Pro Football Focus' ReFo: Rams @ *****, Week 10

[AvengerRam]

Your humility and grace are unrivaled.

Maybe... you'd like to take a swing at me.

[MauiRam]

I'm not saying the guy is perfect, and I don't think he's the best MLB in football. But to characterize his season as a collection of "average games" and "stinkers" is absurd. He is in the top 10 at his position.

One more thing in the equation is JL being our defensive signal caller. I wonder how important he is to our overall defense in that role? Is there anyone on our team right now who could adequately replace him in that regard? Just curious ..

[Fargo Ram Fan]

Maybe... you'd like to take a swing at me.

Who made you a "moderator" again? When they see stuff like this...they should re-think that decision.

[AvengerRam]

Who made you a "moderator" again? When they see stuff like this...they should re-think that decision.

BEFORE MOD!!!

[AvengerRam]

Getting back on topic, I've gone to the PFF site, and there is no formula for "tackling efficiency" that is available to non-subscribers (and there's no chance in Hell I'd ever pay a dime for any of these sites).

From what I can glean from the free portion of the site, it has something to do with tackling "opportunities," total tackles, "missed tackles" and perhaps some other "data."

The problem with this type of data is that it (much like the ESPN Total QBR which most here agree is bogus) combines objective data (such as number of snaps, number of tackles) with subjective observations.

The problem is that the subjective criteria, such as tackling "opportunities" and "missed tackles" are not clearly defined, and are certainly subject to interpretation.

For example, there was a play last Sunday in which the Niners ran a screen. Cortland Finnegan sliced between the screen blockers, got a hand on the receiver, but did not make the play. Is that a missed tackle? Well, in reality, what Finnegan did was force the receive to cut inside where there were no blockers and 2 or 3 Ram defenders there to make the play.

Finnegan certainly had an "opportunity" to make a tackle (if that it to be defined as making contact with the ballcarrier), but did not do so. So is that a missed tackle? I'd say, no, given that Finnegan was, in fact, the person who blew up the play. Therefore, calling what he did a "missed tackle" (a negative stat) is silly.

Bringing the subject back to JL, I have to wonder... does PFF give him credit for being a 3 down MLB - something that only a handful of players are capable of being? Certainly, a player on the field for every defensive play is bound to have more tackles and more missed tackles. So how to you compare that player to a situational guy who only is on the field for 2 downs?

My observation of JL is that he is a key player in the Rams' defense who clearly stands out among the LBs and "in the box" safeties he has played with.

If the PFF Geeks want to label him, they can go ahead. I, for one, am very happy we've locked him long term.

[sosa39rams]

Getting back on topic, I've gone to the PFF site, and there is no formula for "tackling efficiency" that is available to non-subscribers (and there's no chance in Hell I'd ever pay a dime for any of these sites).

From what I can glean from the free portion of the site, it has something to do with tackling "opportunities," total tackles, "missed tackles" and perhaps some other "data."

The problem with this type of data is that it (much like the ESPN Total QBR which most here agree is bogus) combines objective data (such as number of snaps, number of tackles) with subjective observations.

The problem is that the subjective criteria, such as tackling "opportunities" and "missed tackles" are not clearly defined, and are certainly subject to interpretation.

For example, there was a play last Sunday in which the Niners ran a screen. Cortland Finnegan sliced between the screen blockers, got a hand on the receiver, but did not make the play. Is that a missed tackle? Well, in reality, what Finnegan did was force the receive to cut inside where there were no blockers and 2 or 3 Ram defenders there to make the play.

Finnegan certainly had an "opportunity" to make a tackle (if that it to be defined as making contact with the ballcarrier), but did not do so. So is that a missed tackle? I'd say, no, given that Finnegan was, in fact, the person who blew up the play. Therefore, calling what he did a "missed tackle" (a negative stat) is silly.

Bringing the subject back to JL, I have to wonder... does PFF give him credit for being a 3 down MLB - something that only a handful of players are capable of being? Certainly, a player on the field for every defensive play is bound to have more tackles and more missed tackles. So how to you compare that player to a situational guy who only is on the field for 2 downs?

My observation of JL is that he is a key player in the Rams' defense who clearly stands out among the LBs and "in the box" safeties he has played with.

If the PFF Geeks want to label him, they can go ahead. I, for one, am very happy we've locked him long term.

Are you missing the point here? I said he's having an off year... that doesn't categorize him in "bottom 10 LB's in the league", it just means that we're not getting the production were used to seeing from him.

Last year JL had 2.5 more sacks, 7 PDF, and 2 INT's. If you think he's playing as good as he has in previous years your an idiot who's trying to hide that fact that you're wrong.

According to last years amazing tackle stat London Fletcher, D'Qwell Jackson, Chad Greenway, Pat Angerer and Curtis Lofton round out the top 5 MLB's... absolutely laughable.

Plus, I'll take PFF's word ALLL DAY over Mr. Almighty Avenger (Im never wrong, plus, if Jeff Fisher doesn't do it, then you're stupid for suggesting it).

[AvengerRam]

You can rant all you want, but you can't avoid the fact that JL is the signal caller and top tackler on a defense that has improved in virtually every category.

[sb2sb2sb]

I'm not saying the guy is perfect, and I don't think he's the best MLB in football. But to characterize his season as a collection of "average games" and "stinkers" is absurd. He is in the top 10 at his position.

Top 10, I see him Top 6-7

[Nick]

It's a shame this thread has been derailed, because I think there's an interesting discussion to be had about the data on PFF's site (of which I am paying more than a dime for to have access to).

But instead of having that discussion, a member decided to pick a fight with a mod by suggesting his opinion is the only right one, and then continued to resort to personal insults even after a mod attempt to get the thread back on topic.

Because of this, I'm closing the thread. If anyone has a problem with that, please feel free to send me a PM.