Jonathan Martin sucks.....that is, according to PFF

I disagree. I've simply seen it happen too many times. I've seen tackle counts on the same team vary wildly when the usual guy takes a week off. That's despite the fact that they agreed on the criteria beforehand, communicated extensively and were measuring something much more concrete than "effectiveness". Back when PFF was free, I specifically watched several different games and compared the grades they posted. I could not understand what it was they were seeing. The only explanation I could come up with was that despite any claims of objective criteria being employed, they were seeing it with different evaluators. I found the grades had no consistency. I could have thrown darts at a target and come up with grades that made as much sense as those did.

 

And that's probably because there is no effective way of evaluating the play of offensive linemen without invoking the "molecular" approach I mentioned above, which again IMO is problematic. There are no more "molar" stats to use in evaluating them objectively.

 

I don't know that I would simply say Martin has a poor work ethic based on the one report (even if it's true). In general people tend to have areas of strength and weakness. They often arise b/c they like practicing some aspects more than others and some aspects that come easier for them. My guess is that Martin is more cerebral and deliberate. He probably enjoys the areas of hand technique, footwork and opponent tendencies more than weight room work. We have heard reports about how much he improved from the first practice to those later on. He probably didn't get any stronger during that time, but rather improved on the mental side. That doesn't make him lazy or mean he has a poor work ethic. It may just mean that he didn't put as much work in one particular area. The question going forward is whether he'll be able to analyze his weaknesses accurately and adjust his efforts accordingly.

 

Dont know if its already been said but...

I felt alot better having an improving Martin up against the 49ers line than I could have possibly felt with a declining Columbo going up against that 49ers line.

 

Agreed and it wasn't even close, but if you were relying on the PFF grades you'd come to the exact opposite conclusion. You'd come in here all high and mighty about how you're being "objective", but anyone who had watched the games would know you were 100% wrong. And then to make it worse, you'd rely on that alleged objectivity and nothing would sway you from your incorrect conclusion.

 

I assume your tackle counts anecdote is not about PFF, but something you saw elsewhere. Without knowing the details of that situation, it may be that when you have a "usual guy" and someone who is filling in under unusual circumstances, you are likely to see more variance based on the fact that the guy filling in doesn't usually do it. With PFF having 3 graders, all of the graders usually do it.

I'm not sure how you went about comparing the PFF grades to what you saw back when it was free. You wouldn't have had access to the grades on a play-by-play basis, so I assume you were comparing their grades for the whole game to what you saw. Did you watch every player on every play and systemmatically do your own grading according to their criteria and methodology? When you say you "found the grades had no consistency" how are you defining "consistent?" I don't understand what you are saying here.

PFF seems pretty serious about what they do. Quality control is something they clearly talk about and strive for. They say:

They say they are more than 90% accurate on their grading of individual plays, which tells me they have taken steps to measure accuracy and consistency. Your experience from when they were free may not be consistent with what they are doing now, as they say they have constantly updated and codified their methodology and leave very little room for subjectivity.

 

I can't comment on if their system is now different but looking at reports of grades posted here (like the Martin/Columbo grades) the results are the same.

My tackle anecdote was not about PFF, but it's also not an isolated instance. Tackle counts vary wildly from team to team and even on the same team. Reality is that even with something as seemingly simple as tackle counts, there is no objectivity. You see the same thing with "drops". The idea that anybody can come up with a system that will be reliable and consistent for something much more nebulous like "effective blocking" is a fantasy.

As for what I did, I watched every play of individual players on different teams and compared my results to the grades that PFF gave those individual players. I found that the grades varied not only between players, but also for the same players from game to game. Sometimes I guessed that the graders simply didn't understand differences in game plans or assignments. Sometimes I just had no clue what they were seeing at all. I'd see an offensive lineman have a great game, but look bad in one or two instances and his grade would be a negative. The next game he'd struggle all game and end up with a positive score. Regardless of the reason, I found no consistency, no use for their grading.

 

I don't know enough to say how accurate they are or not.

I do however find it funny, there's a couple grammatical errors in their explanation of their quality control methods.

 

how do any of you know any of this? Do you guys get camera angles I'm not getting?

 

You couldn't do it for every position. For example, I didn't look at any secondary players or WRs. Now we have access to all 22 film on NFL.com, so it would be possible, but not back then. Back then I was basically limited to linemen, backs and QBs. (Even the QBs are somewhat limited b/c most of the time you don't see the coverage). I only looked at OL, DL and RBs when I was testing PFF's grades. It was after I got my first DVR so I was enjoying the ability to replay plays several times and use the slow motion feature.

 

In terms of overall effectiveness (not talent, technique, etc.), my general feeling is that Martin in 2012 and Colombo in 2011 were pretty close. I haven't graded each on every play, but . . .

Tackle counts vary from team to team mostly due to use of different criteria. Some plays are unclear but someone has to be credited with the tackle on every play. PFF's grading isn't like that. If the grader isn't 95% sure of the assignment he gives a neutral grade. If he gives a non-neutral grade, the vast majority of the time it is just a +0.5 or -0.5. It is only in relatively rare situations where big +/- grades are given and those are in situations where what the guy did was obviously very good or very bad.

When you talk about what you did, how were you grading your "results?" The same scale as PFF or something different? Did you normalize your results? That the same players might have had different grades for different games is hardly surprising. Nobody performs at the same level in every game.

 

Martin was nothing but an average LT in college. In fact when he played against top flight defensive linemen in college, he often looked completely overwhelmed on the field. He may get stronger, but he is what he is. I don't ever see him being anything but a very average to below average tackle in the NFL. He will be lucky to last 2-3 years with the Dolphins.

 

I was looking at effectiveness, not scouting for technique and Columbo had a much worse season than Martin did.

I rated positive, negatives and neutrals for most plays with bigger deductions/bonuses for plays where the player had a key responsibility. I think that maybe PFF might primarily grade plays as neutral and then add too much or take away too little for positive/negative plays b/c they just don't understand responsibilities as non-scouts/non-coaches. And I understand that players play may vary from game to game. I'm saying that their grades varied relative to the player's.For example, a player might have a good game one week and receive a negative score then play worse the following week and be rated higher, then have a similar game to the first week and receive a higher score. The grade seemed to have no relation to what was happening on the field.

 

People can color it up and tag it anyway they wish. In laymans terms, Martin is top heavy. He is straight up like a tree. He tends to get overpowered because of that and that in itself is a very hard thing to turn around. IMO he does not stink but, he is always going to get overpowered. Is he a DECENT OT ? Yeah, not bad, not really good but not bad.

Personally I do not want to see Martin at LT next year. I also would not pay huge money to keep Long at LT next year. As bad as Long was hurt he was still better then Martin but again, as bad as Long was hurt he is no longer a top $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ LT. If another teams wants to pay him as such then Adios Jake, wish you well and God Bless for getting the payday, again.

 

i thought martin improved pretty well through the season, minus the new england game.

 

I thought Martin did well at the point of attack; especially on running plays. I did see that he had issues, but I actually was fine with this given what I saw from Long and accepting the "rookie-ness" about him.

I honestly think that he will be a fine LT. He does need to strengthen up a bit, but I think he will be just fine

**EDIT**

This is as a LT. As a RT....ugh

 

I can see that angle, I'm referring to allowing the service to determine the fate of the player....do you think a moneyball situation is possible in the NFL?..I surely couldn't, but it does give you solid leverage.

About 6 months ago I believe, I stated that PFF had earned my respect, Before then i kept seeing their grades reflect how i felt about a lot of payers, good or bad, ( a few head scratchers, but can't recall)I think it can get you a head start on some things..but when it comes down to it, GMs and scouts watch their own tape..

 

Even though Jonathan Martin showed promise, no NFL tackle allowed more quarterback hurries than Martin’s 47. And please don’t suggest that the Dolphins’ play at left tackle didn’t suffer without Long. Long allowed four sacks and 10 hurries in 11-plus games. Martin allowed three sacks and 17 hurries in just under five games at left tackle, and Pro Football Focus graded Martin’s work clearly lower than Long’s. So Miami will make another attempt to keep Long, though not at the dollar figure he ideally wants.

Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/#storylink=cpy​

 

The website GF (Grammar Focus) graded them out at -0.2 with Subjects, Objects and Possessive Forms and -0.1 with Indefinite Articles.

 

The problem I have with PFF is this. Sean Smith is supposedly in position to score a huge payday..................but according to PFF there are dozens and dozens of guys you should consider before Smith:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/01/01/free-agent-cornerbacks/

I've been anti Smith for a while...but still come on.

It's the whole problem with PFF in a nutshell when it comes to ratings. A guy plays a quarter scores a 0.2 and he's forever ahead of a guy who played the entire season. It's all too subjective and too prone to what matters in that score. Fasano was a prime example. Guy was a top 5 TE for years on that site.......cause of his blocking. Sure blocking should count.....but for how much in a score would change depending on who you ask.

PFF is a helpful tool...........but it should in no way be the end all be all of what makes a good/bad player.

 

Brilliant. Let's just disregard all their data because of a couple of typos. Jumping on board with the rest of the anti-PFF brigade we have here are ya? Even your comment about grammatical errors, has a grammatical error.

 

I didn't disregard anything. Hell I even started with: I don't know enough to say how accurate they are or not. I just thought it was funny. You have serious problems.

 

Have you no sense of humour? The company espouses its dedication to accuracy and perfectionism in ridiculously bad grammar. That's funny.

I don't think the error people make lies in questioning PFF's ratings. The error lies in either dismissing them entirely or taking them as gospel.

 

I only have one when something is actually funny. Thanks

 

Thank you.

 

Thanks for your analysis Dr Freud. I thought the funny part was your mentioning their grammatical errors, and making one yourself when doing so.

 

Which is funny and would have been a solid post had it just been that.

The problem is you ignoring what I wrote and getting defensive of your precious PFF acting as if I was trying to discredit them, when the very goddamn sentence before I said wasn't trying to discredit them. That's the part the shows you have serious problems. Jesus man, I even admitted I wasn't qualified to say if they were accurate or not. What more do you need, to see that I wasn't attacking them? An effing lawyer drafted disclaimer?

 

Perhaps I am a little too defensive about PFF. I just woke up, and they have been taking a lot of flak around here lately, My apologies.

Here is an interesting testimonial IMO, from an agent who happens to be a long time former player.
"The ONLY outside source that has ever directly benefited our contract negotiations with NFL teams. Pro Football Focus has literally helped us put dollars directly into our clients' pockets. Knowledge is power, and the power of tracking every single player on every single snap of every NFL game is absolutely immeasurable."
— Dave Butz (SportsStars Inc.) NFL Agent

 

Thank you.

 

Then according to their FA CB ratings...Sean Smith should be paying the Dolphins ;p

 

Jon Martin gave up more hurries than any other tackle in the league.

 

Great post!! Now I won't be surprised if Irish picks Warmack from Bama if there is no premium pass rusher available when we pick. I think we would be reaching on corner, wr, TE, OT with the 12th pick.

 

It's possible that Jim Turner sucks too.

 

Is there a breakdown of his stats? Did he progress throughout the year or was he pretty crappy all year?

 

Martin actually gave up more hurries as a left tackle. At right tackle he gave up 30 hurries in 11 games (2.7 hurries per game). At left tackle he gave up 17 hurries in 5 games (3.4 hurries per game).

 

This is true. It has probably been noted in this thread, but I feel it worth adding that he allowed 6 sacks (2 at LT) and 4 QB hits (2 at LT) on the year. Jake Long allowed 4 sacks and 7 hits.

Going through Long's stats, I've forgotten how spoiled we've been with superb LT play. Single digit hurries (7), 2 sacks allowed on a season, (respectively) etc.

 

He could easily improve to average next year and that's fine. Money you can spend elsewhere.

 

The good news is he can only get better