Skip to content

Peppers

The Browns Board
284 44 6.4k 1
  • @mr.-make-believe said:

    Not my strong point, but I know enough to know that .999999 < 1.

    But a 1.000 is perfect.   .99999 is not quite perfect.

    Haven't you guys ever figured a batting average?

    @the-gipper said:

    But a 1.000 is perfect.   .99999 is not quite perfect.

    Haven't you guys ever figured a batting average?

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

  • @mld-woody said:

    I was in Camp Ward after all

    so what do you fukkers think about this? A wolverine was in camp ward. Woody should never drink on his own dime anywhere in NE ohio just for that. 

    @clevfan4life said:

    so what do you fukkers think about this? A wolverine was in camp ward. Woody should never drink on his own dime anywhere in NE ohio just for that. 

    I don't think anything about it cuz I do not consider colleges when talking about the Browns and players that can help them.

    Matter of fact I usually I won't even comment on players that I haven't watched at least six to seven games of that year and guess what the majority of those games that I watch are in Big Ten country.

  • @tour2ma said:

    PFF's individual grades are quite good. Where they get into issues is when they sum up the 5 OL grades to come up with a ranking.

    Our issue, even four and five years ago, has been that the whole has often been less than, sometimes substantially less than, the sum of the parts.

    Yep

    They also do a good job of looking at how well a player actually played, not just looking at flashy stats like a more casual fan would. Which is why I was making those comments early about being interested in seeing the PFF scores. 

    @mld-woody said:

    Yep

    They also do a good job of looking at how well a player actually played, not just looking at flashy stats like a more casual fan would. Which is why I was making those comments early about being interested in seeing the PFF scores. 

    No they really do not because they do not know what the defense called for the players to do or the offense called for the players to do. They know more so on the offensive side but defensively they can't know where the scheme called for the players to be.

    Do they get the all-22 game film?

  • @the-gipper said:

    He had average games and bad games.  If he had another "good game"  I would like to know about it. 

    And don't worry about me.   If you want to be considered a Browns fan, then you will do it for yourself.

    How about the other game this year Where he had the highest PFF score on the defense?

    Oh, Gip Gip Gip. You've been so wrong on so many things over the years that I don't think I could value your opinion on something like this any less. 

    @mld-woody said:

    How about the other game this year Where he had the highest PFF score on the defense?

    Oh, Gip Gip Gip. You've been so wrong on so many things over the years that I don't think I could value your opinion on something like this any less. 

    Coupled with the fact that he had those two High games and his average is still only 61 it means he had some really bad games according to PFF which again already said I don't agree with I trust my eyes.

  • @mld-woody said:

    Yep

    They also do a good job of looking at how well a player actually played, not just looking at flashy stats like a more casual fan would. Which is why I was making those comments early about being interested in seeing the PFF scores. 

    No they really do not because they do not know what the defense called for the players to do or the offense called for the players to do. They know more so on the offensive side but defensively they can't know where the scheme called for the players to be.

    Do they get the all-22 game film?

    @bjh2130 said:

    Do they get the all-22 game film?

    Uhh... yeah.   It's public access there, homie.  

  • @bjh2130 said:

    Do they get the all-22 game film?

    Uhh... yeah.   It's public access there, homie.  

    @tiamat63 said:

    Uhh... yeah.   It's public access there, homie.  

    Again homie they still have no clue what the defensive scheme calls for them to do in certain situations. Just because is Public Access homie doesn't mean that they use it. I was asking if they did like maybe if they have it written somewhere that they use the all 22 like in their info or faqs

    Edit. Found it homie. So it seems like these initial rankings don't really take into account the all 22. It seems like the first run to put out the grades on Monday is just watching the broadcast View. So my next question is does anyone pay for the actual service?

    Each week, grades are subject to change while we run through our extensive review process including All-22 tape runs and coaching audit, so you may notice discrepancies among grades published in earlier articles compared with those in the Player Grades tool until grade lock each week.

  • I think something like 30 of the 32 teams pay PFF and work with them closely for advanced analytics.

    A lot goes into their final numbers

  • @the-gipper said:

    But a 1.000 is perfect.   .99999 is not quite perfect.

    Haven't you guys ever figured a batting average?

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

    @mld-woody said:

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

    @tour2ma said:

    I think you are underestimating Gipper...

    I, however, never underestimate your fecklessness.

  • @the-gipper said:

    But a 1.000 is perfect.   .99999 is not quite perfect.

    Haven't you guys ever figured a batting average?

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

    @mld-woody said:

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

    You know what I meant.  Like I said, have you never calculated a batting average?

  • I think something like 30 of the 32 teams pay PFF and work with them closely for advanced analytics.

    A lot goes into their final numbers

    @mld-woody said:

    I think something like 30 of the 32 teams pay PFF and work with them closely for advanced analytics.

    A lot goes into their final numbers

    And too much information can sometimes be a bad thing as in them having Dwayne Haskins as the 5th best quarterback in the Big Ten

  • @mld-woody said:

    Sly little edit there Gip... I see you changed your original post lol

    You know what I meant.  Like I said, have you never calculated a batting average?

    @the-gipper said:

    You know what I meant.  Like I said, have you never calculated a batting average?

    No I can't stand baseball

    But I know players don't bat at 0.320%

  • @the-gipper said:

    You know what I meant.  Like I said, have you never calculated a batting average?

    No I can't stand baseball

    But I know players don't bat at 0.320%

    @mld-woody said:

    No I can't stand baseball

    But I know players don't bat at 0.320%

    If they are the Indians in this postseason, they might. 😠

  • @mld-woody said:

    I think something like 30 of the 32 teams pay PFF and work with them closely for advanced analytics.

    A lot goes into their final numbers

    And too much information can sometimes be a bad thing as in them having Dwayne Haskins as the 5th best quarterback in the Big Ten

    @bjh2130 said:

    And too much information can sometimes be a bad thing as in them having Dwayne Haskins as the 5th best quarterback in the Big Ten

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

  • @bjh2130 said:

    And too much information can sometimes be a bad thing as in them having Dwayne Haskins as the 5th best quarterback in the Big Ten

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

    @mld-woody said:

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

    Actually I have at least of Brian lewerke Shea Patterson Alex hornibrook Nathan Stanley Peyton Ramsey and Clayton Thorson obviously Haskins as well but you asked for other quarterbacks in the Big Ten. Forgot trace mcsorley.

    Also if statistics and analytics were everything we would have turned this team around before we got a football eye test guy in as our GM. Sashi did a great job acquiring draft capital and freeing up cap space but they needed Dorsey to evaluate talent not based on statistics and Analytics. 

    Edit I can also say I love Baker and the way he is playing but there is no way he's playing the 6th best out of all the quarterbacks in the NFL

  • Woody is in a fever pitch about his boy friend Peppers.  LMAO.

  • @bjh2130 said:

    And too much information can sometimes be a bad thing as in them having Dwayne Haskins as the 5th best quarterback in the Big Ten

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

    @mld-woody said:

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

    Lets see these stats the put Haskins as only the 5th best Big Ten QB.  ....and then I will quote Benjamin Disraeli:  "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

  • @mld-woody said:

    And that's bad because...  Your eye test? 

    You've watched every snap of every other QB in the Big Ten? 

    How can "too much information" be bad when it comes to statistically and analytics?

    Lets see these stats the put Haskins as only the 5th best Big Ten QB.  ....and then I will quote Benjamin Disraeli:  "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

    @the-gipper said:

    Lets see these stats the put Haskins as only the 5th best Big Ten QB.  ....and then I will quote Benjamin Disraeli:  "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

    I have on idea, I didn't bring up the PFF grades.

    I take it there is that difference between "what my eyes see", "what my heart wants" and "what in depth analysis shows". They aren't infallible or anything, but I'd  take  their evaluation over what a fan sees on TV.

  • Woody is in a fever pitch about his boy friend Peppers.  LMAO.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Woody is in a fever pitch about his boy friend Peppers.  LMAO.

    Speaking of, shouldn't you be fellating your Orange God over on the political board?

    From what I hear, your posts over there are even more useless than yours here, MAGA groupie.  

  • @the-gipper said:

    Lets see these stats the put Haskins as only the 5th best Big Ten QB.  ....and then I will quote Benjamin Disraeli:  "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

    I have on idea, I didn't bring up the PFF grades.

    I take it there is that difference between "what my eyes see", "what my heart wants" and "what in depth analysis shows". They aren't infallible or anything, but I'd  take  their evaluation over what a fan sees on TV.

    @mld-woody said:

    I have on idea, I didn't bring up the PFF grades.

    I take it there is that difference between "what my eyes see", "what my heart wants" and "what in depth analysis shows". They aren't infallible or anything, but I'd  take  their evaluation over what a fan sees on TV.

    Analytics and stats aren't everything.

  • @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Woody is in a fever pitch about his boy friend Peppers.  LMAO.

    Speaking of, shouldn't you be fellating your Orange God over on the political board?

    From what I hear, your posts over there are even more useless than yours here, MAGA groupie.  

    @dutch-oven said:

    Speaking of, shouldn't you be fellating your Orange God over on the political board?

    From what I hear, your posts over there are even more useless than yours here, MAGA groupie.  

    u dont need to.hear it second hand, go over and see for urself. He's been better lately tho.....now its west side taking the majority first team reps. 

    ☕