Im guessing the opposite...

[Guest TerraTor]

http://theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabi...ca/Default.aspx

 

Bears unlikely to sign Faneca

Apr

27

4/27/2010 11:15:24 AM | More

 

 

The odds of the Bears signing free agent guard Alan Faneca seem increasingly remote according to Neil Hayes of the Chicago Sun-Times.

 

While Jerry Angelo has had conversations with Faneca's representative, he has not been among the GMs that have expressed the most interest, according to a knowledgeable source.

 

Fanaca, 33, was released by the Jets on Saturday after the team drafted UMass offensive lineman Vladimir Ducasse.

 

 

 

[defiantgiant]

Apparently the Dolphins are considering cutting Justin Smiley to make room for John Jerry, who they just drafted. Smiley could be another option at LG. He's only 28 and graded out much better than Faneca (a little better in run-blocking, WAY better in pass protection) in 2009. His health is kind of a question mark (I think he missed 4 games in 2008 and 1 game in 2009,) but if he doesn't cost anything to sign and he'd be willing to compete for the starting job, I'd be all for bringing him in.

[azbearsfan]

I actually found an article in which Faneca graded out worse that Omiyale.

 

Here it is

[jason]

I actually found an article in which Faneca graded out worse that Omiyale.

 

Here it is

 

That's hilarious for two reasons.

 

One, there is no way he is worse than Omiyale.

Two, there is no way he is anything resembling what he once was.

 

The pickup would be just like the Pace signing. Promising and scary at the same time.

[Guest TerraTor]

That's hilarious for two reasons.

 

One, there is no way he is worse than Omiyale.

Two, there is no way he is anything resembling what he once was.

 

The pickup would be just like the Pace signing. Promising and scary at the same time.

 

Im 5'10 185, i think id grade out better than Omiyale. He is a hybrid offspring of a bullfrog, a catfish, and a turnstyle.

['TD']

I actually found an article in which Faneca graded out worse that Omiyale.

 

Here it is

 

If you read through the guys site, and look at his players graded, you'll see he's doing something wrong.

 

You and I often disagree on a lot of topics, which is fine and what makes this board good. Now, imagine I made my own grading style, based on what I though each position should do. The only film I have of the games is what is shown on tv, and I'm trying to do every player at every position in the league on every play, how would you trust my rankings?

 

Here's some of my major problems with his site.

It's an impossible task

1) He is limited on camera angles. Not even every team can see what every player is doing on each play. He is limited to what we see on tv.

2) Time constraints would limit his ability to evaluate each player on every play and then post the results on his page by a point where people would still care.

 

Biased system

1) He defines what he thinks each player should do at every position, then grades on how well they do that.

2) He is the one judging how well they meet this criteria and assigns values.

 

FLawed system

1) His grading system doesn't divide the grade by the plays. ie. A player who has played worse than Faneca, but has played less snaps will look better in his rankings.

2) Penalties have too much of a value in his system.

3) 0.0 is the average player in his system, yet in many cases there are many more players in the positive then negative or vice versa.

4) Just look at the players and where they are ranked. Vincent Jackson and Sidney Rice the best 2 WR's in the league? Malcom Floyd, Jerricho Cotchery, and Devon Bess are top 10 WRs in the league?

 

Once again I applaud the effort, it's just crazy this guy is getting quoted everywhere.

 

 

[azbearsfan]

If you read through the guys site, and look at his players graded, you'll see he's doing something wrong.

 

You and I often disagree on a lot of topics, which is fine and what makes this board good. Now, imagine I made my own grading style, based on what I though each position should do. The only film I have of the games is what is shown on tv, and I'm trying to do every player at every position in the league on every play, how would you trust my rankings?

 

Here's some of my major problems with his site.

It's an impossible task

1) He is limited on camera angles. Not even every team can see what every player is doing on each play. He is limited to what we see on tv.

2) Time constraints would limit his ability to evaluate each player on every play and then post the results on his page by a point where people would still care.

 

Biased system

1) He defines what he thinks each player should do at every position, then grades on how well they do that.

2) He is the one judging how well they meet this criteria and assigns values.

 

FLawed system

1) His grading system doesn't divide the grade by the plays. ie. A player who has played worse than Faneca, but has played less snaps will look better in his rankings.

2) Penalties have too much of a value in his system.

3) 0.0 is the average player in his system, yet in many cases there are many more players in the positive then negative or vice versa.

4) Just look at the players and where they are ranked. Vincent Jackson and Sidney Rice the best 2 WR's in the league? Malcom Floyd, Jerricho Cotchery, and Devon Bess are top 10 WRs in the league?

 

Once again I applaud the effort, it's just crazy this guy is getting quoted everywhere.

 

 

Well, it was more of a whimsical reference than a hardcore, Omiyale is better than Faneca.

 

I agree its an impossible task, but at least it is something to look at.

 

I didn't watch a ton of Jets games to even know how Faneca was doing. If it wasn't for some people on here posting the sack stats and stuff like this guy, I would have assumed Faneca was playing as well as he always played.

['TD']

I wasn't pointing that at you in paticular. I was just saying that like that guy could be anyone, who knows. I was venting on that site more than anything.

It has been referenced as fact on here some and a lot when I read (I don't post on) the Chicago Bears's main site forum. I just doubt the credibility is all.

 

Faneca in general has never been like a no sack guy, but really 6 or 7 isn't that horrible when you factor in his other contributions.

 

 

[flea]

Trav while I don't agree that stats are everything & disagree with a lot of what PFF say I don't doubt their credibility one bit.

 

Just 1 point there are no time constraints to limit their ability, this is their job it's what they do as a living alsoit's not just 1 guy

['TD']

Trav while I don't agree that stats are everything & disagree with a lot of what PFF say I don't doubt their credibility one bit.

 

Just 1 point there are no time constraints to limit their ability, this is their job it's what they do as a living alsoit's not just 1 guy

 

I went to the page to look at their rankings and the only other page I went to was the one describing how they come about the rankings. Whoever wrote that faq about grading used I and my a lot mixed in with we's. I just assumed it was one guy based off that.

 

I can't help but think there would be time constraints if it was done correctly, even as a group.

 

(1 grade/player)(22 player/play)(125 plays/game)(16 games/year)(32 teams)

__________________________________________________________________ = 704,000 individual grades per year not counting play offs.

2 teams/game

 

I'm sorry but I do have to question their credibility.

I don't think that anyone has the knowledge to develop an unbiased accurate grading scale based on observations for so many different positions, in so many different systems and accurately grade on each play if the player is doing what he is supposed to consistently based on limited camera angles.

 

It's not like one of us making a chart ranking people for fantasy football. This is a website being quoted as fact across the net on forums, in articles, and comments on articles.

 

Luv ya flea, but on this we are just going to disagree.

[flea]

Quoted from them

 

Its not a definition of what we think players should do, but rather an analysis of what players have done.

 

Penalties are weighted too highly. Agreement on that.

 

I wouldn't take the rankings as gospel. There's issues with weighting that leaves a lot up to the user to interpret aspects of a position. Players are graded relative to their role for a team - hence why Davone Bess has a great grade for what the Dolphins ask of him, but we wouldn't say he is a better player necessarily than someone ranked lower than him. By the same token though why aren't Sidney Rice or Vincent Jackson allowed to have better seasons than more established names. We only grade on a season - not a career

 

Also remember it's not just fans using PFF but many "experts" and also some NFL teams have/are using them. Nothing wrong with a bit of disagreement Trav

[defiantgiant]

I like PFF as a resource. I totally agree that their rankings are a little wonky for o-linemen, but they're also the only place where I've found individual o-line stats like sacks/hits/pressures allowed. While the "what a player was supposed to be doing" metrics are pretty subjective, I trust them to look at a play and objectively determine who let the rusher through. I tend to take their subjective grades with a (pretty big) grain of salt, but they're a good resource for other stuff.

[azbearsfan]

I wasn't pointing that at you in paticular. I was just saying that like that guy could be anyone, who knows. I was venting on that site more than anything.

It has been referenced as fact on here some and a lot when I read (I don't post on) the Chicago Bears's main site forum. I just doubt the credibility is all.

 

Faneca in general has never been like a no sack guy, but really 6 or 7 isn't that horrible when you factor in his other contributions.

 

 

I hear ya. I actually got the info from Windy City Gridiron first.

 

I think as a single source if would be somewhat iffy to use those stats to form conclusions. But used with 2 or 3 other pieces of info, it starts to paint a not so flattering picture.

 

At the end of the day, I'm glad he signed with Arizona cause I got the feeling that it was going to be another Pace situation.

[nfoligno]

Hey, its a good resource to have. Particularly with regard to the OL, there is little out there by way of resources. At the same time, I would not take their "stats" over the eyeball test. For example, Omiyale simply doesn't grade out as poorly as some other OL, and yet we all believe Omiyale was about as bad as you can get in terms of OG play.

 

I would compare this to draft reports. Draft evaluates from the many sites out there are an awesome resource due to the inability to watch every game and every prospect. At the same time, when there is a prospect who was on a team you personally were able to watch a lot of, I would rather go with that personal evaluation than what some internet site talks about.

 

I like PFF as a resource. I totally agree that their rankings are a little wonky for o-linemen, but they're also the only place where I've found individual o-line stats like sacks/hits/pressures allowed. While the "what a player was supposed to be doing" metrics are pretty subjective, I trust them to look at a play and objectively determine who let the rusher through. I tend to take their subjective grades with a (pretty big) grain of salt, but they're a good resource for other stuff.