Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

So, PFF rates the OLs as of week 5 - and where do the Giants

jcn56 : 10/11/2017 8:31 am
rank?

Not a fan of PFF in particular - I think their ratings are too subjective and don't include enough explanation for my liking (proprietary is fine, but with no idea how they weight some of their opinions or how they look for certain things makes it hard to get on board with).

There's also the matter of how the passing game has been altered to accentuate quick passes which takes some of the load off the OL, which I'm not sure they take into consideration.

One thing that's obvious from their grades - there's little to separate the middle of the pack from the bottom of the barrel. It would be consistent with watching the NFL from week to week - there's a ton of shitty line play out there.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-all-32-nfl-offensive-lines-by-average-grade-week-5 - ( New Window )
Bottom tierd  
The_Boss : 10/11/2017 8:40 am : link
As expected. Even as far back as April. No surprise at all.
Figure we drop a few slots after the OL gets bent over a park bench in Denver Sunday night for the nation to see.
Too generous  
gmenatlarge : 10/11/2017 8:47 am : link
this is a bottom-feeding O-line, 31 or 32 at best. How about the eye test, have you seen this bunch of clowns try to run a decent screen, it's laughable!
As with any of these rankings, you take the information  
Diver_Down : 10/11/2017 8:53 am : link
and try and balance it based on what your eyes see. Like you mentioned it is hard to factor into the performance based on the quick pass. Certain stats are easily verified - total sacks. If we had an offense that focused on longer developing routes, then we'd likely be ranked at the bottom. As it stands now, we are only the 4th worst in allowing sacks. Yay? Also, any summary analysis that points out that Weston is our best OL is hard to give legitimacy to. I shit on Pugh often, but if you were to poll players/coaches/fans and ask who the best OL for the Giants is, there would be an overwhelming majority that would say Pugh. I'm not sure how Weston vaults past Pugh to attain the best of the worst title.
Keep  
ryanmkeane : 10/11/2017 8:55 am : link
Richburg and Pugh. Outside of that, draft some maulers and figure out the rest.
RE: As with any of these rankings, you take the information  
jcn56 : 10/11/2017 8:56 am : link
In comment 13642401 Diver_Down said:
Quote:
and try and balance it based on what your eyes see. Like you mentioned it is hard to factor into the performance based on the quick pass. Certain stats are easily verified - total sacks. If we had an offense that focused on longer developing routes, then we'd likely be ranked at the bottom. As it stands now, we are only the 4th worst in allowing sacks. Yay? Also, any summary analysis that points out that Weston is our best OL is hard to give legitimacy to. I shit on Pugh often, but if you were to poll players/coaches/fans and ask who the best OL for the Giants is, there would be an overwhelming majority that would say Pugh. I'm not sure how Weston vaults past Pugh to attain the best of the worst title.


I'd say Pugh probably gets dinged due to proximity and the fact that he was moved around.

I don't disagree with the general comments on PFF, but the larger point remains - whether they're subjective or not, so long as they remain consistent in their analysis it should help look at these guys in the context of the wider NFL.

And the fact is - once you get past the top 10-15 teams, the rest of the OLs stink. That doesn't excuse us from stinking, mind you, but it does say something about OL play around the league and a potential talent drain. If you watch enough football on a weekly basis, you'll see what I mean.
Tomlinson 8th best rookie  
jeff57 : 10/11/2017 8:58 am : link
According to their rating.
RE: RE: As with any of these rankings, you take the information  
Diver_Down : 10/11/2017 9:22 am : link
In comment 13642407 jcn56 said:
Quote:
In comment 13642401 Diver_Down said:


Quote:


and try and balance it based on what your eyes see. Like you mentioned it is hard to factor into the performance based on the quick pass. Certain stats are easily verified - total sacks. If we had an offense that focused on longer developing routes, then we'd likely be ranked at the bottom. As it stands now, we are only the 4th worst in allowing sacks. Yay? Also, any summary analysis that points out that Weston is our best OL is hard to give legitimacy to. I shit on Pugh often, but if you were to poll players/coaches/fans and ask who the best OL for the Giants is, there would be an overwhelming majority that would say Pugh. I'm not sure how Weston vaults past Pugh to attain the best of the worst title.



I'd say Pugh probably gets dinged due to proximity and the fact that he was moved around.

I don't disagree with the general comments on PFF, but the larger point remains - whether they're subjective or not, so long as they remain consistent in their analysis it should help look at these guys in the context of the wider NFL.

And the fact is - once you get past the top 10-15 teams, the rest of the OLs stink. That doesn't excuse us from stinking, mind you, but it does say something about OL play around the league and a potential talent drain. If you watch enough football on a weekly basis, you'll see what I mean.


100% agree. There are some plays that we actually look competent and other plays where parts are a flaming dumpster fire. There is some horrible OL play around the league. I think it was 2 weeks ago, but there was a freeze frame of Seattle's OL. On the one particular play, every one of their OL were on the ground and every DL opponent was standing and rushing towards Wilson. You see those types of egregious examples and you are thankful for the hot garbage that we have.
RE: Tomlinson 8th best rookie  
HomerJones45 : 10/11/2017 9:39 am : link
In comment 13642408 jeff57 said:
Quote:
According to their rating.
that's fabulous but is a net wash because he replaced a guy we let walk. Where would these team be if they have paid Joseph and Hankins and spent the Snacks money and the #2 pick elsewhere?
RE: RE: Tomlinson 8th best rookie  
jcn56 : 10/11/2017 9:46 am : link
In comment 13642466 HomerJones45 said:
Quote:
In comment 13642408 jeff57 said:


Quote:


According to their rating.

that's fabulous but is a net wash because he replaced a guy we let walk. Where would these team be if they have paid Joseph and Hankins and spent the Snacks money and the #2 pick elsewhere?


Hankins and Joseph count against the 2017 cap for $17M, Harrison for $10M. So basically, you'd be $7M in the hole and have a 2nd rounder to spend elsewhere.

The better question if the focus were on OL would be to question whether it made sense to pay Ellison and Fluker and not just pony up some more money for one of the FA guards, especially in light of the fact that Fluker didn't see the field until injury and Ellison not much at all.
Giants OL has been better in pass pro  
Vanzetti : 10/11/2017 10:32 am : link
The last few weeks, and they ran the ball very well last week, so I think 24 is about right.

Ironically, the OL is improving as the season goes on as Reese and the football guys in the organization thought it would. Unfortunately, it is too little, too late
Too high  
Carson53 : 10/11/2017 10:47 am : link
they went two weeks with a 3 step drop by Eli. NO sacks.
Last week, they didn't, you saw what happened (5 sacks).
I agree with the premise that PFF is too subjective too.
I mean, they have GB at 10th I believe, and Rodgers has been sacked more than any QB.
Yeah they have two injury prone tackles, but still,
the guy is a mobile QB!
I think they should be where Seattle is rated,
both lines suck! That's just how I feel.
RE: Keep  
FStubbs : 10/11/2017 10:58 am : link
In comment 13642405 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
Richburg and Pugh. Outside of that, draft some maulers and figure out the rest.


Why are we keeping Richburg? What has he shown since 2015?
very little  
idiotsavant : 10/11/2017 11:08 am : link
.
RE: RE: Keep  
Carson53 : 10/11/2017 11:10 am : link
In comment 13642622 FStubbs said:
Quote:
In comment 13642405 ryanmkeane said:


Quote:


Richburg and Pugh. Outside of that, draft some maulers and figure out the rest.



Why are we keeping Richburg? What has he shown since 2015?
.

Well, they aren't keeping both, depends how much they want
to spend on Pugh. You saw the FA contracts last offseason.
He might get 10-12 mill. on AAV, with let's say about
20 mill. GTD. I am just approximating here...
This quote:  
phil in arizona : 10/11/2017 12:23 pm : link
"On the Giants’ most frequently used run play – the inside zone – they are one of just nine teams averaging less than a yard before contact on inside zone runs."

If we especially stink at running this, why is it our most frequently used running play?
Back to the Corner