PFF does not think much of the 2023 NY Giants

[Dgoodmantrublu]

I don't think much of PFF.

[uconnjack8]

Since they like regression to the mean, did they account for that in terms of starts missed due to injury?

Asking for a friend

[DaveBrown74]

Since they like regression to the mean, did they account for that in terms of starts missed due to injury?

Asking for a friend

Totally agree with your friend's point, although you might mention to him that I've been waiting for them regress to the mean on this issue for over a decade now.

[todge]

I think we have to keep in mind that with all their numbers it's all in the past. Not to taking into account the experience it takes to learn how to play in the NFL. Along with the physical maturation these players in their early 20s will go through. As we have seen sometimes it's about how much they want it.

"heavily reliant on the run game" is PFF taking a swipe at Jones"ability to pass the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rambo89]

"heavily reliant on the run game" is PFF taking a swipe at Jones"ability to pass the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Giants were 26th in passing yards and 4th in rushing yards in 2022.  Those are the facts.  Saying the Giants were heavily reliant on the running game last season is the truth whether we choose to recognize it or not.

[Trench]

Haha. This thread will bring out some serious vitriol directed at PFF. Many here already don't like them as it is.

PFF is a scam. Same type thing as the analytics group that has the ear of the Yankees GM and manager.

[Ed Vette]

Too many articles by fringe writers. What they do best is analytics in play by play. It's plain to see whoever wrote this, didn't scout the team.

[AZGiantFan]

The Giants were 26th in passing yards and 4th in rushing yards in 2022.  Those are the facts.  Saying the Giants were heavily reliant on the running game last season is the truth whether we choose to recognize it or not.

But this is supposed to be looking ahead to 2023, not a retrospective on 2022.  They have no idea if the Giants will be heavily reliant on the run, this year.  Teams can and often do change radically from year to year.

Some of the changes between 2021 and 2022 are pretty significant in this chart, in either direction.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-play-pct?date=2023-02-13

[Dgoodmantrublu]

Giants add a lot of new guys of catch the ball. There is no way they plan to be as run heavy.

[GloryDays]

F Collinsworth and his mediocre PFF graders doing that lousy work.
It's OK for anyone to voice their opinion, but when they consider themselves professional graders of players and teams, why do they not come out and confess that they fu**ed up and apologize to the teams and their fans?!

[AZGiantFan]

In my opinion:

Things PFF does really well: collection of objective data such as formation count, percent of time running plays and passing plays go right, left, and middle, % of time blitzing, snap counts, etc.

Things PFF is mediocre at: subjective individual player evaluations, gussied up with numbers to appear objective.

Things PFF is terrible at: team evaluations

[uconnjack8]

Too many articles by fringe writers. What they do best is analytics in play by play. It's plain to see whoever wrote this, didn't scout the team.

Ed,

I was just add that if they want to create content for an upcoming season they should have some methodology for expected improvements or declines based on age and years in the league.  I bring it up because they are just using last years grades without accounting for someone like Evan Neal to improve.  Its the equivalent of when people use last year's record to look at strength of schedule. 

Just seems like its an overly simplistic view from a company that is claiming to be analytical. 

The article discusses regression to the mean for the Giants but doesn't seem to apply any other statistical projections.  In the case of someone like Neal, I would guess they could easily find an average improvement for 2nd year players (or perhaps its an average decline).  Just seems like low effort content.

[Ed Vette]

Ed,

I was just add that if they want to create content for an upcoming season they should have some methodology for expected improvements or declines based on age and years in the league.  I bring it up because they are just using last years grades without accounting for someone like Evan Neal to improve.  Its the equivalent of when people use last year's record to look at strength of schedule. 

Just seems like its an overly simplistic view from a company that is claiming to be analytical. 

The article discusses regression to the mean for the Giants but doesn't seem to apply any other statistical projections.  In the case of someone like Neal, I would guess they could easily find an average improvement for 2nd year players (or perhaps its an average decline).  Just seems like low effort content.

Well said and I absolutely agree. If they take last year's team against this up coming harder schedule, they should regress because close games were won on few mistakes and successful gambles.

They can't use pre-season stats because the starters hardly played. I'm pretty sure they didn't have a Camp reporter there every day.

[kartanoman]

F Collinsworth and his mediocre PFF graders doing that lousy work.
It's OK for anyone to voice their opinion, but when they consider themselves professional graders of players and teams, why do they not come out and confess that they fu**ed up and apologize to the teams and their fans?!

I don't know if that is completely necessary, since you can take them or leave them, at face value or for entertainment. But what would be a good idea is having Collinsworth and team perform a self-assessment of their predictions and summarize their lessons learned. I think that would lend them greater credibility in the long run. They may be doing some of that already; however, they should present it to their audience as such and without any ego as to how they fared.

In the end, it really should be treated as one's opinion and little else. They don't back their predictions with any % accuracy or your money back. It's good for entertainment, then lining the kitty sandbox. 😺

Peace!

[DaveBrown74]

Jeff,

From what I saw in camp and his time in PS games, I think Evans has improved.  I don't think he will be the liability that hampered the offense as he was last season.  Will he be as good as his draft status would indicate?  That is still to be determined.

I'm curious: did you come away from camp sessions in 2022 thinking Neal would have a bad 2022 season (which he did)? How easy it is to tell if an O lineman is going to be good in a given season based on camp, even if you attend?

Not pushing back or saying you're wrong - I am just asking. I have never once attended a camp session so I have no firsthand experience with this.