Benjamin Disraeli once said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
Bearing that in mind, Ian Rapoport at nfl.com tweets this little “statistical” tidbit:
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) September 29, 2015
A later tweet from Rapoport corrected the mistake. Rogers had actually graded at -0.8. OK, noted.
Many people wonder why, given ridiculous statistics like this, fans and media continue to quote Pro Football Focus. The reason is pretty obvious – they’re the only game in town.
Anyone who writes an opinon about anything knows that opinion will be stronger if they can back it up with something that is, theoretically, objective. Quoting statistics from PFF seems to be one way to do that. The reality is, of course, that PFF’s grades are just as subjective as anything you or I might say based upon our own observations. PFF’s observations are, of course, one more factor to consider. But they shouldn’t carry too much weight. Certainly not as much as fans and media tend to give them.
Nevertheless, don’t expect a decrease in the number of people quoting ridiculous player ratings from them any time soon. Until someone comes along who can offer and alternative, PFF is what you get.