(05-23-2021, 11:33 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: A little off topic, but am I the only one who thinks PFF has kinda jumped the shark at this point?
The reason I ask is it seems it's gone from a new and useful tool to somewhat of an overrated, if not downright BS service as of late. I find myself stumbling across more and more things from PFF where I'm left thinking "Well that was clearly bullshit."
Case in point, someone for PFF recently wrote an article that they've come to the conclusion that Tyreek Hill may be the best deep threat of all time. And of course, they used their analystics to support this. Well guess what? They got absolute flamed (rightfully so) for forgetting about Randy Moss. My favorite comment I saw was just a video link that said something like "Randy Moss has a highlight reel of 40+ yard touchdowns that's 10 minutes long."
I think I'm out on PFF. Sometimes they make it real hard to take them seriously.
This contains a lot of inaccuracies. They didn't write an article about it. They tweeted a quote from one of their employees that said Hill MIGHT be the greatest deep threat of all time, which Barstool then twisted into "PFF declares Hill is the the greatest deep threat of all time."
PFF is a tool, but it's not the gospel. I personally feel that a lot of their attributed inaccuracies around here fall into fan bias and/or mistakes being overmagnified because the poster doesn't watch any other player at a given position as much as the Bengals player, making it seem like they screw up more.
(05-23-2021, 12:32 PM)Whatever Wrote: This contains a lot of inaccuracies. They didn't write an article about it. They tweeted a quote from one of their employees that said Hill MIGHT be the greatest deep threat of all time, which Barstool then twisted into "PFF declares Hill is the the greatest deep threat of all time."
Regardless of whether or not it's "might be" or "is", it's still an incredibly stupid statement.
Tyreek Hill has played for only 5 seasons. 3 of those 5 seasons he finished under 1,200 yards. 2 of those 5 seasons he finished under 1,000 yards. 3 of those 5 seasons he finished with less than 10 TD's. He's only hit 15 TD's once.
Now let's take a look at Randy Moss begining of his career (in an era where they threw the ball a lot less, and defenders were given way more leeway in contact and physical play)...
1,313 yards and 17 TD's.
1,413 yards and 11 TD's.
1,437 yards and 15 TD's.
1,233 yards and 10 TD's.
1,347 yards and 7 TD's.
1,632 yards and 17 TD's.
This is even before we get to his other 8 years in the league, or that he had 23 TD's in a single season (half of Tyreek Hill's career total). This is before we get to Moss being paired with Culpepper for bulk of the above, while Hill has been paired with Mahomes for 3 of the last 5 years, and a Pro Bowl Alex Smith before that.
There's no might about it. He's not even close to matching him in anything. And even if he were, it's way too early in his career to start talking about "greatest of all time" about anything.
Agree to disagree, but this makes PFF look bad. And this is just one example, I've seen plenty of others.
I still think there's some usefullness to what they provide but the more and more I see stuff like this the more I wonder how qualified the people who work for them actually are.
(05-23-2021, 12:48 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Regardless of whether or not it's "might be" or "is", it's still an incredibly stupid statement.
Tyreek Hill has played for only 5 seasons. 3 of those 5 seasons he finished under 1,200 yards. 2 of those 5 seasons he finished under 1,000 yards. 3 of those 5 seasons he finished with less than 10 TD's. He's only hit 15 TD's once.
Now let's take a look at Randy Moss begining of his career (in an era where they threw the ball a lot less, and defenders were given way more leeway in contact and physical play)...
1,313 yards and 17 TD's.
1,413 yards and 11 TD's.
1,437 yards and 15 TD's.
1,233 yards and 10 TD's.
1,347 yards and 7 TD's.
1,632 yards and 17 TD's.
This is even before we get to his other 8 years in the league, or that he had 23 TD's in a single season (half of Tyreek Hill's career total). This is before we get to Moss being paired with Culpepper for bulk of the above, while Hill has been paired with Mahomes for 3 of the last 5 years, and a Pro Bowl Alex Smith before that.
There's no might about it. He's not even close to matching him in anything. And even if he were, it's way too early in his career to start talking about "greatest of all time" about anything.
Agree to disagree, but this makes PFF look bad. And this is just one example, I've seen plenty of others.
I still think there's some usefullness to what they provide but the more and more I see stuff like this the more I wonder how qualified the people who work for them actually are.
I don't necessarily disagree that Moss was a better deep threat than Hill, but the raw production numbers you posted don't really do much to show that. The quote was about the best deep threat, not the most productive.
I have no idea in what context the statement was made or how much the guy that made it has researched it. If he did research it, the obvious thing to look at would be things like catch % and YPT on passes that traveled 20+ yards in the air. Frankly, Moss doesn't have great efficiency #'s, which play a lot into analytics. Moss has as many seasons where he caught less than half his targets as he does seasons where he caught 60+%. And Moss's target volume is insane. Hill's career high is 137 in a season and Moss has 6 seasons with the same or more, with a career high of 185 and 4 of 150+.
I would look at PFF as the equivalent of a respected NFL reporter like Schefter. They aren't right 100% of the time, but they get enough right that you have to put some serious consideration into what they say. It's just strange to me that so many Bengals fans complain about wanting to modernize the scouting department, but are so dismissive of analytics when they have become such a big part of modern day talent evaluation for NFL front offices.
(05-23-2021, 02:30 PM)Whatever Wrote: I don't necessarily disagree that Moss was a better deep threat than Hill, but the raw production numbers you posted don't really do much to show that. The quote was about the best deep threat, not the most productive.
I have no idea in what context the statement was made or how much the guy that made it has researched it. If he did research it, the obvious thing to look at would be things like catch % and YPT on passes that traveled 20+ yards in the air. Frankly, Moss doesn't have great efficiency #'s, which play a lot into analytics. Moss has as many seasons where he caught less than half his targets as he does seasons where he caught 60+%. And Moss's target volume is insane. Hill's career high is 137 in a season and Moss has 6 seasons with the same or more, with a career high of 185 and 4 of 150+.
I would look at PFF as the equivalent of a respected NFL reporter like Schefter. They aren't right 100% of the time, but they get enough right that you have to put some serious consideration into what they say. It's just strange to me that so many Bengals fans complain about wanting to modernize the scouting department, but are so dismissive of analytics when they have become such a big part of modern day talent evaluation for NFL front offices.
I'll see if I can dig up the article or tweets that show that Randy Moss is far superior. I can't remember where I read them but I did see people discussing this when the PFF writer posted that. They used the 20+ you referenced, as well as 40+.
I did just find this:https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/2021/05/19/randy-moss-tyreek-hill-deep-threat-nfl-history/
Look, there’s no question that Tyreek Hill of the Chiefs is a great deep receiver. Last season, he caught 13 passes of 20 or more air yards for 475 yards, 36.5 yards per reception, and eight touchdowns. This is a guy who can nuke your defense at any moment, and his connection with Patrick Mahomes has been quite impressive over the years. The Super Bowl champion Buccaneers found this out in their 27-24 Week 12 loss to the Chiefs, when they kept putting cornerback Carlton Davis on an island with Hill, and poor Davis got demolished on the day for 12 catches on 15 targets for 236 yards, just 50 yards after the catch, and three touchdowns. This wasn’t Davis’ fault — you don’t put an above-average cornerback one-on-one with Tyreek Hill unless the idea is to get torched over and over.
So, one might assume that Tyreek Hill is the most dangerous deep threat in the game today. One would most likely be correct. However, to place Hill first overall in a historical frame, as Pro Football Focus recently posited, is problematic, at best.
No offense to the good folks at PFF, whose data tools and overall analysis are quite useful, but there are sirens all over the place with this one. The reason? One Randy Gene Moss, whose Hall of Fame credentials were undisputed, and Moss made Canton in 2018. From 1998 through 2012, Moss caught 982 passes for 15.292 yards, and 156 touchdowns. He led the league in touchdown receptions five times from 1998 through 2009, and while we don’t have specific deep-ball numbers yet for greats from the earlier eras like Don Maynard and Cliff Branch, we do have air yards numbers for Moss going back to 2006, per the aforementioned Pro Football Focus.
And when you look at 2007 alone (Moss’ first season with the Patriots, in which he caught 105 passes for 1,587 yards and 24 touchdowns, including the postseason), the deep receiving numbers are just preposterous. In that season, from Week 1 through Super Bowl XLII, Moss caught 15 passes of 20 or more air yards on 48 targets for 630 yards, 42 yards per reception, and 10 touchdowns. If that isn’t the greatest deep-ball season by any receiver in pro football history, I don’t know what is.
I mean… who else in the history of the game could have a nearly 10-minute highlight reel of nothing but his touchdown receptions of 40 or more yards? When it comes to deep-ball potential in pro football history, there’s Randy Moss, and there’s everybody else.
(05-23-2021, 02:42 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I did just find this:https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/2021/05/19/randy-moss-tyreek-hill-deep-threat-nfl-history/
Look, there’s no question that Tyreek Hill of the Chiefs is a great deep receiver. Last season, he caught 13 passes of 20 or more air yards for 475 yards, 36.5 yards per reception, and eight touchdowns. This is a guy who can nuke your defense at any moment, and his connection with Patrick Mahomes has been quite impressive over the years. The Super Bowl champion Buccaneers found this out in their 27-24 Week 12 loss to the Chiefs, when they kept putting cornerback Carlton Davis on an island with Hill, and poor Davis got demolished on the day for 12 catches on 15 targets for 236 yards, just 50 yards after the catch, and three touchdowns. This wasn’t Davis’ fault — you don’t put an above-average cornerback one-on-one with Tyreek Hill unless the idea is to get torched over and over.
So, one might assume that Tyreek Hill is the most dangerous deep threat in the game today. One would most likely be correct. However, to place Hill first overall in a historical frame, as Pro Football Focus recently posited, is problematic, at best.
No offense to the good folks at PFF, whose data tools and overall analysis are quite useful, but there are sirens all over the place with this one. The reason? One Randy Gene Moss, whose Hall of Fame credentials were undisputed, and Moss made Canton in 2018. From 1998 through 2012, Moss caught 982 passes for 15.292 yards, and 156 touchdowns. He led the league in touchdown receptions five times from 1998 through 2009, and while we don’t have specific deep-ball numbers yet for greats from the earlier eras like Don Maynard and Cliff Branch, we do have air yards numbers for Moss going back to 2006, per the aforementioned Pro Football Focus.
And when you look at 2007 alone (Moss’ first season with the Patriots, in which he caught 105 passes for 1,587 yards and 24 touchdowns, including the postseason), the deep receiving numbers are just preposterous. In that season, from Week 1 through Super Bowl XLII, Moss caught 15 passes of 20 or more air yards on 48 targets for 630 yards, 42 yards per reception, and 10 touchdowns. If that isn’t the greatest deep-ball season by any receiver in pro football history, I don’t know what is.
I mean… who else in the history of the game could have a nearly 10-minute highlight reel of nothing but his touchdown receptions of 40 or more yards? When it comes to deep-ball potential in pro football history, there’s Randy Moss, and there’s everybody else.
Those are good comparison numbers. The problem is, the author didn't include 20+ air yard targets for Hill, only Moss. Honestly, it feels like he wanted to write a piece to try and prove Moss was better and omitted it because it blows his argument out of the water.
Last year, Hill was credited with 32 20+ air yard targets per playerprofiler.com, only 2/3 of the 48 Moss had in '07. So Moss's raw numbers advantage is easily dismissed by his target volume advantage. When you look at their efficiency numbers, here's what you come up with...
Catch %=Hill(40.6%) vs Moss(31.3%)
Yards/Target=Hill(14.8) vs Moss(13.1)
TD %=Hill(25%) vs Moss(20.8%)
If you prorated Hill's efficiency numbers against Moss's 48 targets, you get 19.5 catches, 710 yards, and 12 TD's. Moss got more opportunities, but Hill produced more with his opportunities. That certainly isn't enough to say Hill is the deep threat GoaT, but being better last year than Moss at his best certainly puts him in the discussion.
(05-23-2021, 02:44 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: But we could also just forgot stats and enjoy this awesome video too. (You'll have to follow the vid link to youtube, it won't play the embedded)
I'll never forget watching that Dallas Thanksgiving game his rookie season. He only had 3 receptions... All 3 for 40 plus yard TDs.
I'm gonna break every record they've got. I'm tellin' you right now. I don't know how I'm gonna do it, but it's goin' to get done.
Here's one of my favorite Randy Moss catches that's not featured on the 40+ vid. (This was only like 35 yards, so just missed the cut).
The reason I like it so much is it's an old Randy (33 years old) vs. an in his prime 25 year old Darelle Revis. Randy just plucks this ball out of that air with one hand. If you watch close on the replay he doesn't even bring his other hand over, or pull it into his body. He just snags the thing with his big old mitt and grips it.
(05-25-2021, 12:00 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Come again?
If I've "read" the forums properly, I think he's insulting Boomers which doesn't apply to you--- you're Gen X (You've made cultural references that put you around my age lol).
(05-25-2021, 12:23 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: If I've "read" the forums properly, I think he's insulting Boomers which doesn't apply to you--- you're Gen X (You've made cultural references that put you around my age lol).
Yup. Late Gen-X. I'm right on the cusp of being a dreaded millenial. Only missed it by a couple of years. I'm just trying to figure out who he is referring to, who doesn't know about the 2015 Bengals in this thread?
PS Nothing is more tired than the term "boomers". Just say you don't like people older than you, or be honest that you use it only when it's convenient to discount something said that you disagree with. Anyone that uses this term that is above the age of 12 is an absolute moron. Imagine saying "Ok boomer" to Obama, or Bill Gates, or Jeff Bezos, or Steve Woziniak, or Michael Jordan, or Oprah or Tom Hanks as means to say their thoughts or opinon is somehow less than, or flawed.
Kids, stop saying this nonsense. You're making your entire generation look bad. lol
(05-25-2021, 12:45 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Yup. Late Gen-X. I'm right on the cusp of being a dreaded millenial. Only missed it by a couple of years. I'm just trying to figure out who he is referring to, who doesn't know about the 2015 Bengals in this thread?
PS Nothing is more tired than the term "boomers". Just say you don't like people older than you, or be honest that you use it only when it's convenient to discount something said that you disagree with. Anyone that uses this term that is above the age of 12 is an absolute moron. Imagine saying "Ok boomer" to Obama, or Bill Gates, or Jeff Bezos, or Steve Woziniak, or Michael Jordan, or Oprah or Tom Hanks as means to say their thoughts or opinon is somehow less than, or flawed.
Kids, stop saying this nonsense. You're making your entire generation look bad. lol
Ok boomer.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
