[News] Late For Work 5/5: Will Ravens Make More Veteran Additions?

[hen826957]

Why not signed Antonio Cromartie over Chris Culliver? I think he could be a pretty nice veteran pickup or we could wait after the June 1 cuts. Cromartie and Jimmy Smith would be nice. ?

[Halshayeji]

14 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Why isn't that accurate though? They played great in one year and poor in another... happens all the time to many players.

PFF isn't the be-all, end-all, but they're pretty much one of the only evaluators who looks at production on a snap by snap basis, not just using box score statistics that anybody can pull off ESPN.

Its quite useful when evaluating players who aren't putting up "box score" stats, like lineman, linebackers, secondary players, etc.

You and I both know how flawed PFF is

They r usually accurate enough when you look at the top 5 and stuff. But seriously who doesn't know JJ watt K Mack and those boys are up there?

Their grading system is so flawed in so many ways it's not even funny. Especially in the secondary. They regularly give negative grades to corners when the safety screws up and vice verse. They also don't take into account pass rush. So a CB can hold up for 7 seconds then give up a 15 yard completion and another CB could give up a slant that goes 15 yards and both get the same grade.

oh and the best part is the total grade system. If Revis plays one game next year and gets 5 then gets hurt. He's probably one of the worst in their eyes because a pedestrian corner can get 2 for 16 games and his 32 (total year grade) is so much better than revis.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Halshayeji

[eze17]

Why not signed Antonio Cromartie over Chris Culliver? I think he could be a pretty nice veteran pickup or we could wait after the June 1 cuts. Cromartie and Jimmy Smith would be nice. ?

I would wait til after the June 1st cuts. Not saying Cromartie would hurt us, but i'd prefer to see who's actually out there first. I would like to see more competition at CB, and I believe the Raven's will sign at least one, maybe two veterans. I wouldn't hold my breath that they will be some big-name players, however. Probably someone who they feel may benefit from a change of scenery.

[rmcjacket23]

49 minutes ago, Halshayeji said:

You and I both know how flawed PFF is

They r usually accurate enough when you look at the top 5 and stuff. But seriously who doesn't know JJ watt K Mack and those boys are up there?

Their grading system is so flawed in so many ways it's not even funny. Especially in the secondary. They regularly give negative grades to corners when the safety screws up and vice verse. They also don't take into account pass rush. So a CB can hold up for 7 seconds then give up a 15 yard completion and another CB could give up a slant that goes 15 yards and both get the same grade.

oh and the best part is the total grade system. If Revis plays one game next year and gets 5 then gets hurt. He's probably one of the worst in their eyes because a pedestrian corner can get 2 for 16 games and his 32 (total year grade) is so much better than revis.

Yeah, but what you are describing is inherent limitations in trying to quantify something that you may not be able to quantify. For example... how exactly do you quantify a corner's ability in coverage when the QB is holding the ball for 7 seconds? How do you know that the QB holding the ball is doing so because the corner is playing good coverage? Maybe he's holding it because he's not going through his progressions properly due to a consistent pass rush?

I have no issue with your latter example, because why would I give somebody a high grade who isn't on the field? By definition, you're not a productive football player when you're not on the field. 

As I said earlier, PFF isn't ideal for identifying how good obvious players are. But what about somebody like a Luke Donald, a Marcel Dareus, or even somebody like a Marshal Yanda?

I guarantee a lot of fans who follow this team may have never even heard of those names because they don't play for their team, yet PFF is the type of place that allows people to see who some of the better players in the league are that they wouldn't ordinarily even know about.

You also sort of have to take people who bash it's opinions with a grain of salt as well. I mean who are those people? Fans who just watch the game from a macro sense and don't even watch individual players on individual plays?

Again, not saying its the Gospel, but there really aren't any better metrics out there that I've seen for evaluating players.

[TXRavensFan]

  4 hours ago, CLWG said:

I must say that I am excited about the up coming training camp and this year's draft class. I was a little disappointed at first, but after calming down I see the method to the madness of the player's that were picked.

I would have to say the biggest thing I was upset about was passing on Myles Jack, I understand his knee problem and that we still got a great player. In my opinion he just isnt a player that you can pass on in the 2nd round, not only is he a top 5 player when healthy but he is so versatile that he can play any level on the Defense. I understand with the injuries we have had on the team and Perriman missing all of last year it was hard to spend a high pick on another questionable player. However I think we could of got a higher pick in return for trading down.

While Jack has rare athleticism and would look good next to CJ, I think you have to ask if he's worth more by himself than Correa + Moore + Judon.

[eze17]

I feel like getting Ochi was like having a 12th pick. He had been linked to us through the entire draft. I seen him and his parents sitting on their couch on the third day of the draft looking somber that he hadn't been called yet...hopefully he will come in with a huge chip on his shoulder ready to prove that he belongs on an NFL team. I'm very excited that he'll play for the Ravens, and hope he can continue our record of getting gems out of un-drafted players.

[Crusader]

How many of those guys last year that the media praised really became that great? Joe was NEVER talked about like that he turned out better that most. "You don't know what's in the pickle jar until you get the lid off" FOG HORN

[rmcjacket23]

23 minutes ago, Crusader said:

How many of those guys last year that the media praised really became that great? Joe was NEVER talked about like that he turned out better that most. "You don't know what's in the pickle jar until you get the lid off" FOG HORN

Well, it is kinda hard to become great in a year.

[throwback2000]

So sorry to hear about Perrimans' dad. Prayers for the entire family. Forget about AJ Hawk. On his best day ever, he couldn't carry a washed up Darryl Smith's jock. Find someone else. Give little Arthur a shot.

[billiejean]

  5 hours ago, billiejean said:

by PFF

You mean the same pff that rated Rodes #9 and Culliver #10 the year prior..,

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/02/13/sig-stats-ypcs-cornerbacks/ 

 

Then rates them 102 and 111 the next year...

https://mobile.twitter.com/PFF/status/672899009292460032/photo/4

I'm sorry but I honestly don't take PFF too seriously.

its actually a pretty good way to evaluate players. its not perfect but there is a lot of data that goes into those numbers.

[RRRRRavens]

Chris Moore's almost 20 YPC average sounds great - but, if you come to think of it, it suggests that he's a one-trick pony - or was totally excluded from short yardage plays for some reason. If Torrey was exclusively used as a deep threat, he'd have a similarly impressive YPC stat - but from tenth the number of catches.

Not necessarily, Bio. It would partly depend on what his YAC was (yards after catch).

[RRRRRavens]

Moore looks like he will attack the ball more than Torrey Smith. Torrey Smith was never a guy to attack the ball. Which costed us probably 4 or 5 picks a season that I remember. I hope he continues to attack the ball in the NFL

You're so right!. That was Anquan Boldin's special gift - outfighting the DB for the ball.

[moonwalker619]

  12 hours ago, CaliRavenFan said:

  12 hours ago, CLWG said:

I must say that I am excited about the up coming training camp and this year's draft class. I was a little disappointed at first, but after calming down I see the method to the madness of the player's that were picked.

I would have to say the biggest thing I was upset about was passing on Myles Jack, I understand his knee problem and that we still got a great player. In my opinion he just isnt a player that you can pass on in the 2nd round, not only is he a top 5 player when healthy but he is so versatile that he can play any level on the Defense. I understand with the injuries we have had on the team and Perriman missing all of last year it was hard to spend a high pick on another questionable player. However I think we could of got a higher pick in return for trading down.

While Jack has rare athleticism and would look good next to CJ, I think you have to ask if he's worth more by himself than Correa + Moore + Judon.

Exactly this, I think a lot of people are forgetting that we got three players out of that trade. Arguably the best deep threat in the draft class, the college leader in sacks last year and very good pass rusher in Correa. I'd take the three of them over Myles Jack and the baggage of worrying about that knee his entire career. I guess we'll see how their careers all play out, but I'm very happy with the moves the Ravens made.

[Halshayeji]

9 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Yeah, but what you are describing is inherent limitations in trying to quantify something that you may not be able to quantify. For example... how exactly do you quantify a corner's ability in coverage when the QB is holding the ball for 7 seconds? How do you know that the QB holding the ball is doing so because the corner is playing good coverage? Maybe he's holding it because he's not going through his progressions properly due to a consistent pass rush?

I have no issue with your latter example, because why would I give somebody a high grade who isn't on the field? By definition, you're not a productive football player when you're not on the field. 

As I said earlier, PFF isn't ideal for identifying how good obvious players are. But what about somebody like a Luke Donald, a Marcel Dareus, or even somebody like a Marshal Yanda?

I guarantee a lot of fans who follow this team may have never even heard of those names because they don't play for their team, yet PFF is the type of place that allows people to see who some of the better players in the league are that they wouldn't ordinarily even know about.

You also sort of have to take people who bash it's opinions with a grain of salt as well. I mean who are those people? Fans who just watch the game from a macro sense and don't even watch individual players on individual plays?

Again, not saying its the Gospel, but there really aren't any better metrics out there that I've seen for evaluating players.

RMC man I honestly don't know if your being sarcastic or for real.

i know PFF gather information that not many others do. I also know that their statistics are so screwed that if you present it to any person working in statistics they'll wont take any of it because there are too many independent variables and the way they present their info is too inconsistant.

this particular statistic is presented in a way that shows Culliver to be like the 4th worst CB in the NFL.

in actuality there are around 200 CBs and only 115 qualify for this stat. Those other 80 didn't qualify because they didn't play the required downs.

if you look at the bottom twenty in that stat most of them barely qualify in that stat because they played just enough snaps to be on it. Due to injury or being a backup. 

but what's for sure is that if you want to compare 2 players you have to fix as many variables as you can. Here you are comparing players that played 4,7, or 9 games with players that played 16 games. That itself makes the comparison irrelevant. If you want to compare top ten maybe but if you want to compare someone on the top ten and someone in the latter that stat becomes irrelevant. The only way you can compare is to look at Culliver vs the rest in those 5-6 games he played. And that's state is not accessible to the public

its like saying KO was one of the worst LTs in 2015 I can't believe he got that deal. And in actuality he's only rated low as a LT because he played there for 4 games and may have played better than anyone but 4 games won't gather you as many points as the top 50 because they played 16 games. He also may have fallen out of the top ten in G because he missed games by virtue of moving to LT not because he was bad.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Halshayeji

[Maryland]

I want nothing to do with AJ Hawk. Unless you have a need for a slow, plodding, run-stuffing LB, there is no spot for Hawk on this defense. Just roll with Brown and Orr on their cheap deals and bring in a veteran only if it is absolutely necessary because they are struggling in camp.

[rmcjacket23]

7 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

RMC man I honestly don't know if your being sarcastic or for real.

i know PFF gather information that not many others do. I also know that their statistics are so screwed that if you present it to any person working in statistics they'll wont take any of it because there are too many independent variables and the way they present their info is too inconsistant.

this particular statistic is presented in a way that shows Culliver to be like the 4th worst CB in the NFL.

in actuality there are around 200 CBs and only 115 qualify for this stat. Those other 80 didn't qualify because they didn't play the required downs.

if you look at the bottom twenty in that stat most of them barely qualify in that stat because they played just enough snaps to be on it. Due to injury or being a backup. 

but what's for sure is that if you want to compare 2 players you have to fix as many variables as you can. Here you are comparing players that played 4,7, or 9 games with players that played 16 games. That itself makes the comparison irrelevant. If you want to compare top ten maybe but if you want to compare someone on the top ten and someone in the latter that stat becomes irrelevant. The only way you can compare is to look at Culliver vs the rest in those 5-6 games he played. And that's state is not accessible to the public

its like saying KO was one of the worst LTs in 2015 I can't believe he got that deal. And in actuality he's only rated low as a LT because he played there for 4 games and may have played better than anyone but 4 games won't gather you as many points as the top 50 because they played 16 games. He also may have fallen out of the top ten in G because he missed games by virtue of moving to LT not because he was bad.

OK, but I still don't get where the issue is. If you're already aware that Culliver isn't actually the 4th worst corner in the league, but that he's the 4th worst among qualified corners, where is the issue? You already know the context for that comparison, so why is it a problem?

Its no different than saying a punter leads the league in completion percentage because he ran one fake punt and completed the pass, thus giving him a perfect completion percentage. Nobody will say that he leads the league in completion percentage, because he doesn't meet the minimum required attempts to qualify for that title. Practically every single statistic in almost every sport has a minimum attempt threshold by which we judge players... PFF isn't doing anything different there.

It would appear that your only real "knock" on the process is against players who don't play a full slate of games for the position, which I agree isn't ideal, but I'm also not seeing a better option. If you're comparing a player who's played 5 games to a player who played 16 games, you obviously can't simply evaluate the guy who played 16 games on ONLY the 5 games the other guy played... that doesn't make a ton of sense or seem fair in any way.

[Halshayeji]

39 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

OK, but I still don't get where the issue is. If you're already aware that Culliver isn't actually the 4th worst corner in the league, but that he's the 4th worst among qualified corners, where is the issue? You already know the context for that comparison, so why is it a problem?

Its no different than saying a punter leads the league in completion percentage because he ran one fake punt and completed the pass, thus giving him a perfect completion percentage. Nobody will say that he leads the league in completion percentage, because he doesn't meet the minimum required attempts to qualify for that title. Practically every single statistic in almost every sport has a minimum attempt threshold by which we judge players... PFF isn't doing anything different there.

It would appear that your only real "knock" on the process is against players who don't play a full slate of games for the position, which I agree isn't ideal, but I'm also not seeing a better option. If you're comparing a player who's played 5 games to a player who played 16 games, you obviously can't simply evaluate the guy who played 16 games on ONLY the 5 games the other guy played... that doesn't make a ton of sense or seem fair in any way.

My only issue is that the guy threw a stat at me that was so irrelevant. It may be relevant if we were comparing revis to Sherman. But even then you'd have to separate man cover grades and run support grades to really get some sort of a feel of how the players rack up.

The only better option is the eye test and to look at how good or bad a player has been over the past 3-5 years. Obviously I don't watch every redskins or 49ers game. But reading reports and stuff from experts over that span gives you a good indication. Also the contract he was handed is usually a descent indicator. 

One last thing. You promised a prediction after the draft.....

[JimmyBlack]

8 hours ago, moonwalker619 said:

Exactly this, I think a lot of people are forgetting that we got three players out of that trade. Arguably the best deep threat in the draft class, the college leader in sacks last year and very good pass rusher in Correa. I'd take the three of them over Myles Jack and the baggage of worrying about that knee his entire career. I guess we'll see how their careers all play out, but I'm very happy with the moves the Ravens made.

First good chop block or clip and Jack is done.  I will see how the others pan out but I think we made the right choice with passing on Tunsil and Jack.  I sure hope that Stanley becomes a workout warrior in the weight room.

[rmcjacket23]

1 hour ago, Halshayeji said:

My only issue is that the guy threw a stat at me that was so irrelevant. It may be relevant if we were comparing revis to Sherman. But even then you'd have to separate man cover grades and run support grades to really get some sort of a feel of how the players rack up.

The only better option is the eye test and to look at how good or bad a player has been over the past 3-5 years. Obviously I don't watch every redskins or 49ers game. But reading reports and stuff from experts over that span gives you a good indication. Also the contract he was handed is usually a descent indicator. 

One last thing. You promised a prediction after the draft.....

PFF does separate protection grades vs run stopping grades for Corners, as they do for linebackers as well. You probably just didn't get the breakdown of how the total number was calculated.

Eye test obviously has major flaws, because it implies that people watching the games actually know what they are watching and how to evaluate players. The overwhelming majority of fans and people watching games don't have any idea what they are looking at. Contracts obviously isn't a good barometer either, for obvious reasons.

Way too early prediction... I'll say 8-8 or 9-7, missing the playoffs. 3rd in the division again.

[Halshayeji]

21 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

PFF does separate protection grades vs run stopping grades for Corners, as they do for linebackers as well. You probably just didn't get the breakdown of how the total number was calculated.

Eye test obviously has major flaws, because it implies that people watching the games actually know what they are watching and how to evaluate players. The overwhelming majority of fans and people watching games don't have any idea what they are looking at. Contracts obviously isn't a good barometer either, for obvious reasons.

Way too early prediction... I'll say 8-8 or 9-7, missing the playoffs. 3rd in the division again.

I understand that PFF separates both but this particular stat was overall. We can argue all night if run support should be 50% or 40% or even 30% of the overall grade.

i absolutely get your point with the eye test  and assuming people watching know what they're watching is a reach lol. Me personally, I look at a players measurables from the draft. Then I turn on NFL game pass and watch 5 or 6 games against good passing teams from the sky cam so I can focus on 1 player not the ball.

of course I'm no NFL scout but I trust my judgement more than PFF especially in the secondary.

To your prediction. It's fair but I hope your wrong. If we miss the playoffs again I might shoot myself.