Top 10 highest graded Bengals for the season

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:05 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I'd say it's more misunderstood than made up. They have several different grades for each player, but those grades are not averaged to give the player an overall grade. 

The overall grade has it's own formula and just muddies the water a bit more. For example; If WR #1 ran 80 true pass snaps and blocked on 20 snaps and WR #2 ran 30 true pass snaps and blocked on 70 snaps, averaging out their scores would be unfair to both of them, for different reasons. 

If it's sketchy for a particular Bengals player or two, it's sketchy for everyone in the league. That's the way i look at it, they're all in the same boat and it's all subjectively viewed anyway so i don't really get why there's such a stink about it. 

I'm in too many threads right now to keep it all straight in my brain, but I followed up in this one or a different conversation that perhaps the issue is I need to better understand PFF. So I agree. 

I'm also too simple with my thinking, I suppose. I like the stats on the back of football cards more than PFF grades. It doesn't matter what I think about this, but I'm acknowledging the bias since I've briefly been partaking in this conversation.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-12-2022, 10:39 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I'm assuming you're saying it's wrong to give Jonah the sack because he didn't even try to engage the guy who sacked Burrow?
If so, who should that sack go to?
Williams was the closest OL to that defender.
EDIT - Or maybe it was Spain who blocked the wrong guy. Hard to tell with these angles.

They were trying to sell the run to the right. Chris Jones said F that, i'm going after the QB. 

Maybe Jonah did exactly as the coaches wanted and Jones just made a great play. Maybe Jonah should have chipped him just a bit harder. Hard to know unless you're in the film room so i guess they have to assign the sack to someone and Jonah was the closest guy.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

It’s a flawed process that people can take or leave.

What should be obvious though is that relying only on classical statistical production and/or the extreme limitations of the “eye test” is also highly flawed.

Is the latter *more* flawed? I certainly think so, yes. But that doesn’t imply the former is Gospel.

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2022, 12:03 PM)ochocincos Wrote: With that said, I don't have the time nor interest to go watch all these players on every snap, so I typically trust someone who is getting paid to do that. Even though they may not be the best-equipped at doing it, they're definitely looking at these players a lot closer than I and most fans are.

I will give credit for this.

The only time many fans notice an offensive lineman is when he messes up.  I know I sure don't watch them individually every play.

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:14 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: It’s a flawed process that people can take or leave.

What should be obvious though is that relying only on classical statistical production and/or the extreme limitations of the “eye test” is also highly flawed.

Is the latter *more* flawed? I certainly think so, yes. But that doesn’t imply the former is Gospel.

Yes, that, as I posted, is also my takeaway from this thread. Classical stats (what I called back of the football card stats), the proverbial eye test (which is so fun to rely on when making an emotional hot take), and PFF--is PFF even considered advanced metrics akin to Moneyball type stuff?

Anyhow, it's all just fun ways of discussing sports. This is a quality thread though, good learning can be done in this one. Educate me, fellows!

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2022, 12:14 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: It’s a flawed process that people can take or leave.

What should be obvious though is that relying only on classical statistical production and/or the extreme limitations of the “eye test” is also highly flawed.

Is the latter *more* flawed? I certainly think so, yes. But that doesn’t imply the former is Gospel.

The only true way to get the most accurate analysis is for having someone on the team assessing every play of every player and releasing that analysis.
Only someone within the team who knows the play calls and assignments would really be able to grade the player.

Until we have that, we're always going to have some degree of missing/flawed analysis.

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2022, 12:12 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They were trying to sell the run to the right. Chris Jones said F that, i'm going after the QB. 

Maybe Jonah did exactly as the coaches wanted and Jones just made a great play. Maybe Jonah should have chipped him just a bit harder. Hard to know unless you're in the film room so i guess they have to assign the sack to someone and Jonah was the closest guy.

And that's what I don't know.
Does PFF require that SOMEONE be assigned responsibility for every sack, even if the play called (naked bootleg in this case) dictates that everyone did what they were supposed to and the defender just made a good play?

I don't know, but I could see a logical assumption that if they do assign it to someone, it would either go to Jonah, Spain, or Burrow himself.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-12-2022, 11:51 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: Which is probably the problem. I think people WANT an objective way of saying "This guy is better than that guy" or "XYZ is the 4th best receiver in the league". It's nearly impossible to quantify those things, though, at least for some positions. PFF kind of tries to offer that and people run with it. 

Yep. That's why an understanding of it's inevitable flaws has to be taken into consideration and it's weight needs to be adjusted properly. 

I just don't get those who get bent out of shape and discount it when it's only one piece to use and if you use it properly, it's not "worthless". 

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I wouldn’t give PFF Moneyball credit, either in terms of predictive power or mathematical complexity. NFL advanced analysis tends to trail that of the NBA or MLB simply because the game is less friendly to it and the sample sizes are much smaller.

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:27 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: I wouldn’t give PFF Moneyball credit, either in terms of predictive power or mathematical complexity. NFL advanced analysis tends to trail that of the NBA or MLB simply because the game is less friendly to it and the sample sizes are much smaller.

Thanks for the take, I don't know much about PFF other than weekly tweet I see here with the scores and resulting discussion. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-12-2022, 12:10 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: I'm in too many threads right now to keep it all straight in my brain, but I followed up in this one or a different conversation that perhaps the issue is I need to better understand PFF. So I agree. 

I'm also too simple with my thinking, I suppose. I like the stats on the back of football cards more than PFF grades. It doesn't matter what I think about this, but I'm acknowledging the bias since I've briefly been partaking in this conversation.

Yep. I'm a stats guy too. 

These days, there are sooooo many ways to compare players. Standard stats, averaged stats, advanced metrics, etc. Grading is just another way to do it and not a single one of those that i mentioned before will definitively tell you who is better and who is worse. They will tell you who has more and who has less, but there is no context involved. It kind of comes down to if you're a person who likes context or not. 

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2022, 12:27 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: I wouldn’t give PFF Moneyball credit, either in terms of predictive power or mathematical complexity. NFL advanced analysis tends to trail that of the NBA or MLB simply because the game is less friendly to it and the sample sizes are much smaller.

This.

How do you separate the running back from the blocking?

How do you determine if a sack is blamed on the blocking or the QB?

There is a lot more grey than blac-and-white.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(01-12-2022, 12:26 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. That's why an understanding of it's inevitable flaws has to be taken into consideration and it's weight needs to be adjusted properly.

I just don't get those who get bent out of shape and discount it when it's only one piece to use and if you use it properly, it's not "worthless". 

Absolutely, Bang-on.

Tell that to a certain poster on CJ, who uses every single PFF stat, metric and grade to tell people they're wrong; that guy's reality is strictly a PFF-world and not the real world <_<

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:34 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Absolutely, Bang-on.

Tell that to a certain poster on CJ, who uses every single PFF stat, metric and grade to tell people they're wrong; that guy's reality is strictly a PFF-world and not the real world <_<

Careful how you are using this phrase, friend. 

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2022, 12:04 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: I think people want this when they narrow in on wanting to be right about their opinion. I like the subjectivity of hot takes in sports and having the impromptu discussions with friends or you fine people on this forum about which players are best. I appreciate both the statistical takes and the emotional views people bring to such debate.

What your post reveals though, which is good to make note of, is that it is hard to bring objectivity to subjective conversations.

Random, but I like when you post stats and also make an effort to explain your argument. I think too many posters just post a random stat with a mic drop thinking they enlightened the Bengals community. You actually know how to develop your opinions with support. Props to you dude.

I think people also find this very helpful when trying to assess where the upgrades are needed going into next season.
PFF helps provide some level of assessment aside from stats to make that determination.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-12-2022, 12:26 PM)ochocincos Wrote: And that's what I don't know.
Does PFF require that SOMEONE be assigned responsibility for every sack, even if the play called (naked bootleg in this case) dictates that everyone did what they were supposed to and the defender just made a good play?

I don't know, but I could see a logical assumption that if they do assign it to someone, it would either go to Jonah, Spain, or Burrow himself.

My personal opinion is that, from looking at the play, it was obviously a naked bootleg and Chris Jones made a hell of a play. I don't think assigning Jonah the sack is the correct way to grade that play. 

That is where the whole (or at least a big part) of the subjectivity comes in and rubs people the wrong way. I get that. 

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:32 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yep. I'm a stats guy too. 

These days, there are sooooo many ways to compare players. Standard stats, averaged stats, advanced metrics, etc. Grading is just another way to do it and not a single one of those that i mentioned before will definitively tell you who is better and who is worse. They will tell you who has more and who has less, but there is no context involved. It kind of comes down to if you're a person who likes context or not. 

I think contextualization for the framework for what you're using to defend a take, standard stats/PFF/or whatever, is always important. You cannot just throw a random stat out there, drop the mic, and think you've enlightened the world by posting a stat. Context, meaning, and explaining is necessary.

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2022, 12:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: My personal opinion is that, from looking at the play, it was obviously a naked bootleg and Chris Jones made a hell of a play. I don't think assigning Jonah the sack is the correct way to grade that play. 

That is where the whole (or at least a big part) of the subjectivity comes in and rubs people the wrong way. I get that. 

At the end of the day, Jonah is still 10th best LT and was the best OL for the Bengals according to PFF, so giving him that sack really doesn't make a huge difference.

But I get it. People want no subjectivity and the best accurate analysis possible.
I just don't think we'll ever get there.

[Big_Ern]

(01-10-2022, 11:00 PM)Chip Smallwood Wrote: This plays out pretty consistently with what we saw on the field. This is our core.

Speaking of contracts, I heard on the radio (Tony Pike, I believe) that both Hendrickson and Awuzie have mutual opt-out clauses after this year. I don’t know enough about contracts to confirm. Can anyone else verify?

I hope this isn't true. Why would the Bengals give trey the option to opt out when all the guaranteed money was in year 1? What benefit to the team is putting that in. If this is true chido will def opt out. Not seeing this anywhere online at least for trey. Team can opt out on him after 2021 since all guaranteed money is already paid 

[TecmoBengals]

(01-12-2022, 12:37 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I think people also find this very helpful when trying to assess where the upgrades are needed going into next season.
PFF helps provide some level of assessment aside from stats to make that determination.

Yea, I'm not dismissing people can have a rationale conversation supporting their opinions with information such as PFF. I also think online communities foster an environment where people want to be right; keyboard warriors are abundant. Hell, people here directly state it their posts from time to time: "I am right" when discussing an opinion. My post wasn't meant to ignore or dismiss other views such as what you're offering.