PDA

View Full Version : Tom Brady 33rd best player in NFL?


America
05-31-2011, 12:26 AM
Interesting article differentiating the top QB's in the league. I was actually very happy to read this because it pretty much sums up why I've thought Tom Brady has always been overrated. But even though I hate him, I'd have to rate him higher than 33. Also provides some foundation for how Matt Cassel was able to do so well in NE.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/05/09/defending-the-indefensible/

yo123
05-31-2011, 12:33 AM
His argument saying that Brady doesn't have to make as many great throws as some other quarterbacks is valid I think, but ranking him the 33rd best player in the league last year is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. That's to be expected of profootballfocus though.

jack1077
05-31-2011, 01:57 AM
Interesting article. I think he rates him as 33 because that's where he falls in terms of his rating in that statistical system. He does point out that he doesn't think he is 33, just that his play demonstrated it.

Halsey
05-31-2011, 02:01 AM
It's a myth that the Patriots didn't drop off when Cassell took over while Brady was injured.

Patriots in 2007 with Brady: 18-1 (a 4th quarter game winning drive by the Giants away from being 19-0)

Patriots in 2008 with Cassell: 11-5 and no playoffs

Patriots in 2010 (Brady 2 years removed from knee injury): 14-2

AntoinCD
05-31-2011, 02:42 AM
OK well Im clearly not going to agree with this no matter how the writer tries to spin it. Firstly his rankings of good and bad plays are, in my opinion, idiotic. By saying that Tom Brady only had 21 plays graded as +1.0 or better would indicate that he didn't have many very good plays and especially wasn't good in the clutch, as there is a +0.5 bonus for clutch plays. However seldom were the Patriots put in a position last year where they needed to win the game down the stretch.

Another issue I have is that for plays graded as +1.0 or +1.5 it states

"Beating tight coverage or splitting loose double coverage to pick up significant yardage/first down. Good deep throws will mostly (unless it’s wide open) get this grade, leading the receiver past deep coverage etc. Making space with their feet (see above) and making a “good” throw on the run"

and

"Beating tight double cover, using your legs to beat tight single cover or loose double cover etc. Splitting double cover to lead a receiver deep etc"

Sure QBs like Brady and Manning arent going to make many great throws on the run, because they dont have to. Their movement inside the pocket is so elite they generally dont have to. But I dont see any extra points for that. So realistically if Peyton Manning throws an 8 yard out route which is completed he doesn't get the same points as Aaron Rodgers who makes the same throw but bootlegs out of the pocket first???


Really, IMO, this is a flawed set of general principles used to simplify and grade a position which is extremely difficult to grade.

Ness
05-31-2011, 05:44 AM
Tom Brady, MVP, was higher than 33rd last season. Or should be on most people's lists to me. He should be top five minimum. In a league where your quarterback is your a franchise, and him putting on the best performance last year...should be a no-brainer. 33rd is just ridiculous.

Razor
05-31-2011, 06:19 AM
So... the first unanimous NFL MVP and three time Super Bowl winner is the 33rd best player in the league? Go **** yourself PFF. This is just plain dumb.

AntoinCD
05-31-2011, 06:46 AM
So... the first unanimous NFL MVP and three time Super Bowl winner is the 33rd best player in the league? Go **** yourself PFF. This is just plain dumb.

But...but...it is based on a totally unbiased mathematical formula which is the determining factor in how good someone is

Shane P. Hallam
05-31-2011, 07:26 AM
So... the first unanimous NFL MVP and three time Super Bowl winner is the 33rd best player in the league? Go **** yourself PFF. This is just plain dumb.

Not disagreeing, but the list was merely 2010 including postseason.

fear the elf
05-31-2011, 08:00 AM
Any statistical system you develop that has Tom Brady ranked as your 33rd overall player in a year when he was far-and-away the top QB (or at least Top 2 with Rodgers, since the post season was included) needs to be reevaluated.

And I'm more of a "Team Peyton" kinda guy.

AntoinCD
05-31-2011, 08:02 AM
Interesting article differentiating the top QB's in the league. I was actually very happy to read this because it pretty much sums up why I've thought Tom Brady has always been overrated. But even though I hate him, I'd have to rate him higher than 33. Also provides some foundation for how Matt Cassel was able to do so well in NE.



Im not sure how this article backs anything up about how Cassell did so well in NE. This points to Brady last year and his play in regards to the throws he made, didn't make, mistakes etc. I understand the things he is saying(I dont necessarily agree) but the relevance to Cassell's season in 2008 is not there simply because the offensive system the Patriots used last year was completely different to 3 years ago.

In 2008 Cassell had Randy Moss drawing at worst double coverage opening up Wes Welker underneath and Kevin Faulk out of the backfield. The idea was to open the field up and create space and easy reads. It is a trait of Josh McDaniel's offense.

Last year the offense was based around physical matchups and being able to operate multiple systems out of one or two formations.

This is the problem with the formula being used. It doesn't take offensive system, talent, scenario etc into account. According to the article not throwing into double coverage is a disadvantage since he is attributing extra points for beating tight coverage and double coverage. However few teams will put two men on Wes Welker underneath if the possiblity of the deep ball is there.

Likewise when Cassell started for NE there was normally 4 WRs and a RB out of an empty set formation. How many teams are able to double cover them all? I disagree that QBs should be penalised for making the right decisions instead of making glory throws into tight coverage.

FUNBUNCHER
05-31-2011, 08:27 AM
Tom Brady was a unanimous 1st ballot HOFer five years ago.

He still is.

All this ranking garbage is just noise.

Splat
05-31-2011, 09:07 AM
Funny stuff.

killxswitch
05-31-2011, 09:58 AM
As happy as the idea of this makes me, since Brady is massively overrated, this rating system is really dorky and not useful. It's a rating system with a bunch of caveats that render it useless when talking about the best football players in the NFL.

King Carls 5 Year Plan
05-31-2011, 11:01 AM
But...but...it is based on a totally unbiased mathematical formula which is the determining factor in how good someone is

When did the BCS get involved?

TACKLE
05-31-2011, 11:15 AM
But...but...it is based on a totally unbiased mathematical formula which is the determining factor in how good someone is

baseball = football according to pff. some of their info is mildly interesting but it is in no way something people should use as a real piece of evidence to base opinions on.

FlyingElvis
05-31-2011, 11:32 AM
Tom Brady is overrated because he throws to the open receiver, makes the fewest mistakes, doesn't make plays with his feet, and has too few opportunities to makes plays to win the game.

Got it. Glad to have that debate put to rest.

America
05-31-2011, 12:14 PM
Im not sure how this article backs anything up about how Cassell did so well in NE. This points to Brady last year and his play in regards to the throws he made, didn't make, mistakes etc. I understand the things he is saying(I dont necessarily agree) but the relevance to Cassell's season in 2008 is not there simply because the offensive system the Patriots used last year was completely different to 3 years ago.

In 2008 Cassell had Randy Moss drawing at worst double coverage opening up Wes Welker underneath and Kevin Faulk out of the backfield. The idea was to open the field up and create space and easy reads. It is a trait of Josh McDaniel's offense.

Last year the offense was based around physical matchups and being able to operate multiple systems out of one or two formations.

This is the problem with the formula being used. It doesn't take offensive system, talent, scenario etc into account. According to the article not throwing into double coverage is a disadvantage since he is attributing extra points for beating tight coverage and double coverage. However few teams will put two men on Wes Welker underneath if the possiblity of the deep ball is there.

Likewise when Cassell started for NE there was normally 4 WRs and a RB out of an empty set formation. How many teams are able to double cover them all? I disagree that QBs should be penalised for making the right decisions instead of making glory throws into tight coverage.

Yeah, I figured you'd realize that's the obvious flaw in the rankings. Brady's throws most always look easy, which in this ranking system does not benefit the quarterback, but comes as a 0.0 or an expected play made due to the offense. So the offense in NE, from 2008-2010 has been tailor made for successful less challenging throws. PFF's whole argument completely penalizes Brady for quick progressions and executing the play. It doesn't make sense to use as a skill ranking, but really only as a difficulty of throw indicator. So whoever made the completed the most difficult throws would in the end be the best player.

But the percentage of receivers targeted less than 10 yards down the field hasn't changed that much from when Cassel played. The offense was missing the big play Brady and Moss were able to create so often the year before, partly because Cassel doesn't have a great deep ball and partly because they knew it so they didn't call those plays as much. They still used Moss to capture double teams or went to a spread, but the principle is the same to create 1-on-1 matchups with quick easy routes that prevent defenders from breaking early.

Since the Pats haven't had a legit running game in so long, they have run a lot of spread plays, getting 1-on-1's, and even if there is double coverage over the top, about 2/3 of his passes came before the second cover guy had a chance to make a play. The thing that makes it so effective is they have unbelievably versatile talent that makes their personnel in I-form the same as 4-wide.

So to sum, yes the offense in 08 was different than last years, but the principles are the same that allowed Cassel to have such success. Even back in the early 2000's, the Patriots employed that short, quick pass strategy, doing a lot of screens, slants, quick outs and ins, passes to the flats etc. It was really only with Moss that Brady started to really use the deep ball more, but the basic principle of short, effective passes with low risk was still the center of their offensive philosophy.

I think Brady is a very good player. I just can't stand the hype around him. People never bring up just how great that defense was in the early part of the decade. Or how he also lost the first home playoff game by a Patriots QB since 1978 throwing 3 picks against Baltimore in the first round, or how un-clutch he was in the AFC Championship game against the Colts with a pick on the last drive. Or even this, how people diminish the players around Brady and say he makes them so much better. But how about give them some credit or the offense itself that might be the most well-tuned machine ever seen in the NFL.

With that said, I am completely bias because I'm a Manning fan and I hate Tom Brady more than other athlete ever, on and off the field, but especially off.

descendency
05-31-2011, 12:58 PM
I can understand not having him #1, but when your evaluation process lists the MVP (of any year) as the 33rd best player, you don't understand something (and that something is called football...).

Ness
05-31-2011, 01:41 PM
I think Brady is a very good player. I just can't stand the hype around him. People never bring up just how great that defense was in the early part of the decade. Or how he also lost the first home playoff game by a Patriots QB since 1978 throwing 3 picks against Baltimore in the first round, or how un-clutch he was in the AFC Championship game against the Colts with a pick on the last drive. Or even this, how people diminish the players around Brady and say he makes them so much better. But how about give them some credit or the offense itself that might be the most well-tuned machine ever seen in the NFL.

With that said, I am completely bias because I'm a Manning fan and I hate Tom Brady more than other athlete ever, on and off the field, but especially off.

Then your beef should be with the media, not Tom Brady. Just because you don't like the hype around him doesn't make Tom Brady an overrated player.

descendency
05-31-2011, 05:23 PM
So to sum, yes the offense in 08 was different than last years, but the principles are the same that allowed Cassel to have such success.

You mean the Patriots didn't create an entirely new system to play for Matt Cassel after Brady went down week 1?@?#@?

What were they thinking??? I mean they had an entire 6 days to get him ready to play in the next game... they should have done it.

Fact: The easiest schedule the Patriots (since 01) have played was 08. Brady played during easily the 3 hardest schedules (07, 09, 10) where he won 16, 10, and 14. The hardest schedule was in 07.

Matt Cassel playing the 07 schedule would have been a losing QB.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
05-31-2011, 05:25 PM
It's a myth that the Patriots didn't drop off when Cassell took over while Brady was injured.

Patriots in 2007 with Brady: 18-1 (a 4th quarter game winning drive by the Giants away from being 19-0)

Patriots in 2008 with Cassell: 11-5 and no playoffs

Patriots in 2010 (Brady 2 years removed from knee injury): 14-2

You mean they experienced dropoff when their starter had not started a game since high school?

America
05-31-2011, 06:49 PM
You mean the Patriots didn't create an entirely new system to play for Matt Cassel after Brady went down week 1?@?#@?

What were they thinking??? I mean they had an entire 6 days to get him ready to play in the next game... they should have done it.

Fact: The easiest schedule the Patriots (since 01) have played was 08. Brady played during easily the 3 hardest schedules (07, 09, 10) where he won 16, 10, and 14. The hardest schedule was in 07.

Matt Cassel playing the 07 schedule would have been a losing QB.

Really don't know what you're trying to prove. AntoinCD and I were discussing the differences of the offense under Josh McDaniels with Cassel at QB and the offense 2010 with Tom Brady back under center. But I appreciate how thoroughly you read my post to find such a hilariously stupid comment.

nepg
06-02-2011, 02:17 PM
You mean they experienced dropoff when their starter had not started a game since high school?
That's not really a completely accurate statement. Cassel basically ran the off-season that year and played 3 quarters of a game against Miami (the drop-kick game).

Maybe This Year Mayhew
06-02-2011, 03:16 PM
That rating system is pretty bogus. Nobody knows the difficulty of throw it takes for Brady on a specific play. Defenses change on a play by play basis along with personnel so a shorter pass may be more difficult than a longer pass in certain situations. Nobody knows the offensive compared to defensive play calls to assess the difficulty. It may be a good thing Brady didn't force balls down field like other QBs with higher interceptions and was smart enough to let Welker underneath and good tight ends work the intermediate stuff. And Brady making the throws look easy may be Brady making the correct decision faster than other QBs and taking what the defense allows.

Article bogus. Rating system bogus. Brady/Manning are GOAT.

gsorace
06-02-2011, 04:08 PM
Why do people still read PFF?

7DnBrnc53
06-02-2011, 05:43 PM
You mean the Patriots didn't create an entirely new system to play for Matt Cassel after Brady went down week 1?@?#@?

What were they thinking??? I mean they had an entire 6 days to get him ready to play in the next game... they should have done it.

Fact: The easiest schedule the Patriots (since 01) have played was 08. Brady played during easily the 3 hardest schedules (07, 09, 10) where he won 16, 10, and 14. The hardest schedule was in 07.

Matt Cassel playing the 07 schedule would have been a losing QB.

What are you talking about? Their division was much weaker in 07 than it was in 08. In 07, nobody else in their division was at .500. In 08, you had two other teams with 10 wins, and Buffalo began the season really well before falling off late.

The Pats may have had a little tougher out of division schedule in 07, with games against San Diego, @Dallas, @Baltimore, and @Indy, but their division was much weaker. None of the other teams finished at .500 in 07. In 08, two other teams beside New England had 10+ wins, and Buffalo started 5-0 before falling off. And, in 08, they played both eventual SB teams, @Indy, and @San Diego.