Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Darius Leonard ranked 6th best Linebacker


Recommended Posts

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Let's start with Leonard's stats. And keep in mind Leonard plays WILL in a 4-3, but mostly a 4-2 (we're in nickel mostly), so most would say he naturally gets more opportunity for Ts. At minimum, diff

They might be right and they maybe wrong. However, how many of us can truly say the other linebackers are not better or for that matter worse!?  90% of us don't watch the linebackers thru out the seas

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius.   

5 minutes ago, DownHillRunner said:

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis does on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is hard for me to believe any knowledgeable fan goes by what PFF says regarding a ranking. It is just not Colts players, it is their rankings in general for all players. I think their system stinks but that is my opinion.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DownHillRunner said:

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They might be right and they maybe wrong. However, how many of us can truly say the other linebackers are not better or for that matter worse!?  90% of us don't watch the linebackers thru out the season.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares, man, honestly. It's been known Leonard isn't really an analytics darling, likely because he's a little shakier in coverage at times.

 

PFF does their thing and you can agree or disagree with their process and opinions when it suits. Same for the Jonathan Taylor thing. They're just a resource.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting because each linebacker is different.

 

That's like asking which fruit juice is best. Obvioulsy you got your top choices, and then the meh juices. 

 

However you wanna squeeze it, Darius Leonard is full of top shelf juice. 

 

(Joking aside, he plays weak side backer... so it really isn't productive to compare him to LBs except those playing weak side as well)

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DownHillRunner said:

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You should check out Lavonte numbers..

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yet  when they rank Nelson as the best Guard, the forum jumps for joy!!

Because it doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to know Nelson is the best Guard. That is pretty obvious. That would be like someone saying Mahomes is the best QB. PFF got 1 right, oh boy! Even if I wasn't a Colts fan I would say Nelson is the best Guard.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It is hard for me to believe any knowledgeable fan goes by what PFF says regarding a ranking. It is just not Colts players, it is their rankings in general for all players. I think their system stinks but that is my opinion.

 

I posted a thread in the NFL General forum about PFF asking people to explain their arguments against them. Would appreciate it if you could go there and elaborate about why their system stinks so bad.

 

Personally, I'd put Darius in the top 3 with Wagner and David. Davis is really good and I haven't watched a massive amount of Kendricks tbh.

 

A lot of those guys have been doing it for a lot longer than Leonard, and have been consistent in their production. Leonard has arguably been the best LB in the league for stretches, but he has also had his rocky moments and his time on the sideline through injury. Give him time to build his sample size, and no one will be able to argue that he's top 3 at his position imo.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Mackrel829 said:

 

I posted a thread in the NFL General forum about PFF asking people to explain their arguments against them. Would appreciate it if you could go there and elaborate about why their system stinks so bad.

 

Personally, I'd put Darius in the top 3 with Wagner and David. Davis is really good and I haven't watched a massive amount of Kendricks tbh.

 

A lot of those guys have been doing it for a lot longer than Leonard, and have been consistent in their production. Leonard has arguably been the best LB in the league for stretches, but he has also had his rocky moments and his time on the sideline through injury. Give him time to build his sample size, and no one will be able to argue that he's top 3 at his position imo.

 

They use poor sample sizing a lot when grading players. Sometimes they will grade a LB higher that has only played 25 games over a LB that has played 50 but the LB that has played 50 had many more good games.

 

 Also the way they grade players statistically is odd IMO. For example if RB A. gains lets say 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 and doesn't get the 1st down but RB B. gains 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 but breaks a tackle to get the 6 yards and still doesn't get the 1st down, the 2nd RB is graded higher. 6 yards is 6 yards, the player that didn't have to break a tackle still had to use vision and speed to get that 6. I could use other examples but I think after reading this you may know where I am coming from.

 

Different topic here:

I am not a fan of QB Rating either. Remember when Luck and RG3 were rookies, do you know RG3 had a QB rating of 102.4 and Luck was at 76.5. Watching both by the eye test, Luck was just as good if not better. They focus on efficiency more than anything and RG3 was dinking and dunking so hardly threw any INT's. They ignore come from behind wins, yardage thrown, and how clutch a player is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They use poor sample sizing a lot when grading players. Sometimes they will grade a LB higher that has only played 25 games over a LB that has played 50 but the LB that has played 50 had many more good games.

 

 Also the way they grade players statistically is odd IMO. For example if RB A. gains lets say 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 and doesn't get the 1st down but RB B. gains 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 but breaks a tackle to get the 6 yards and still doesn't get the 1st down, the 2nd RB is graded higher. 6 yards is 6 yards, the player that didn't have to break a tackle still had to use vision and speed to get that 6. I could use other examples but I think after reading this you may know where I am coming from.

 

Different topic here:

I am not a fan of QB Rating either. Remember when Luck and RG3 were rookies, do you know RG3 had a QB rating of 102.4 and Luck was at 76.5. Watching both by the eye test, Luck was just as good if not better. They focus on efficiency more than anything and RG3 was dinking and dunking so hardly threw any INT's. They ignore come from behind wins, yardage thrown, and how clutch a player is.

Well no.  These are the kinds of things that grading attempts to do.  You are trying to judge the individuals’ contribution on each play not just team production.

 

So no not all 6 yd 3rd and 7 runs are the same,  the point of grading is to try to judge each players’ contribution.  Very hard, and inherently subjective in the end.  There is a large qualitative element regardless of the formulas to objectify football plays.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rankings, Power Polls, Predictions…. All useless.   But they have one thing in common - to get people talking about them.  Click bait.

 

Mission Accomplished.  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nickster said:

Well no.  These are the kinds of things that grading attempts to do.  You are trying to judge the individuals’ contribution on each play not just team production.

 

So no not all 6 yd 3rd and 7 runs are the same,  the point of grading is to try to judge each players’ contribution.  Very hard, and inherently subjective in the end.  There is a large qualitative element regardless of the formulas to objectify football plays.

 

Yeah but it is opinion of PFF to which 6 yard run was more impressive is the bottomline. Just because someone breaks a tackle to get 6 yards doesn't make his run any better than a guy that uses better vision or elusiveness to get the same 6 yards. So why grade one 6 yard run higher over another is where I am going with this and they do it all the time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah but it is opinion of PFF to which 6 yard run was more impressive is the bottomline. Just because someone breaks a tackle to get 6 yards doesn't make his run any better than a guy that uses better vision or elusiveness to get the same 6 yards. So why grade one 6 yard run higher over another is where I am going with this and they do it all the time. 

 

I didn't want to hijack this thread with PFF talk, which is why I directed you to the other thread that I made but oh well.

 

Two RBs run 20 yards with the ball.

 

RB1: Runs through a 6ft hole formed by a top 5 offensive line and goes down at first contact by a safety.

 

RB2: Finds no hole where it should be because the offensive line is terrible, bounces to the outside, jukes around a linebacker, breaks the tackle of a corner, and then gets tackled by a safety.

 

One of those RBs deserves a much higher grade than the other, despite the outcome being exactly the same.

 

As previously mentioned, PFFs grades are subjective, but that doesn't mean that they're worthless or that it's bad process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  There is very little to separate all these fine LB's.
  And i have not gotten to watch them that much.
 I have watched Leonard a lot and am very aware of HIS short comings.
 And i am very hopefull that IF we develop a considerably better (and i think we can) front four package, Leonard has the possibility of adjusting his game to be a more complete player.
 That said, i watched Tampa's Devin Smith in the playoffs and SB and i would take him over Leonard. The young man is a Superior in all facets type player.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mackrel829 said:

 

I didn't want to hijack this thread with PFF talk, which is why I directed you to the other thread that I made but oh well.

 

Two RBs run 20 yards with the ball.

 

RB1: Runs through a 6ft hole formed by a top 5 offensive line and goes down at first contact by a safety.

 

RB2: Finds no hole where it should be because the offensive line is terrible, bounces to the outside, jukes around a linebacker, breaks the tackle of a corner, and then gets tackled by a safety.

 

One of those RBs deserves a much higher grade than the other, despite the outcome being exactly the same.

 

As previously mentioned, PFFs grades are subjective, but that doesn't mean that they're worthless or that it's bad process.

I get all of that, of course if the run is obviously more impressive than a RB should deserve a higher grade but a lot of it is opinion when it comes to certain plays as well. You stated an obvious that if someone runs 20 yards untouched and tackled by a safety compared to someone who breaks tackles for 20 yards than is tackled by a safety should get the higher grade. Of course they should, what about my example above? Your example isn't anywhere close to mine. PFF misuses sample sizing as well, they do it all the time. You like PFF apparently and believe in it so we will just have agree to disagree. 

 

One last thing PFF has Leonard rated 6th, I have no clue how they came to that, see Fluke's post above. Going by that, Leonard is arguably the best LB to play at his position.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just be glad Leonard is included on this list.  Think about the LB's that were left off, and could make a case for being included.

Khalil Mack

Tremaine Edmunds

Leighton Vander Esch

Roquan Smith

Myles Jack

etc

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DownHillRunner said:

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

Honest question... did you look at stats of the 3 guys you called out and at least compare to Leonard's stats before commenting?

When something looks off to me, the first thing I do is dig a bit.

 

Give me 5 minutes and I'll pull stats...

 

10 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Yet  when they rank Nelson as the best Guard, the forum jumps for joy!!

 

Exactly. 

 

10 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

They might be right and they maybe wrong. However, how many of us can truly say the other linebackers are not better or for that matter worse!?  90% of us don't watch the linebackers thru out the season.

 

That's why I do the below every time someone says "eye test". I watch more football weekly for CFB and NFL than most, and I still don't get to watch enough to break out the old "eye test" when comparing across positions. I can understand AFC teams on our schedule who we see a few times a year, but how may posters watched a lot of the other teams. 

 

200.gif

 

4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They use poor sample sizing a lot when grading players. Sometimes they will grade a LB higher that has only played 25 games over a LB that has played 50 but the LB that has played 50 had many more good games.

Not sure I understand this at all. They supposedly watch every play of every player and grade. What are they supposed to do differently? Can you give a specific example of what you are talking about?

4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

 

 Also the way they grade players statistically is odd IMO. For example if RB A. gains lets say 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 and doesn't get the 1st down but RB B. gains 6 yards on a 3rd and 7 but breaks a tackle to get the 6 yards and still doesn't get the 1st down, the 2nd RB is graded higher. 6 yards is 6 yards, the player that didn't have to break a tackle still had to use vision and speed to get that 6. I could use other examples but I think after reading this you may know where I am coming from.

So given two RBs that gained the same yardage, you wouldn't give the RB that broke the tackle more bonus points? You're losing me here.

 

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah but it is opinion of PFF to which 6 yard run was more impressive is the bottomline. Just because someone breaks a tackle to get 6 yards doesn't make his run any better than a guy that uses better vision or elusiveness to get the same 6 yards. So why grade one 6 yard run higher over another is where I am going with this and they do it all the time. 

It's not really an opinion if broken Ts or YAContact is figured into the formula. You just don't agree with their formula. But I would say the overwhelming majority of people would rate a run higher if that RB had more YAContact or broke a tackle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DownHillRunner said:

These PFF dudes been smoking something since the draft. Darius is a top 3 linebacker. Show me what Eric Kendricks, Lavonte David, and Demario Davis do on a football field better than Darius. 

 

 

 

Let's start with Leonard's stats. And keep in mind Leonard plays WILL in a 4-3, but mostly a 4-2 (we're in nickel mostly), so most would say he naturally gets more opportunity for Ts. At minimum, different positions so should be looked at in that context.

 

I've bolded blue for best (out of the 4 in question)

 

  • Leonard - 14 games
    • Tackles: 9.4 pg
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 109.2
    • Completion % allowed: 81.4% (12th worst in the league in all positions)
    • TDs given up 3 (0.21 pg)
    • Sacks: 3 (0.21 pg)
    • TFL's: 7 (0.5 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 3 (0.21 pg)
    • Missed T%: 5%
    • Note: Very solid vs the run, but one could say plain bad vs the pass. His completions % allowed was 12 highest in the league (all positions). 
  • Eric Kendricks (plays MIKE in a 4-3) 11 games
    • Tackles: 9.7 pg
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 58.8 (top 10 all positions)
    • Completion % allowed: 70.7
    • TDs given up: 0
    • Sacks: 0
    • TFL's: 4 (0.36 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 0
    • Missed T%: 7%
    • Note: You can't argue with Kendricks at all IMO. Highest Ts per game of the 4 we're comparing, and also top 10 in pass D in the NFL of all positions including DBs. 
  • Lavonte David (plays RIL in a 3-4) 16 games
    • Tackles: 7.3 pg
    • INTs: 1 (0.06 pg)
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 93.4
    • Completion % allowed: 75%
    • TDs given up: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • Sacks: 1.5 (0.09 pg)
    • TFL's: 12 (0.75 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 3 (0.19 pg)
    • Missed T%: 7.915%
    • Note: Great combined TFL/sack stats per game, and better pass D stats than Leonard.
  • Demario Davis (plays WILL in a 4-3) 16 games
    • Tackles: 7.4
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 106.3
    • Completion % allowed: 70.4%
    • TDs given up: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • Sacks: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • TFL's: 10 (0.63 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 0
    • Missed T%: 7% 
    • Note: Has the highest combined # of sacks and TFLs per game last year. Also the lowest missed T% over the last 2 years. Down year for him, so perhaps he's getting a nod for 2019 as well. Even in a down year, his pass D was still a bit better than Leonards.

Conclusion - Sure there could be debate, but doesn't appear that PFF is smoking anything after looking at the stats for context.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I get all of that, of course if the run is obviously more impressive than a RB should deserve a higher grade but a lot of it is opinion when it comes to certain plays as well. You stated an obvious that if someone runs 20 yards untouched and tackled by a safety compared to someone who breaks tackles for 20 yards than is tackled by a safety should get the higher grade. Of course they should, what about my example above? Your example isn't anywhere close to mine. PFF misuses sample sizing as well, they do it all the time. You like PFF apparently and believe in it so we will just have agree to disagree. 

 

One last thing PFF has Leonard rated 6th, I have no clue how they came to that, see Fluke's post above. Going by that, Leonard is arguably the best LB to play at his position.  

 

Well the exact same applies to your example. The only difference would be that the difference in grade would be smaller.

 

And production isn't the same as contribution. That's something else that PFF helps to distinguish. Just because Leonard's stats are higher, that doesn't necessarily mean that he's better, essentially for the reasons already discussed. His stats certainly don't mean nothing, and we're all pleased to have such a productive player on the defence, but those numbers alone don't make Leonard #1.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Honest question... did you look at stats of the 3 guys you called out and at least compare to Leonard's stats before commenting?

When something looks off to me, the first thing I do is dig a bit.

 

Give me 5 minutes and I'll pull stats...

 

 

Exactly. 

 

 

That's why I do the below every time someone says "eye test". I watch more football weekly for CFB and NFL than most, and I still don't get to watch enough to break out the old "eye test" when comparing across positions. I can understand AFC teams on our schedule who we see a few times a year, but how may posters watched a lot of the other teams. 

 

200.gif

 

Not sure I understand this at all. They supposedly watch every play of every player and grade. What are they supposed to do differently? Can you give a specific example of what you are talking about?

So given two RBs that gained the same yardage, you wouldn't give the RB that broke the tackle more bonus points? You're losing me here.

 

It's not really an opinion if broken Ts or YAContact is figured into the formula. You just don't agree with their formula. But I would say the overwhelming majority of people would rate a run higher if that RB had more YAContact or broke a tackle. 

Eric Kendricks has played in 85 games, DeMario Davis 144 games. Davis even had a better year statistically in 2020 with 119 combined tackles and 4 sacks. Kendricks had 107 combined tackles and 0 sacks. PFF rates Kendricks the better player eventhough he has only played in 85 games and Davis has played in 144 games - that is what I mean by rating a player higher that doesn't have near the sample size as another player does. That is a great example. I would be fine with it if he had a better season last season than Davis but he didn't statistically there is the problem.

 

Regarding RB's if RB A. breaks a tackle and gains 6 yards and RB B. makes an elusive move ala Barry Sanders to gain the same amount of yards without breaking a tackle then I would grade them the same. That is where my 6 yards is 6 yards came in. Because RB B. still had to make a spectacular move to get the yards. The example @Mackrel829used was saying if RB A. just had a huge hole and it was an easy run to get 20 yards compared to RB B. breaking tackles to get the 20 then yes I agree with you and him both on that regarding a higher grade for RB B. 

 

I don't think I can explain things any better than this. You told me to give you an example regarding a LB not having near the sample size as another and being rated higher that wasn't as good statistically and I did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Eric Kendricks has played in 85 games, DeMario Davis 144 games. Davis even had a better year statistically in 2020 with 119 combined tackles and 4 sacks. Kendricks had 107 combined tackles and 0 sacks. PFF rates Kendricks the better player eventhough he has only played in 85 games and Davis has played in 144 games - that is what I mean by rating a player higher that doesn't have near the sample size as another player does. That is a great example. I would be fine with it if he had a better season last season than Davis but he didn't statistically there is the problem.

This is a ranking entering the 2021 season, not a career rank. It doesn't matter what someone did in 144 games. 

 

And how can you say Davis had a statistically better year than Kendricks in 2020? Kendricks had more Ts per game, and clearly better pass D grades. It's not even close. And even if you want to look back further, Kendricks has the best coverage grade of all LBs going back the last 2 years.

5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

 

Regarding RB's if RB A. breaks a tackle and gains 6 yards and RB B. makes an elusive move ala Barry Sanders to gain the same amount of yards without breaking a tackle then I would grade them the same. That is where my 6 yards is 6 yards came in. Because RB B. still had to make a spectacular move to get the yards. The example @Mackrel829used was saying if RB A. just had a huge hole and it was an easy run to get 20 yards compared to RB B. breaking tackles to get the 20 then yes I agree with you and him both on that regarding a higher grade for RB B. 

 

I don't think I can explain things any better than this. You told me to give you an example regarding a LB not having near the sample size as another and being rated higher that wasn't as good statistically and I did. 

 

A running back gets extra credit for using speed to gain an edge, just like a broken tackle.... so you're bolded is covered......

 

I'm guessing you're just not familiar with PFF's grading process.

 

Here ya go.

https://www.pff.com/news/pro-how-pff-grades-running-backs

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

This is a ranking entering the 2021 season, not a career rank. It doesn't matter what someone did in 144 games. 

 

And how can you say Davis had a statistically better year than Kendricks in 2020? Kendricks had more Ts per game, and clearly better pass D grades. It's not even close. And even if you want to look back further, Kendricks has the best coverage grade of all LBs going back the last 2 years.

 

A running back gets extra credit for using speed to gain an edge, just like a broken tackle.... so you're bolded is covered......

 

I'm guessing you're just not familiar with PFF's grading process.

 

Here ya go.

https://www.pff.com/news/pro-how-pff-grades-running-backs

I was under the assumption that they put more emphasis on a RB breaking tackles than being fast or elusive. If I am wrong there, than I am wrong. Regarding Kendricks vs Davis, I gave you last season stats (2020). Davis had more combined tackles, more solo tackles, and more sacks. I guess I look at certain statistics being more important than PFF does. I am not going by career stats but Davis does have a great body of work in 144 games played which is a huge sample size. I get what you are saying though, it just seems like you and @Mackrel829 don't get what I am saying lol. There are many on this forum that agree with me that PFF's formula isn't accurate when it comes to rating players. Over the last few years I have seen many in here say they aren't that good. I still read them just to see what they say because I try to figure out how different formula's are used, so I don't just ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@2006Coltsbestever if I may, I think you're overvaluing sample size in your analysis here. I get what you're saying though.

 

I also maintain just looking at tackle numbers in isolation is not a good metric. 

 

PFF is.... PFF. A lot on here won't agree with their rankings/scoring, but it's a subjective grading system so you'll never win them all. What I will say is, I bet PFF's staff have watched a lot more film then a lot of the blind naysayers (not including you in that btw!).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

@2006Coltsbestever if I may, I think you're overvaluing sample size in your analysis here. I get what you're saying though. I maintain just looking at tackle numbers is not a good metric. 

 

PFF is.... PFF. A lot on here won't agree with their rankings/scoring, but it's a subjective grading system so you'll never win them all. What I will say is, I bet PFF's staff have watched a lot more film then a lot of the blind naysayers (not including you in that btw!).

Oh I am sure they have watched way more film than me or any of us in here, I will admit that. They do that for a living around the clock. I just don't agree most of the time with the way they rank players. Not saying this because he is a Colt but Leonard being ranked 6th is a head scratcer IMO. He may not be #1 but he is at least top 5, JMO. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Oh I am sure they have watched way more film than me or any of us in here, I will admit that. They do that for a living around the clock. I just don't agree most of the time with the way they rank players. Not saying this because he is a Colt but Leonard being ranked 6th is a head scratcer IMO. He may not be #1 but he is at least top 5, JMO. 

 

I think another thing to take from @EastStreet's breakdown is LB is such a varied grouping of some very different positions it's not always an apples -> apples comparison. Why I like using EDGE for pass rushers rather than DE/OLB. Would you have been ok with him at 5? 4? 3? 

 

You'll see this play out in the Pro Bowl voting too with how they group certain players.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think another thing to take from @EastStreet's breakdown is LB is such a varied grouping of some very different positions it's not always an apples -> apples comparison. Why I like using EDGE for pass rushers rather than DE/OLB. Would you have been ok with him at 5? 4? 3? 

 

You'll see this play out in the Pro Bowl voting too with how they group certain players.

On PFF's top 10 list I can honestly say only Bobby Wagner is better and Wagner is going to be 31 in June, Leonard only 25. If I was choosing long term who to take I would take Leonard because he is much younger. To PFF's credit they do have Wagner #1. They also have Nelson #1 regarding Guards so they are ok at times.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I was under the assumption that they put more emphasis on a RB breaking tackles than being fast or elusive. If I am wrong there, than I am wrong. Regarding Kendricks vs Davis, I gave you last season stats (2020). Davis had more combined tackles, more solo tackles, and more sacks. I guess I look at certain statistics being more important than PFF does. I am not going by career stats but Davis does have a great body of work in 144 games played which is a huge sample size. I get what you are saying though, it just seems like you and @Mackrel829 don't get what I am saying lol. There are many on this forum that agree with me that PFF's formula isn't accurate when it comes to rating players. Over the last few years I have seen many in here say they aren't that good. I still read them just to see what they say because I try to figure out how different formula's are used, so I don't just ignore them.

Kendricks was injured 5 games. His avgs per game are better than Davis's. I provided games played, and pg average for the 4 players.

 

Every time a PFF hater goes on and on about PFF being bad, I ask them to provide specifics. Rarely does anyone reply. Just like in your case relevant to RBs  (thank you for replying by the way), most people don't have a good understanding of PFF's process. 

 

Personally PFF is only one indicator. But it's just a bit silly for people to hot take stuff without even looking at comparable stats (like the OP), or criticize without knowing how they grade in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Kendricks was injured 5 games. His avgs per game are better than Davis's. I provided games played, and pg average for the 4 players.

 

Every time a PFF hater goes on and on about PFF being bad, I ask them to provide specifics. Rarely does anyone reply. Just like in your case relevant to RBs  (thank you for replying by the way), most people don't have a good understanding of PFF's process. 

 

Personally PFF is only one indicator. But it's just a bit silly for people to hot take stuff without even looking at comparable stats (like the OP), or criticize without knowing how they grade in the first place.

That is fair enough, I am glad I replied (had the balls to at least reply lol) because like you said many in here say they stink but don't say why or even attempt to say why. @Mackrel829wanted me to reply so I did.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think another thing to take from @EastStreet's breakdown is LB is such a varied grouping of some very different positions it's not always an apples -> apples comparison. Why I like using EDGE for pass rushers rather than DE/OLB. Would you have been ok with him at 5? 4? 3? 

 

You'll see this play out in the Pro Bowl voting too with how they group certain players.

 

Yup. IMO they should have some sub-grouping for LBs. They already group 3-4 OLBs in with DEs for "Edge". 

I think they should have 

 

Edge - 4-3 DEs and 3-4 OLBs (like they already do)

 

but then break the following like

 

OLBs - only 4-3 OLBs (Wills and SAMs)

MLBs - 4-3 Mikes and 3-4 RILB and LILBs

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Yup. IMO they should have some sub-grouping for LBs. They already group 3-4 OLBs in with DEs for "Edge". 

I think they should have 

 

Edge - 4-3 DEs and 3-4 OLBs (like they already do)

 

but then break the following like

 

OLBs - only 4-3 OLBs (Wills and SAMs)

MLBs - 4-3 Mikes and 3-4 RILB and LILBs

This I agree with this 100%. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know.....if we were to rank people or sites who rank players.....I wonder where they would rank? Sometimes, the thought of ranking kind of rankles me. 

 

Sorry, my post kind of stinks....it's damn near.....rank. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Let's start with Leonard's stats. And keep in mind Leonard plays WILL in a 4-3, but mostly a 4-2 (we're in nickel mostly), so most would say he naturally gets more opportunity for Ts. At minimum, different positions so should be looked at in that context.

 

I've bolded blue for best (out of the 4 in question)

 

  • Leonard - 14 games
    • Tackles: 9.4 pg
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 109.2
    • Completion % allowed: 81.4% (12th worst in the league in all positions)
    • TDs given up 3 (0.21 pg)
    • Sacks: 3 (0.21 pg)
    • TFL's: 7 (0.5 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 3 (0.21 pg)
    • Missed T%: 5%
    • Note: Very solid vs the run, but one could say plain bad vs the pass. His completions % allowed was 12 highest in the league (all positions). 
  • Eric Kendricks (plays MIKE in a 4-3) 11 games
    • Tackles: 9.7 pg
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 58.8 (top 10 all positions)
    • Completion % allowed: 70.7
    • TDs given up: 0
    • Sacks: 0
    • TFL's: 4 (0.36 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 0
    • Missed T%: 7%
    • Note: You can't argue with Kendricks at all IMO. Highest Ts per game of the 4 we're comparing, and also top 10 in pass D in the NFL of all positions including DBs. 
  • Lavonte David (plays RIL in a 3-4) 16 games
    • Tackles: 7.3 pg
    • INTs: 1 (0.06 pg)
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 93.4
    • Completion % allowed: 75%
    • TDs given up: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • Sacks: 1.5 (0.09 pg)
    • TFL's: 12 (0.75 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 3 (0.19 pg)
    • Missed T%: 7.915%
    • Note: Great combined TFL/sack stats per game, and better pass D stats than Leonard.
  • Demario Davis (plays WILL in a 4-3) 16 games
    • Tackles: 7.4
    • INTs: 0
    • Passer Rating Allowed: 106.3
    • Completion % allowed: 70.4%
    • TDs given up: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • Sacks: 4 (0.25 pg)
    • TFL's: 10 (0.63 pg)
    • Forced Fumbles: 0
    • Missed T%: 7% 
    • Note: Has the highest combined # of sacks and TFLs per game last year. Also the lowest missed T% over the last 2 years. Down year for him, so perhaps he's getting a nod for 2019 as well. Even in a down year, his pass D was still a bit better than Leonards.

Conclusion - Sure there could be debate, but doesn't appear that PFF is smoking anything after looking at the stats for context.

Few people watch games critically with the goal of objective evaluation of what happens in every possession with every single player(what PFF actually does) (this is not a knock on those people - to a significant degree I can count myself in that group too - my goal when I watch the Colts is to have fun and enjoy rooting for my team). Even fewer have watched every snap of every single player of every other team in the league critically with the goal of objective evaluation. PFF are not perfect but they have a system that's more objective and consistent than anything you can find on almost any football forum on the internet(this one included). And it's not even close! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

You know.....if we were to rank people or sites who rank players.....I wonder where they would rank? Sometimes, the thought of ranking kind of rankles me. 

 

Sorry, my post kind of stinks....it's damn near.....rank. 

Perhaps you should save yourself some rankling and not click on rank threads. You probably rank high on that.:headspin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stitches said:

Few people watch games critically with the goal of objective evaluation of what happens in every possession with every single player(what PFF actually does) (this is not a knock on those people - to a significant degree I can count myself in that group too - my goal when I watch the Colts is to have fun and enjoy rooting for my team). Even fewer have watched every snap of every single player of every other team in the league critically with the goal of objective evaluation. PFF are not perfect but they have a system that's more objective and consistent than anything you can find on almost any football forum on the internet(this one included). And it's not even close! 

Agreed. I always watch our games with the intent of having fun. But I do go back and re-watch games, rewinding, etc. to look closer. Not all games, but a decent amount. And yes, PFF is far from perfect. but they are a better than the majority of "eye-test" fans.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

@2006Coltsbestever if I may, I think you're overvaluing sample size in your analysis here. I get what you're saying though.

 

I also maintain just looking at tackle numbers in isolation is not a good metric. 

 

PFF is.... PFF. A lot on here won't agree with their rankings/scoring, but it's a subjective grading system so you'll never win them all. What I will say is, I bet PFF's staff have watched a lot more film then a lot of the blind naysayers (not including you in that btw!).

 

This is my general stance. Their process may not be perfect but at least they have a process and they apply it to every snap of every game. I barely get to watch football outside of Colts games so they're an invaluable resource for me in terms of fleshing out my opinions about the rest of the league. I can't watch every snap of every game so it's fantastic to have a resource available that does.

 

51 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That is fair enough, I am glad I replied (had the balls to at least reply lol) because like you said many in here say they stink but don't say why or even attempt to say why. @Mackrel829wanted me to reply so I did.

 

I'm glad you replied too. There's nothing wrong with two (or more) people disagreeing. It's been a perfectly civil discussion and I appreciate your contributions to it.

 

I don't think we even disagree that much. We seem to agree that players should be graded differently based on their contributions to a play rather than the outcome of that play. I think we mostly just disagree about how effectively PFF are able to judge the contributions that different players make. Nothing wrong with that :)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...