really painful to watch... there were crappier teams out there statistically. And those teams bump us up a few spots. So while our hopes were crushed by an OL that struggled all season, there were worse issues offensively around the league.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs/sort/firstDowns
Posts: 14,292
Threads: 294
Reputation:
31588
Joined: May 2015
Perhaps there needs to be another stat called "With the game on the line" stat when some teams excel and others fold like a cheap suit. Anyone care to take a stab at where the Bengals have stood in the "With the game on the line" stat over the years? I'm guessing it ain't been pretty..
In the immortal words of my old man, "Wait'll you get to be my age!"
Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse, but the one comfort we have is Cincinnati sounds worse. ~Oliver Wendal Holmes Sr.
Posts: 1,289
Threads: 22
Reputation:
7245
Joined: Jan 2019
(05-21-2019, 11:57 AM)grampahol Wrote: Perhaps there needs to be another stat called "With the game on the line" stat when some teams excel and others fold like a cheap suit. Anyone care to take a stab at where the Bengals have stood in the "With the game on the line" stat over the years? I'm guessing it ain't been pretty..
You know... I'm going to actually disagree with you here, since we're talking mostly about the offensive line here.
Assuming by "with the game on the line" you mean "one drive to win it", I have a ton more faith in Andy and the offense than I do our defense. Offensively they've proven that in a close game if they need a score, they can go get it (Indy and Atlanta last year, Baltimore two years ago). Put the defense on the field in the same situation and they blow it a lot (Pittsburgh, LA, Pittsburgh 2 years ago, Pittsburgh 3 years ago, Pittsburgh pretty much every year...)
Posts: 36,283
Threads: 49
Reputation:
234707
Joined: May 2015
Location: Star Valley, Wyoming
(05-20-2019, 06:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: FootballOutsiders has a formula they use to try and separate the RB skills from the O-line skills when grading run blocking. They penalize the O-line for tackles for loss or zero gain, and give the RBs more credit for yards gained more than 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. It is called "adjusted line yards". Based on just the standard "avg per carry" the Bengals 4.7 avg ranks 8th in the league, but their "adjusted line yards" is only 4.1 and ranked 22nd. We averaged 4.7 per carry because our RBs ranked 11th in "second level yards per carry" (5 to 10 yards past line of scrimmage) and 3rd in "open field yards per carry" (10+ yards past line of scrimmage).
They also rank O-lines on "power success" (3rd or 4th down with 2 yards or less to go, and anything within 2 yard line). The Bengals actually di very well in this category ranking 7th in the league.
Finally they calculate an "adjusted sack rate" that takes into account sacks and intentional groundings per attempt adjusted for down distance and opponent. Bengals ranked 19th in this metric.
So while these numbers are bad, they are not as bad as some people here seems to think. Lots of people here claimed we had one of the worst O-lines in the league last year and claim we will be bottom 5 in 2019.
I am hoping Price will be a different player with a healthy offseason to work out and get stronger, plus we added the best O-lineman in the draft. I don't think we will have a great O-line next year, but it should be easily in the top half of the league.
Here are all the rankings......https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
Wow, kind of surprising we were that good, have to give Pollack some cred.
Good thing Turner got Jonah to help him out, man, if this Line plays in the top half of the league we should have a great year Offensively and this will only help out the Defense to keep them fresh. Looking for Dalton to have a career year, need to use Mixon more in the passing game and use Gio and Traveon more on 1st and 2nd downs so we are not as predictable.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-20-2019, 10:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: PFF ranked our like 27. That's not decent or ok.
How does PFF even rank an O-line?
Do they have separate scores for running and passing?
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-20-2019, 09:53 PM)bonesaw Wrote: Interesting. Do you happen to have 2017's numbers, because if I remember correctly that was a real shitty oline.
2017
24th in adjusted line yards
24th in power success rate
20th in adjusted sack rate.
2018
22nd in adjusted line yards
7th in power success rate
19th in adjusted sack rate
Posts: 13,472
Threads: 132
Reputation:
89628
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 02:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How does PFF even rank an O-line?
Do they have separate scores for running and passing?
The reason why football outsiders has never been considered a actual football source like Pro Football Focus is because they don't give all the relevant information. When it says a failed run to the right who was successful and who failed the center rg rt te etc?
There is a reason why ESPN CBS Sports and NFL.com mention PFF even during things like the draft. While I dont always agree with their rankings their in-depth stats are the best out there...
NFL.Com does the Next Gen Stats now that are pretty good too.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 02:23 PM)Synric Wrote: The reason why football outsiders has never been considered a actual football source like Pro Football Focus is because they don't give all the relevant information. When it says a failed run to the right who was successful and who failed the center rg rt te etc?
There is a reason why ESPN CBS Sports and NFL.com mention PFF even during things like the draft. While I dont always agree with their rankings their in-depth stats are the best out there...
NFL.Com does the Next Gen Stats now that are pretty good too.
They may keep some in depth stats, but their individual rankings are not accurate at all. They are too subjective and the formula they use is flawed. And I don't even know how they rank a unit like an O-line. Can you tell me how they do it?
At least FootballOutsiders uses objective stats.
Posts: 405
Threads: 3
Reputation:
2221
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 02:44 PM)PAjwPhilly Wrote: 72.5% was 19th in the league... why does this chart have "games played" by some teams at 13, 14, 15, & 16? Do they not have data for games (that isn't professional)? Also the Giants lead the league in this stat with 90% (30 total plays but only 13 games). Missing data kinda makes this unusable to me. But what do I matter, lol...
No missing data. Some teams just had entire games with no goal line or other short yardage situation.
Posts: 19,659
Threads: 633
Reputation:
85328
Joined: Oct 2016
(05-21-2019, 02:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How does PFF even rank an O-line?
Do they have separate scores for running and passing?
This is what they said last year:
The start of the new league year begins March 14, and with that, the 2017 NFL season is more than officially over. The 2017 season saw an offensive line seemingly carry its offense to the ultimate crown while portions of other teams’ struggles can be attributed to offensive line struggles. The following rankings for the league’s offensive lines are a look back at the 2017 season only, and do not reflect any moves that each team has made with regards to looking ahead to 2018.
Our comprehensive PFF player grades take into account every aspect of a lineman’s game on every play from every game — their performance in both pass-blocking and run-blocking, and their discipline. Our PFF Player Grades showcase the true effectiveness of an offensive lineman as an individual, so we’ve taken that a step further to give you a look at how the units graded out, on average during the 2017 regular season.
This looks back at the 2017 season only, this doesn’t factor in any moves made towards the 2018 season, and factors in a wide variety of context in addition to those grades:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-offensive-lines-from-the-2017-nfl-season
Posts: 19,659
Threads: 633
Reputation:
85328
Joined: Oct 2016
(05-21-2019, 02:23 PM)Synric Wrote: The reason why football outsiders has never been considered a actual football source like Pro Football Focus is because they don't give all the relevant information. When it says a failed run to the right who was successful and who failed the center rg rt te etc?
There is a reason why ESPN CBS Sports and NFL.com mention PFF even during things like the draft. While I dont always agree with their rankings their in-depth stats are the best out there...
NFL.Com does the Next Gen Stats now that are pretty good too.
Well...what IF the line blocks bad and the RB cuts back and runs for 7 yards. That would seem like good blocking for the offensive line...but it isn't.
Stuff like that factors in too.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 03:25 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: This is what they said last year:
The start of the new league year begins March 14, and with that, the 2017 NFL season is more than officially over. The 2017 season saw an offensive line seemingly carry its offense to the ultimate crown while portions of other teams’ struggles can be attributed to offensive line struggles. The following rankings for the league’s offensive lines are a look back at the 2017 season only, and do not reflect any moves that each team has made with regards to looking ahead to 2018.
Our comprehensive PFF player grades take into account every aspect of a lineman’s game on every play from every game — their performance in both pass-blocking and run-blocking, and their discipline. Our PFF Player Grades showcase the true effectiveness of an offensive lineman as an individual, so we’ve taken that a step further to give you a look at how the units graded out, on average during the 2017 regular season.
This looks back at the 2017 season only, this doesn’t factor in any moves made towards the 2018 season, and factors in a wide variety of context in addition to those grades:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-offensive-lines-from-the-2017-nfl-season
So do they just add up the individual scores to get a score for the entire line?
Posts: 13,472
Threads: 132
Reputation:
89628
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 02:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They may keep some in depth stats, but their individual rankings are not accurate at all. They are too subjective and the formula they use is flawed. And I don't even know how they rank a unit like an O-line. Can you tell me how they do it?
At least FootballOutsiders uses objective stats.
Their rankings are more subjective because they dont have enough data. Hence why I said Football Outsiders has never been truly used as a real source of information for football.
You might not like PFF but it's used by every relevant media source and is even becoming a part of team analytics.
Posts: 19,659
Threads: 633
Reputation:
85328
Joined: Oct 2016
(05-21-2019, 03:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So do they just add up the individual scores to get a score for the entire line?
I would guess it's a weighted average though because a guy like Westerman has a good PFF grade despite playing a small amount of snaps.
But yeah...it looks like it's an average of their individual scores of some type.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 03:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Their rankings are more subjective because they dont have enough data. Hence why I said Football Outsiders has never been truly used as a real source of information for football.
PFF is the one with subjective rankings, not FO.
(05-21-2019, 03:42 PM)Synric Wrote: You might not like PFF but it's used by every relevant media source and is even becoming a part of team analytics.
I guarantee you that not a single NFL team uses their individual rnkings. Maybe some of the objective stats, but their individual rankings are a joke.
In 2015 Dre Lirkpatrick playe 97% of the snaps for a top 5 pass defense. He ranked in the top 30 in every objective cover stats I could find (completion percentage allowed, yards per target, success rate) yet PFF had him ranked as the 112th CB behind a bunch of scrubs who barely played. Any team that has the 112th ranked CB playing 97% of the snaps is not going to have anything close to a top 5 pass defense.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(05-21-2019, 03:48 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I would guess it's a weighted average though because a guy like Westerman has a good PFF grade despite playing a small amount of snaps.
This is another problem with PFF rankings.
Player A gets 20 snaps and messes up 2 plays. Player B gets 60 snaps and messes up 3. Player A is ranked higher (-2 to -3) even though he played fewer snaps and messed up more often.
Posts: 2,722
Threads: 34
Reputation:
21556
Joined: May 2015
Location: Into the Void.....
(05-20-2019, 06:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This just in:
It's because of Andy's quick release.
Yeah. Pretty much.
Posts: 19,659
Threads: 633
Reputation:
85328
Joined: Oct 2016
(05-21-2019, 03:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is another problem with PFF rankings.
Player A gets 20 snaps and messes up 2 plays. Player B gets 60 snaps and messes up 3. Player A is ranked higher (-2 to -3) even though he played fewer snaps and messed up more often.
It's really hard to know how they rate things. They seem very guarded with their formulas/metrics. That's a criticism I have of it.
Also, RB rankings seem to be lower than you'd think and DT's higher.
I think overall, it's a decent tool. Probably one that factored in actual stats too would be a great combination.
|
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
