Vagitron Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 they dont really "rate players" on a scale of best to worst....... they rate the players "performance for a year" then compare the score to other players at the same position..... Â Mack only played 5 games....stands to reason that "his season" rated below most other centers, simply because he didn't play.. Â And Haden started very slowly, scoring low his first 5 games or so....so, even though he finished strong, his season as a whole was not as good as some others..... Bingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I like PFF but its ranked using specific metrics and the steelers are ranked 11th because they don't factor potential, they rate on field performance. Shazier barely played. Jarvis Jones and stephon tuitt the same. Its what have you done for me lately and in this instance how it should be. Â Â That's because potential is an immeasurable metric. It's completely subjective. Shazier's potential in Pittsburgh is different than his potential in Cleveland. Brady's potential in New England is different then his potential in Oakland. Â Browns fans should know. We've been drafting for "potential" for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 DL (2) ILB OLB OL - RT OL - C backup general depth guy WR QB Â that's 8 players. Â or yeah and TE.......9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagitron Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Â Â That's because potential is an immeasurable metric. It's completely subjective. Shazier's potential in Pittsburgh is different than his potential in Cleveland. Brady's potential in New England is different then his potential in Oakland. Â Browns fans should know. We've been drafting for "potential" for years. I agree and that's exactly why the article needs to be viewed objectively, some people here just can't seem to grasp the concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 DL (2) ILB OLB OL - RT OL - C backup general depth guy WR QB Â that's 8 players. Â or yeah and TE.......9 You wouldn't count a backup as being one of your 'above-average' players playing most of the time. So 7. Add a TE, take away Jordan Cameron, so that's about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Bottom line the Browns have talent. Enough talent getting the right few people in place can make all the difference. Â Here is the kicker though. And you guys correct me if I am wrong (I know you will anyway lol) ...to get the pieces together it seems to be one or the other. They would have to give up the farm to get the quarterback. Or go after the other pieces on offense and defense and not go after the qb. I like the idea of going after the quantity and quality and not focus on the qb. I think if we can keep Hoyer he can be the qb we have seen he is capable of with the improvements on offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Bottom line the Browns have talent. Enough talent getting the right few people in place can make all the difference. Â Here is the kicker though. And you guys correct me if I am wrong (I know you will anyway lol) ...to get the pieces together it seems to be one or the other. They would have to give up the farm to get the quarterback. Or go after the other pieces on offense and defense and not go after the qb. I like the idea of going after the quantity and quality and not focus on the qb. I think if we can keep Hoyer he can be the qb we have seen he is capable of with the improvements on offense. Not necessarily. I think Gip did a breakdown on where 'franchise' QBs are taken, and it breaks down about 50/50 top 5 picks and 'other' - from Rodgers at 25, down to Brady in the 6th via Wilson in the third. Proper research, proper development time where necessary, and you can get your QB without giving everything up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 I assumed the same about mack - over a season, not so great, but 'per game' elite.  Haden got a pretty big positive score in the last 10 games of the season to wipe out his negatives in the first 6 I would have thought - anybody got the numbers? Ok...got the numbers they used to rate these guys...Haden graded out at #28 overall in the league for the season....  he earned negative grades the first 5 weeks and the last 2 weeks.....so thats 7 negs with 3 being in the red(extra bad) he earned positive grades the other 9 weeks, with 4 being in the green(extra good)  so, in summary, 3 terrible weeks.....4 great weeks.....and 9 average weeks.....for a total score of 3.4 pts  Whats interesting is Kwaun Williams actually graded out better.....he is ranked #13, with a score of 8.7....  Sherman? (18.2).....Peterson? (-3.5).....Revis? (17.7).....  Now....to help people to see.....if we removed those first 3 really bad games from Haden and gave him 3 'just average' games, his score would adjust by "about" +11....giving him a 19.7, which would rank him near the top ....  Mack....based upon his play and scores through the first 5 games....would have finished #1 have he played the full 16 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Ok...got the numbers they used to rate these guys...Haden graded out at #28 overall in the league for the season....  he earned negative grades the first 5 weeks and the last 2 weeks.....so thats 7 negs with 3 being in the red(extra bad) he earned positive grades the other 9 weeks, with 4 being in the green(extra good)  so, in summary, 3 terrible weeks.....4 great weeks.....and 9 average weeks.....for a total score of 3.4 pts  Whats interesting is Kwaun Williams actually graded out better.....he is ranked #13, with a score of 8.7....  Sherman? (18.2).....Peterson? (-3.5).....Revis? (17.7).....  Now....to help people to see.....if we removed those first 3 really bad games from Haden and gave him 3 'just average' games, his score would adjust by "about" +11....giving him a 19.7, which would rank him near the top ....  Mack....based upon his play and scores through the first 5 games....would have finished #1 have he played the full 16 games Interesting. I'd be willing to give Haden (and the rest of the D) a pass on the first three games given that they're learning a new scheme. Last two less so.  So that puts us at only 5 players away, with Mack as well? And as for the 'but he's coming back from a long injury' nonsense, it's a broken leg, no ligament or muscle damage, there's nothing to suggest he will have lost anything from his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Interesting. I'd be willing to give Haden (and the rest of the D) a pass on the first three games given that they're learning a new scheme. Last two less so. Â So that puts us at only 5 players away, with Mack as well? And as for the 'but he's coming back from a long injury' nonsense, it's a broken leg, no ligament or muscle damage, there's nothing to suggest he will have lost anything from his game. Im with you on both......we know how good Haden is and dont need a "score" to prove it...he earned the pass by stepping up his game..... Â And I think Mack will heal up too....agree that broken bones usually heal up just fine....and the word is he's healing well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Concerning starters, according to the PFF list, and our discussions with Mack/Haden, as well as the overriding feeling of "being happy to go with" Crowell and West, we're looking something like this in terms of 'good' players: Â QB RB - West RB - Crowell LT - Thomas LG - Bitonio C - Mack RG - Greco RT - Schwartz WR - Hawkins WR - Gabriel WR - Austin WR - Benjamin TE - Barnidge TE - Dray DE - Winn NT - Kitchen DE - D. Bryant OLB - Kruger ILB - Dansby ILB - Robertson/Kirksey OLB - Mingo/Sheard CB - Gilbert CB - Skrine CB - Haden SS - Whitner FS - Gipson Elite Good Average Aside from West/Crowell, the only place we don't have at least an 'average' player is QB. Which says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck The Frowns Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Interesting in that Hoyer may not be as bad as we think. His ineffectiveness coincided with defensive linemen being in his face ten times more often after Mack's leg was broken. I knew there was a drop off in protection but did not realize how large it was. Â PFF is very informative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Ok.....revised this slightly, using the PFF grades for all of them......and a little color to help my old eyes....hope this is helpful.... The numbers in parenthesis are where that players "score" ranked league wide...... QB- Hoyer RB - West RB - Crowell LT - Thomas(3) LG - Bitonio(5) C - Mack RG - Greco(11) RT - Schwartz(30) WR - Hawkins(11) WR - Gabriel(17) WR - Austin (42) WR - Benjamin TE - Barnidge TE - Dray DE - Winn NT - Kitchen DE - D. Bryant NOTE: Our entire D line graded in the negative. Not one bright spot there..... OLB - Kruger(14) ILB - Dansby(8)...not top 5, but close....was on track until injured ILB - Robertson(19) OLB - Mingo(15) - Sheard(16) CB - Skrine CB - Haden SS - Whitner FS - Gipson....like Mack, Gipson was on track to be #1, before he got hurt....so, Im calling him elite too... Elite = Top 5 type of player Good = Above average(plus score in the green) Average below average = Below average(negative score in the red) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 I thought John Hughes graded out positively? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 I thought John Hughes graded out positively? actually...you're right!!.....I missed him because he didn't have enough snaps(like Mack, again).....his score was a +5.2, which if continued over 16 games, would have put him at 16.6....or #10 in the league at his position..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Yeah I had a feeling I'd read that a few places. Got to remember the guys coming back from injury like Hughes and A. Bryant, who looked so good before injury last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Ok.....revised this slightly, using the PFF grades for all of them......and a little color to help my old eyes....hope this is helpful.... On behalf of all the colorblind folk in the world... Thanks a lot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 On behalf of all the colorblind folk in the world... Thanks a lot! Ha!....sorry bout that.....adjusted the color and bolded now...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitchTits Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 How is it that the previous year with our dc we were nearly top 10, but this year with the same base defense, and same players our Dline is suddenly the worst on this team. Prior to the 2014 season, everyone had to think that the dline was our strength. I wonder if it has to do with our DC. Ray Horton 3-4 was top 10 for what 13 weeks, and top 12 for the season, but Jim O'Neal's 3-4 is horrible? Rubin, Taylor and Bryant were very good in 2013, and Hughes, and Wynn were solid rotational guys. Now our dline is terrible? I blame O'Neil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 How is it that the previous year with our dc we were nearly top 10, but this year with the same base defense, and same players our Dline is suddenly the worst on this team. Prior to the 2014 season, everyone had to think that the dline was our strength. I wonder if it has to do with our DC. Ray Horton 3-4 was top 10 for what 13 weeks, and top 12 for the season, but Jim O'Neal's 3-4 is horrible? Rubin, Taylor and Bryant were very good in 2013, and Hughes, and Wynn were solid rotational guys. Now our dline is terrible? I blame O'Neil. Â Horton's defense was also very bad in a number of key defense statistical categories. Just because we were giving up less YPG doesn't mean we had a good defense, it means our terrible offense gave the opponents the ball in great field position. We were ranked near the bottom of the league in average starting position for defense, if I recall correctly. Â I had a whole post about this at year's end last year, about how Horton's defense wasn't nearly as good as was advertised. Â Â Injuries also had something to do with it, as did designation changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBC mike Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 We are about thirty guys away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitchTits Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Â Horton's defense was also very bad in a number of key defense statistical categories. Just because we were giving up less YPG doesn't mean we had a good defense, it means our terrible offense gave the opponents the ball in great field position. We were ranked near the bottom of the league in average starting position for defense, if I recall correctly. Â I had a whole post about this at year's end last year, about how Horton's defense wasn't nearly as good as was advertised. Â Â Injuries also had something to do with it, as did designation changes. I have no doubt, but there is no denying that this years defense was far worse, that was my point. I don't care if we gave up less yards; I am just wondering how the same players, same base defense (yes I know their styles are different) but it's still the same base defense, and it is far worse than last year. Â Even the injuries can be explained away. The Dline was supposed to be our deepest group of players. Just frustrates me to no end that a group of positions now likely needs addressed in FA or the draft after only a year when they were very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Â That's how I've seen it all year. Â An ILB, a pass rushing OLB, and a QB away. This sums it up perfectly although I might add a tall WR to the list. I'd kill for Dez or DT but I'm a tad bias as they hail from my two schools. Â Some DL and OL depth would certainly help as well but that could be said for every NFL team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.