I know there are some out there that do not like PFF at all. However, I stole this from another board and thought it could generate good discussion. Here is a look at where our starters, and top backups, finished in PFF's rankings; list only includes players that played 25% of the teams snaps. Special Teamers require a minimum of 10 games.
QB: Teddy Bridgewater | 15th | +3.5
RB: Jerick McKinnon | 29th | -1.6 (would be positive, but brought down by terrible blocking grade -4.7) RB: Matt Asiata | 56th | -10.3 (positive pass blocking grade, likely why he got the snaps early) FB: Jerome Felton | 5th | +4.2
It's crazy how many defensive players were in the green and offensive players were in the red. Impressed with the grades Floyd (highest grade of anyone on the team), Griffen, Barr, Hodges, Smith, Sully and Teddy.
Surprised Rhodes didnt have a higher grade than what he ended up with. Kalil and Locke's grades were pretty pitiful.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
Oh man, did you open up a new can of worms, PHP just teasing.
Well, everyone is beign graded the same, so it is interesting information for sure. Kalil had a really bad year, and I Am surprised Locke graded so poorly.
I Am sure they will have competition for both him and Walsh next training camp.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
PFF is an interesting deal. Just playing devil’s advocate a bit here, but is it any surprise that the vast majority of our defensive players are in the green when the Unit as whole finished as high as it did statistically? How does PFF’s methodology balance individual performance vs. team performance. How does it value said performance? What about scheme?
Do we really think Jasper Brinkley is the 18th best ILB in the league right now? For that matter, is Kyle Rudolph the 37th best TE?
I know by posing those questions, I’m leaving a lot out, but that omission IS the point. Would our offensive players grade higher if the unit as a whole produced better?
Our OL struggled this season, but looking at the rankings provided, the average rank of our OL is 46th in the league. One interpretation of that would be that on average our OL are all benchwarmers on other NFL rosters. I know we started some backups this year, so in that sense this ranking should be lower, but that average includes 4/5 starters. Are we low because our players SUCK or are we low because of transition to a new scheme and injuries? I do not have an answer, but again, that IS the point.
I would take this stuff with a grain of salt before drawing conclusions. We do not know their methodology, plus this data is a point in time and based on a certain subset of performances. (Probably just this season.) It says nothing about where these guys are going to end up, nor does it speak to causation for the grade.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
I can't pay attention to their 'grades'..just way too subjective and undefined for my taste. Their raw data, when defined properly, is great, and is the reason I pay for a subscription.
huh, in most cases about what you'd expect watching this team this year. A few here and there questionable, but even in those cases there's usually an explanation.
Maybe he isn't that stout against the run? People loved Winfield because of it, despite his questionable coverage skills, shouldn't it cut the other way if he's getting blocked out of plays it counts against him? Or because he was so damn good in coverage this year, we'll just ignore any other possible holes in his game....
I would not have voted Deon Sanders into the HOF if I was a Voter. Its a wonder Chad Johnson isn't in the HOF. Seems to me the Guys with the Loudest mouths get the attention. The problem with the HOF is that there too many guys in there that were very, very good but NOT Great Players ever since the early 80s
Another article that breaks Rhodes down even more.
I don't think anyone would rank corners and have him the 29th corner in the league right now. But I also think there's more to it than that in this case...
Another article that breaks Rhodes down even more.
I don't think anyone would rank corners and have him the 29th corner in the league right now. But I also think there's more to it than that in this case...
Wow. Quoting both PFF and Bleacher Report.
Pulling out your top sources for this one, are ya?
I'll go ahead and assume you didn't read the article, since it wasn't me "quoting" anything to try and win internet points. It was just an interesting in depth article on Rhodes that breaks down the numbers even more.
Passer rating on targets from Weeks 9-13: 1. Richard Sherman 2. Joe Haden 3. Xavier Rhodes (of CBs w/ 50% of team's snaps)
Boy did I show you! Take that! I win?....
If this play continues from Rhodes, and it should, his value to the Vikings will be difficult to overstate.
His impact can be enormous even with Zimmer keeping him on the right side of the field almost exclusively. With Rhodes’ man-coverage skills, safeties can frequently be rotated over the opposite side of the field or be moved into the alley to aid the run defense instead of being kept in a shell over the top. The entire defense is given more freedom with a shutdown CB on one side.
Zimmer’s scheme and magic touch with defensive backs is a big reason for Rhodes’ growth. The growth of Rhodes is a big reason why the Minnesota defense has found success in 2014. The dominoes are falling perfectly for the Vikings.
just teasing.
