PFF: Worst RB in the NFL is Chris Johnson

[TJ]

Another reason to shake your head at advanced metrics:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/11/11/pro-pffs-midseason-all-worst-team/

Running back: Chris Johnson, Cardinals, 45.3

Johnson has long been someone that puts up the stats but has never graded well, and there are a few reasons for that. It’s easy to run when your O-line is creating holes the size of three people. Currently, the Cardinals have our fourth-best offensive line in terms of run blocking. Johnson’s elusive rating is a mere 40.2, as he’s broken just 20 tackles on 146 touches.

On top of that, the Cardinals’ have one of the most dangerous passing games in the league. So, when you’ve got a really strong offensive line, and a passing game defenses need to focus on, you’re going to get some running lanes. But despite all the yards, Johnson just hasn’t done enough on his own to show he can succeed without the perfect offense around him.

 

[Shaggy]

Stupid, but I love what they are saying about the OL and passing attack.

 

[mjb21aztd]

Yea a fa rb on a year prove it deal has a real chance to get 1000 yds
What a idiotic statement
Not a huge fan of PFF anyway

 

[NoelPHX]

Well we must have the best worst RB ever!

 

[cardpa]

On a positive note Butler is not one of the two worst punters.

Punter: Mike Scifres, Chargers

Nobody’s punts are returned more frequently than Scifres’, who is seeing 72.7 percent of his punts being brought back. Only 8-of-33 punts have landed inside the 20, and his net punt averages a league-low 35.5 yards.

Honorable Mention: Jeff Locke

 

[Russ Smith]

Another reason to shake your head at advanced metrics:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/11/11/pro-pffs-midseason-all-worst-team/

I'll read the whole thing but sometimes you don't break tackles because you don't have to, you jump cut in the hole and completely avoid the defender.

If he's the worst RB in the NFL I hope we find more guys just as bad as him.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I'll read the whole thing but sometimes you don't break tackles because you don't have to, you jump cut in the hole and completely avoid the defender.

If he's the worst RB in the NFL I hope we find more guys just as bad as him.

CJ is living and dying by the big runs, but those big runs have keyed multiple wins this year.

I think they are dead wrong to call him the worst RB.

The issue I always see with PFF is that you can't properly evaluate how other players would perform under the same circumstances. Would Leveon Bell have done better with our team? Most likely, but I doubt Melvin Gordon would.

 

[kerouac9]

Another reason to shake your head at advanced metrics:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/11/11/pro-pffs-midseason-all-worst-team/

PFF isn't an advanced metrics site. They're an opinion page bankrolled by Chris Collinsworth and ESPN masked as a metrics site.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb

FO has him ranked 18th in their value-per-play metric, and he's hurt by opponent adjustments. I'd guess that his 2 fumbles against just 3 TDs hurts his value.

The advanced metric that I like the most for RBs — success rate — loves Chris Johnson in 2015. 6th in the NFL with successful plays on 53% of his runs

 

[TJ]

(PFF) They're an opinion page

So is Football Outsiders. They use opinions and quantify then with arbitrary figures to spit out rankings. Both FO and PFF advertise themselves as advanced metric sources, but in reality, they're no different than someone who blogs or provides subjective analysis. It's the same animal as ESPN's QBR and others. Take it with a grain of salt.

 

[BurqueCardFan]

Stats are worthless. Anyone with common sense, who watches the games, knows his value has been infinitely higher than any of these random stats. You can't use lame stats to argue with the end results. The team is winning and the team rushing has been better (both individually and as a team) than it has been in many years.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

LMAO.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Yep, definitely the worst.

 

[Buckybird]

Barry Sanders sucked also, given all of his negative runs & then he would break 2 long ones

Keep hatin...I luv it

 

[TJ]

Barry Sanders sucked also, given all of his negative runs & then he would break 2 long ones



Keep hatin...I luv it

Barry Sanders would have look mediocre had his accomplishments been plugged into these sites.

 

[Krangodnzr]

So is Football Outsiders. They use opinions and quantify then with arbitrary figures to spit out rankings. Both FO and PFF advertise themselves as advanced metric sources, but in reality, they're no different than someone who blogs or provides subjective analysis. It's the same animal as ESPN's QBR and others. Take it with a grain of salt.

I read them all, but I don't trust any as the end all, be all.

I like that PFF attempts to rate players, but if you read the site enough, you will see their biases. It's an entertaining read, but that's all.

Football Outsiders is a bit more academic, but less entertaining.

 

[kerouac9]

So is Football Outsiders. They use opinions and quantify then with arbitrary figures to spit out rankings. Both FO and PFF advertise themselves as advanced metric sources, but in reality, it's no different than someone who blogs or provides analysis. It's the same animal as ESPN's QBR and others. Take it with a grain of salt.

The opinion pieces in Football Outsiders are, in fact, opinion pieces; they stats are not. FO's stats are no different than YPC, YPA, Completion Percentage, whatever — in fact, they're based on them. When the stats disagree with the conventional wisdom, or with FO's own predictions, FO will adjust their opinions. You know, evidence-based analysis.

PFF does individual "grades" on each player and then uses an actual made up, arbitrary "stat" that isn't made up of anything except (possibly) the average opinion of their graders.

Simmons on his podcast Monday pointed out that Newton is ranked 22nd in Total QBR, and that if a potential MVP candidate is ranked between Ryan Mallett and Matt Stafford, you might want to reconsider your stat. Newton's ranked low in FO's passer ratings, but he's first in their rusher ratings. FO puts a situational layer on top of traditional raw stats. I find that approach useful.

 

[kerouac9]

Barry Sanders would have look mediocre had his accomplishments been plugged into these sites.

You must be registered for see images

Barry Sanders DYAR ranking by year (yards expected above a replacement-level players adjusted by opponnent):

1989 - 3
1990 - 1
1991 - 5
1992 - 19
1993 - 22
1994 - 2
1995 - 7
1996 - 2
1997 - 2
1998 - 29

 

[GoldGloveschmidt]

While I don't think he's the worst, I also don't think he's a top 5 runner in the league like his yardage says he is.

He's making good cuts and getting big running lanes from the OL, but he goes down very easily, and doesn't grind out yards when the running lanes aren't there. A back like AP or Lynch could have 800+ yards behind this line right now I think. Johnson looks pretty average to me when he's running the ball.

 

[TJ]

The opinion pieces in Football Outsiders are, in fact, opinion pieces; they stats are not. FO's stats are no different than YPC, YPA, Completion Percentage, whatever — in fact, they're based on them. When the stats disagree with the conventional wisdom, or with FO's own predictions, FO will adjust their opinions. You know, evidence-based analysis.

Still, their stats are based largely on preseason expectations and while they adjust based on new information, it's still very much subjective.

I'm reminded of the old axiom of, "statistics are what you make it to be"

 

[kerouac9]

Still, their stats are based largely on preseason expectations and while they adjust based on new information, it's still very much subjective.

I'm reminded of the old axiom of, "statistics are what you make it to be"

Only at the beginning of the season. Halfway through the year those adjustments to away because there's enough data.



Google has 0 results for your old axiom. Must be pretty old.

 

[TJ]

You must be registered for see images

Barry Sanders DYAR ranking by year (yards expected above a replacement-level players adjusted by opponnent):

1989 - 3
1990 - 1
1991 - 5
1992 - 19
1993 - 22
1994 - 2
1995 - 7
1996 - 2
1997 - 2
1998 - 29

At least they're not completely incompetent.

 

[CardLogic]

I'm reminded of the old axiom of, "statistics are what you make it to be"

Google has 0 results for your old axiom. Must be pretty old.

This must be the old axiom that TJ meant to refer to:

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

 

[Proximo]

While I'm sure CJ is not the worst back - I do agree he is nothing special despite his yardage numbers. He is not making many people miss, but he does do a fairly good job of finding the right hole, which is his main reason for his success.

I really believe we would be doing much better on YPC if David Johnson was getting the majority of the carries. The thing to worry about with him though is ball security.

Arians seems to be content to go with the veteran because he knows exactly what he will get, and he thinks he is good enough.

I really wish he would give DJ one game to show what he could do - if he did I am convinced the job would be his because he would show he is clearly the better back.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

He's on pace for almost 1400 yards..that's a top 5 back...

 

[TJ]

This must be the old axiom that TJ meant to refer to:

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Having read numerous research articles and contributed to some, I can tell you with 100% confidence that most statistics can be manipulated to validate any hypothesis. Thus the term "inferential statistics." Despite K9's desperate attempts to justify FO's statistical validity, they are just as subjective as this post that I'm writing at the moment.