Here are Pro Football Focus's top 10 Jets grades for week 1. for those not familiar with PFF, any positive grade is very good. for instance, Colon's 4.1 puts him at the 3rd best G performance in the league for week 1. PFF reviews are not an exact science by any means. However, the do a decent job studying blocking, run defending, and coverage......which normally would not show up on any stat sheet otherwise, so it's worth a look imo.. the grades look pretty consistent with what i saw. 1) Colon: 4.1 2) Harris: 3.2 3) Wilkerson: 2.9 4) Pryor: 2.8 5) Carpenter: 2.1 6) Marshall: 2.0 7) Fitzpatrick: 1.7 8) M Williams: 1.6 9) Breno: 1.6 10) Ivory: 1.3 Have to admit, seeing Colon and Harris at the top of this list brings a smile to me. these two guys are very underrated on this board in particular. hopefully they can keep it up. The Oline as a whole had a great game. Colon and Carpenter were our two best offensive grades, and even Breno had a good game. run blocking in particular was excellent, and we didn't let up a single sack. Great seeing our QB with a positive grade for a change. young guys in our secondary stepping up......Pryor and Williams looked good. It's only week one, but what i find most encouraging is that the guys who had the best games, were some of the guys most questioned coming into the season.
Colon's grade has me questioning the legitimacy of this. Overall it was a good day for almost all the Jets. The only two guys I thought didn't play well were Cromartie & Pace. Do you know what their grade was? Pace probably gets good grades against the run. With Cro it was just one play, but still.
I liked what i saw from pryor. He seemed comfortable. I am very excited about ivory and marshall. The 2 of them will take alot of pressure of the qb and oline. We actually have offensive players that opposing teams have to game plan for.
haha, no one will ever admit Colon is actually a pretty good G. in terms of the negative, your eyes are good. both Pace and Cro logged a -2.1 grade. and Davis has really been struggling between preseason and week 1, earning a team worse -3.5 grade. Joe Mays might have been a better option.
Yeah, I'm not DD's biggest fan either. He just looks lost so often, he doesn't have any instincts. Some people like to talk him up, not sure why. He doesn't do anything good. Whether it's blitzing, coverage, run stopping. He's still young, I guess that's one thing he's got working for him.
PFF is a joke - they gave Big Ben a higher PFF grade than Tom Brady. Brady had 7 incompletions, 4 TDs and no picks.
frustrating thing with Davis is that he's got what it takes physically, and his attitude/leadership qualities are good. i'm rooting for him, but it should've come together on the field by now.
You're 100% correct. Seems like he's lacking the necessary instincts to be somewhere between good and great, - instead of average.
Not sure who could have laughed at you,..............overwhelming majority here feels the same - Coples has been a disappointment. Waiting for his very first game of "unstoppable" play from start to finish.
great to see our qb in the positive, and pryor i thought player a pretty outstanding game. i thought wilkerson was pretty poor at times and harris was flat out awful from what i say on nfl replay all 22 film. but i guess i also didnt put any stock into alot of the damage we did when we were up big late in the 4th when those guys made some plays. not sure what davis grade was be he was on my crap list for week 1 as well. colon was good, and no penalties from him is awesome no revis in the top 10. just an observation
I have no clue what those numbers really mean in the bigger scheme of things. Mathematically one could assume that for that game, Colon was 3 times more valuable than Ivory?
I don't like the way they do things. They grade out based on "analyst" opinion of each play.. (good = 2.0, bad =-2.0). Without even calling into question the merit of the analyst (which is obviously very important) looking at each individual play subjectively (As a layman) and then compiling is not a sound theory IMO... it's not even "analytics," an exact science, or a formula of any kind like they like to sell it as. For starters they don't know the play call and when following an individual player closely and using your "opinion" that means a lot. A lineman could pull out of his stance and head up field, for example, and let their man go completely past them. Subjectively one could look at that and say "he missed his block.. that's a -2." but the play in the huddle may have been a trap, whereby the lineman did exactly as he was supposed to. Now try applying that same predicament over the course of an entire game and you see how they could end up rating a Roethlisberger as playing better than Brady over a course of a game when everyone knows who played better. not to mention its a subjective analysis to begin with. I think there's a place for analytics/science in football but I don't think this is one of them. You can't look at an individual on each play like that and try to compile it as an exact science. It isn't baseball where an "at-bat" has a very strictly confined set of results..(walk, hit, SO, etc.) on any given play.. or basketball where a player possession does the same (FG, TO, ASST) a football player could do any number of things, planned or otherwise, that will always be subjective as to whether or not it was a good or bad result. A GM or Coach can decide if he is doing his job properly, and analysts/reporters can issue their opinions as well.. but its not something that can realistically be statistically quantified. If PFF just released who they thought played well sunday, that's another story but the "Willie Colon 4.1 grade" stuff is just dumb
Idk, I thought it was interesting that for me Calvin Pryor passed the eye test, and he was the second highest rated player.
I could have sworn he recovered a fumble on Sunday. Coples isn't bad, he just isn't a coverage guy. I'd personally like to see him gain some weight and play more on the inside, but we are stacked there, so it doesn't make much sense.
he did pass the eye test.. which is essentially all the PFF system is. An eye test wrapped up in a bow and sold as something scientific. You saying you thought Pryor looked good and they giving him a nonsense grade saying he played well is exactly the same thing
the numbers are representative of how a player performed at their specific job. it's not an attempt to compare value across positions, or to even compare how one player did versus another at a different position.
