So about PFF.........

[modo]

According to PFF Trubisky regressed significantly from year 1 to year 2 based on their ratings......


Just now.....
According to PFF Sam Monson

[B]Sam Monson[/B]‏Verified account @[B]PFF_Sam[/B]
FollowFollow @PFF_Sam
More
Replying to @[B]benbbaldwin[/B] @[B]aweste1[/B] and 3 others
Allen Robinson has now made Christian Hackenberg, Blake Bortles and Mitch Trubisky look good...

The question was asked....

[B]phil wick[/B]‏ @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] 35m35 minutes ago
More
Replying to @[B]PFF_Sam[/B] @[B]benbbaldwin[/B] and 4 others
But if Trubisky had a better grade in 2017 without Robinson, how could Robinson make him better in 2018?


The answer from PFF.....

[B]Eric Eager ??[/B]‏ @[B]PFF_Eric[/B]
FollowFollow @PFF_Eric
More
Replying to @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] @[B]PFF_Sam[/B] and 4 others
He made their passing offense better

Another question...restating .....

[B]Todd Steen[/B]‏ @[B]CToddd240[/B] 8m8 minutes ago
More
Replying to @[B]PFF_Eric[/B] @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] and 5 others
what.....according to PFF Trubisky regressed...but now you say Robinson made him look better....then you say Robinson made the "passing game" better. So If Trubisky's passing game was better...where did he regress....his running game? We know it wasn't his drinking game.

PFF is moronic.....

Sam Monson then accused the previous twitter of being an asshole because of the drinking game statement...

 

[Black Rainbow]

Trubisky got better; Robinson regressed.

 

[gilder121]

I dunno, I think I follow the logic that Trubisky's process regressed while the production improved and that Robinson contributed to that production being better than Trubisky's process in 2018.

I'm not planning on Stanning for PFF here, it isn't always obvious when they are talking about their grades vs actual output, but I think I at least understand what they are trying to say.

Whether I agree or not is a different discussion.

 

[pinkfloydster]

According to PFF Trubisky regressed significantly from year 1 to year 2 based on their ratings......


Just now.....
According to PFF Sam Monson

[B]Sam Monson[/B]‏Verified account @[B]PFF_Sam[/B]
FollowFollow @PFF_Sam
More
Replying to @[B]benbbaldwin[/B] @[B]aweste1[/B] and 3 others
Allen Robinson has now made Christian Hackenberg, Blake Bortles and Mitch Trubisky look good...

The question was asked....

[B]phil wick[/B]‏ @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] 35m35 minutes ago
More
Replying to @[B]PFF_Sam[/B] @[B]benbbaldwin[/B] and 4 others
But if Trubisky had a better grade in 2017 without Robinson, how could Robinson make him better in 2018?


The answer from PFF.....

[B]Eric Eager ??[/B]‏ @[B]PFF_Eric[/B]
FollowFollow @PFF_Eric
More
Replying to @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] @[B]PFF_Sam[/B] and 4 others
He made their passing offense better

Another question...restating .....

[B]Todd Steen[/B]‏ @[B]CToddd240[/B] 8m8 minutes ago
More
Replying to @[B]PFF_Eric[/B] @[B]onmymindgrapes[/B] and 5 others
what.....according to PFF Trubisky regressed...but now you say Robinson made him look better....then you say Robinson made the "passing game" better. So If Trubisky's passing game was better...where did he regress....his running game? We know it wasn't his drinking game.

PFF is moronic.....

Sam Monson then accused the previous twitter of being an asshole because of the drinking game statement...

I think that what they are saying is that Trubisky was below average despite having a quality receiver. Bears receivers didn't drop many passes and so they made Trubisky look better than what he really did. Numbers usually don't lie. I hate to say it.

Where I think PFF falls short is that defensive lineman took a very disciplined pass rush against Trubisky because of his scrambling abilities. So it made the entire offensive line's pass blocking look much better. But it really was Trubisky.

 

[modo]

I think that what they are saying is that Trubisky was below average despite having a quality receiver. Bears receivers didn't drop many passes and so they made Trubisky look better than what he really did. Numbers usually don't lie. I hate to say it.

Where I think PFF falls short is that defensive lineman took a very disciplined pass rush against Trubisky because of his scrambling abilities. So it made the entire offensive line's pass blocking look much better. But it really was Trubisky.

Numbers generally don't lie....so how did Trubisky perform much better from year 1 to year 2 yet regress according to PFF.

Then PFF claims the passing game was better. Isn't Trubisky's main job, the passer? Which got better yet Trubisky regressed.

What PFF claims is that Trubisky was a much better QB under Fox than he was this past year...according to their grades.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

PFF, like everything, is always as good as you want them to be.

 

[pinkfloydster]

Numbers generally don't lie....so how did Trubisky perform much better from year 1 to year 2 yet regress according to PFF.

Then PFF claims the passing game was better. Isn't Trubisky's main job, the passer? Which got better yet Trubisky regressed.

What PFF claims is that Trubisky was a much better QB under Fox than he was this past year...according to their grades.

Well...if you took a math test one year and got a 75% and then took a much easier one the next year and got an 80%, one may conclude that you got worse at math during that one year.

 

[modo]

Well...if you took a math test one year and got a 75% and then took a much easier one the next year and got an 80%, one may conclude that you got worse at math during that one year.

Ok so you are going on the theory that the supporting cast did all the heavy lifting for Trubisky as he got significantly worse from year 1 to year 2?

 

[pinkfloydster]

Ok so you are going on the theory that the supporting cast did all the heavy lifting for Trubisky as he got significantly worse from year 1 to year 2?

Technically, it's not a theory. Assuming PFF did a good analysis, and I have no reason to suspect that they didn't, then it is a proven fact. Here's what PFF DOESN'T tell you. It doesn't tell you WHY. Maybe Trubisky was given as his first primary responsibility is to protect the ball and avoid a sack. In which case he isn't looking downfield but at the pass rush. Only the Bears team knows...none of us else do including PFF.

 

[gilder121]

His overall grade was pretty similar. Unsure about his passing grade. It seems like you're focused on his regression when I'm pretty sure he was in the same ballpark. Plus if you look, almost all of his awful PFF grades were in the first 9 weeks of the season when he was having bad quarters/halves and still adjusting to the new offense.

 

[modo]

Technically, it's not a theory. Assuming PFF did a good analysis, and I have no reason to suspect that they didn't, then it is a proven fact. Here's what PFF DOESN'T tell you. It doesn't tell you WHY. Maybe Trubisky was given as his first primary responsibility is to protect the ball and avoid a sack. In which case he isn't looking downfield but at the pass rush. Only the Bears team knows...none of us else do including PFF.

PFF and proof don't go hand in hand as they don't reveal how they went from point a to point b as they just say trust us we know what we are doing.

They are subjective grades crowd sourced from fans watching games or all-22 footage....that isn't proof.

The problem here is that they claim Trubisky got significantly worse as a QB, yet got better as a passer all due to Robinson who accounted for 16% of the receptions and had the 4th best catch percentage on the team.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Numbers generally don't lie....so how did Trubisky perform much better from year 1 to year 2 yet regress according to PFF.

Then PFF claims the passing game was better. Isn't Trubisky's main job, the passer? Which got better yet Trubisky regressed.

What PFF claims is that Trubisky was a much better QB under Fox than he was this past year...according to their grades.

But didn't his actual attempts go way up from 2017 to 2018?

 

[modo]

His overall grade was pretty similar. Unsure about his passing grade. It seems like you're focused on his regression when I'm pretty sure he was in the same ballpark. Plus if you look, almost all of his awful PFF grades were in the first 9 weeks of the season when he was having bad quarters/halves and still adjusting to the new offense.

in 2018 they gave him a 63.6 and in a 75.7 in 2017.....

that isn't exactly similar...

 

[modo]

But didn't his actual attempts go way up from 2017 to 2018?

yes....and all of his metrics, independent of attempts went up as well.....

TD percentage, yards per reception, completed air yards per pass.....those show actual improvement regardless of attempts, yet PFF claims it was all due to Robinson and his 16% of the receptions and 4th highest catch percentage on the team.

 

[nc0gnet0]

I would think a large part of it would be to look at pass's dropped, percentage of Catchable balls, YAC, etc. If the WR core as a whole improved significantly (less drops, more YAC, etc) then His Stats could in theory go up, but his overall accuracy could have went down. Hard to imagine it could be significant though............

 

[nc0gnet0]

yes....and all of his metrics, independent of attempts went up as well.....

TD percentage, yards per reception, completed air yards per pass.....those show actual improvement regardless of attempts, yet PFF claims it was all due to Robinson and his 16% of the receptions and 4th highest catch percentage on the team.

Yes, true, but not all of that is directly attributable to Mitch. A much improved WR core will help that with less drops, more YAC, etc. I am not saying this is the case, just trying to wrap my head around how it could be possible.

 

[pinkfloydster]

But didn't his actual attempts go way up from 2017 to 2018?

Sticking to the math test analogy...if you take a longer math test, it doesn't help you figure out if you are good or bad at math compared to a short test.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Sticking to the math test analogy...if you take a longer math test, it doesn't help you figure out if you are good or bad at math compared to a short test.

I get what your saying but disagree with your analogy.

 

[pinkfloydster]

PFF and proof don't go hand in hand as they don't reveal how they went from point a to point b as they just say trust us we know what we are doing.

They are subjective grades crowd sourced from fans watching games or all-22 footage....that isn't proof.

The problem here is that they claim Trubisky got significantly worse as a QB, yet got better as a passer all due to Robinson who accounted for 16% of the receptions and had the 4th best catch percentage on the team.

Dude, you can believe whatever you want. That's the trend these days. Ignore facts that you don't like and make up whatever you want. Have at it. I prefer to live in the real world.

 

[modo]

I would think a large part of it would be to look at pass's dropped, percentage of Catchable balls, YAC, etc. If the WR core as a whole improved significantly (less drops, more YAC, etc) then His Stats could in theory go up, but his overall accuracy could have went down. Hard to imagine it could be significant though............

Trubisky's completion percentage went from 59.4 to 66.6.....His Intended air yards went from 7.7 to 8.8...that is a significant increase in both categories...

The expected completion percentage went from -5.8 to 1.4....another huge jump in the positive from first year to second

yet PFF claims significant regression......