(06-27-2017, 12:45 PM)pirkster Wrote:

(06-27-2017, 09:10 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: There are lots of ways that PFF's "rating methods" can skew results too far one way or the other for a number of positions.

This is clearly one of those situations.

My issue with them is that they seem to lack the awareness to acknowledge those shortcomings, and fail work to improve their system/methodology accordingly.

If you're getting garbage out, then you're either putting garbage in (I don't necessarily think this is the case for all their measurements, but the subjective measurements certainly are open to wild inaccuracies) or you need to re-think and re-tool the way you are formulating the "grade."

They clearly are either penalizing the run too heavily, not weighing his pass rush effectiveness high enough, or their subjective observations are not accurate.  It simply makes no sense that he would grade as the lowest rated starter.  That's a sign to go back and reassess the methodology, and take a second look at the subjective data as well.  Either their formula, judgement in observation, or both need review.

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.