Looking forward to 2019, Browns Team Needs

Offensive lineman rankings may be where PFF gets the most wrong. Maybe wrong is the wrong word. It's where their rankings are the most misleading.

 

He's a top-ranked guard in a metric - not overall. That metric is pass-blocking efficiency, meaning that he was very good (when on the field). There is a minimum threshold of snaps to be ranked (e.g., you cannot have 1 snap, have a perfect score, and be 100% and the top guy).

 

Well, since I don't spend my free time watching Bears football games and evaluating their offensive linemen, I defer to someone who is paid (read: professional) to do it for me.

 

Guilty.

 

2018 All Pro Team
LT: David Bakhtiari (PFF Ranking - 1st)
LG: Quenton Nelson (PFF Ranking - 1st)
C: Jason Kelce (PFF Ranking - 1st)
RG: Zach Martin (PFF Ranking - 2nd)
RT: Mitchell Schwartz (PFF Ranking - 1st)

 

2018 All Pro Team (Second Team)

LT: Duane Brown, Terron Armstead (PFF Rankings - 4th, 2nd)
LG: Joel Bitonio (PFF Ranking - 2nd)
C: Maurkice Pouncey (PFF Ranking - 14th)
RG: Marshal Yanda (PFF Ranking - 3rd)
RT: Ryan Ramczyk (PFF Ranking - 3rd)

The only one that looks funny there is center, where All Pro voters got it wrong as Pouncey is nowhere near the Top 5 spots. Alex Mack, Rodney Hudson, and J.C. Tretter are all superior centers. PFF ranks them 3rd, 4th, and 5th, so...

 

Here's the issue with that......it doesn't mean he was very good at anything. It means the results of the plays he was involved in were good. The way PFF grades offensive line play isn't really fair. And it's subjective based on the play ran, what the defense is doing, what the guy next to the guard is doing, and so on.

The Bears have a QB that moves the pocket. The Bears employ zone blocking on the interior. The Bears also run RPO quite a bit. These are all things that will take a load off a guard and make him look better than he really is often...based on the result of the play. This is all especially true when you are looking a guy that played a tick less than 1/3 of his teams snaps.

These scores that PFF gives are not objective. They are subjective. It's very murky...that's true for every position but for offensive line play it's even more so because they is so much going on up front.

In PFF's system....offensive line play is murky because there's no way for the person doing the grades to objectively say what that lineman's assignment was. And that's where the trouble really begins. And PFF freely admits that at times when they can't definitely say what a players assignment was with a high level of confidence....that player will receive a neutral 0 score for that play...regardless of the actual outcome. Also when it comes to pass blocking....PFF puts the grading emphasis on the defense....meaning they will score wins for defensive players over scoring an offensive linemen a loss. Leading to favorable ratings for offensive linemen. Offensive linemen start every play with a small positive rating while defensive players start with a small negative. The stats are literally padded in favor of the blocker.

I like PFF's grading system. I think it's fun. I also think it's really informative and helpful. I think it's a really good tool. But it's a flawed tool and when you make it the basis of how to perceive every players worth.....it's gonna steer you wrong.

 

A) Tretter is in the final year of his contract
B) Dorsey has established a history of replacing interior linemen in the draft, rather than giving them extended contracts...see Kevin Zeitler...

So the topic came up that a replacement needs to be drafted in order to be ready to take over in 2020...which I can't disagree with, given Dorsey's tendencies.

 

A) Tretter is in the final year of his contract
B) Dorsey has established a history of replacing interior linemen in the draft, rather than giving them extended contracts...see Kevin Zeitler...

So the topic came up that a replacement needs to be drafted in order to be ready to take over in 2020...which I can't disagree with, given Dorsey's tendencies.

 

I also side with paid professionals.....but more so the ones that are paid and employed by football teams to make football decisions. GMs...scouts...coaches. And they seem to have a much lesser opinion of Kush than PFF does, it would seem.

 

In other news....water is wet.

 

Couldn't decide which one to like.



I agree it's a topic worth considering, but I guess it could have been a shorter discussion.

"Should we consider moving on from Tretter?"

*looks at current center rankings*

*looks at prospective draft class, specifically the center position*

*looks at trade opportunities*

"No."

"Okay."

 

So which is it?

BWW: "PFF is flawed, especially among offensive linemen."

PFF: *perfectly matches their rankings and All Pro voting*

BWW: "Well, duh!"

 

PFF can be flawed while most All Pros have high grades. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

QBR is a flawed stat.....yet the best QBs in the league will typically rank high with it.

Plenty of baseball stats are flawed....yet the really good players tend to be among the leaders.

 

But also a reason not to invest $11M+ in a gruad(Zeitler) or $5.6M in a center. If the system and/or QB make flaws less discernible, you can use these players effectively freeing your cash flow up for other needs, especially high importance positions like QB and rush specialist, that demand higher money.

 

I can't ask John Dorsey if Eric Kush, a sixth year NFL veteran is going to be a better fit for the Browns' offensive system than a potential fourth or fifth round pick in this year's upcoming draft.

In PFF, we have a metric - however flawed some perceive it - that at least puts everything under the same lens.

 

I wasn't trying to say the Browns getting Kush was a bad move. Signing veterans with starting experience for O-line depth is rarely a bad idea.