Mike Clay's roster talent evaluation all 32 teams ranked

[Reed83HOF]

4 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Based on these rankings it looks like the Bills better be drafting OFFENSE in all seven rounds! 

 

Lol. TBF, that is everyone's opinion anyways.

[JohnNord]

5 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Come on---Jets QB is 3.4 out of 4??  lol Who?

I think he assumed it was Rodgers 

[Punching Bag]

8 hours ago, MJS said:

Yeah, that's my suspicion. Just assigning a number based on his own opinions. So this is just worthless, if that's the case. Might as well be ranked by gold stars.

 

People try to turn their opinions into "data" by just assigning numbers.

 

Sounds like some posters' favorite site PFF.

[PrimeTime101]

4 hours ago, DCOrange said:

Are you asking about how the math actually works or about why Burrow is a 3.8 vs. Dak being a 3.1 and stuff like that?

No. I am asking how the math works where Cinci and all their positional values ends in a total offensive grade of 1.8 and then the same with Dallas. Fact is they don't match.

[GreggTX]

I think the offense is underrated a smidge at RB, WR and TE. The OL is overrated. I want OT as our 1st pick.

[MJS]

1 hour ago, Limeaid said:

Sounds like some posters' favorite site PFF.

It's exactly what PFF does which is why it is practically worthless.

[LeGOATski]

Here comes the offseason hype train for the Miami Dolphins.

 

CHOO CHOO!!

[CincyBillsFan]

11 hours ago, whorlnut said:

So basically, we are in the red at every position on offense except qb. Meanwhile, every position on defense is green. Shocker…

To the extent that these rankings are correct it's a powerful indictment of the ass backwards way in which Bean/McD are constructing this team.  Of the elite QB's Allen has by far the weakest supporting cast on offense. 

11 hours ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

Our offensive rating checks out. Allen basically carries the entire offense to a #5 ranking. WR seems a tad low given Diggs alone, feel like the Bills could be a 2.0

 

It's strong evidence that the Bills are wasting Allen's talents.  While they have made a serious tilt towards the offense in their FA signings they've yet to make a splash signing that is likely to move the needle much.  If they don't get D Hop then they have to commit their 1st round pick and 2 of their next 3 picks to offense.  The defense will have to make do.

 

 

[DCOrange]

11 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

No. I am asking how the math works where Cinci and all their positional values ends in a total offensive grade of 1.8 and then the same with Dallas. Fact is they don't match.

I already explained that though. It's because of the significant gap in QBs and how heavily the QB position is weighted. With the way the positions are weighted for the weighted average, the QBs make up roughly half of the offense grade and the other offensive positions make up the other half. If you changed the QB grades to both be 3.0s, Dallas would have a higher offense grade by roughly 0.2, but because Burrow is graded so much higher than Dak, it's enough to give both teams roughly the same offensive grade.

[SoCal Deek]

15 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

Lol. TBF, that is everyone's opinion anyways.

And that’s much of what I’ve said about this ranking. I’m not saying it’s garbage. I actually think it’s pretty good. But with any such scoring metric there’s a lot of subjectivity that ends up in it too. I applaud the guy for trying to quantify it on one page. 

[Dopey]

22 hours ago, MJS said:

How did he determine the numbers for each position?

[Nextmanup]

So he's got the Bills 5th but has KC behind us; not sure I agree with that.

 

We should be 6th. 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, Dopey said:

While memes are cute, I’d love to see if your chart would be all that different. I doubt that it would. 

[First Round Bust]

interesting and insightful...Texans who are the lowest graded overall actuially have 3 units on offense scoring higher than the Bills,  which indicates what ???  we have better coaching and a QB that makes up for the deificiencies apparenlty...also glaring issue - no special teams  Approx 10% of the game is deveoted to special teams - needs consideration as well and likely elevates Bills score slightly.

 

I do agree that Miami (due to vet acquisitions) and the Jets (drafting) have rapidly improved their rosters and have closed the gap between to the point of expecting close,competetive games...not a bad thing from the entertainment perspective as most where thrilling and dramtatic

 

Point of emphasis - Tua was asked toughest place to play...answer:  Buffalo...electric

[Dopey]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

While memes are cute, I’d love to see if your chart would be all that different. I doubt that it would. 

I’d have to have an interest in evaluating EVERY NFL team. The Commanders, Panthers, Colts?? It’s Saturday in Florida, better and more productive things to do. Like mowing my lawn. Gonna hit my fishing spot in a bit . That meme was cute, wasn’t it?
Edit: in looking at the chart, you’re right, mine would be similar.  

[whorlnut]

9 hours ago, CincyBillsFan said:

To the extent that these rankings are correct it's a powerful indictment of the ass backwards way in which Bean/McD are constructing this team.  Of the elite QB's Allen has by far the weakest supporting cast on offense. 

It's strong evidence that the Bills are wasting Allen's talents.  While they have made a serious tilt towards the offense in their FA signings they've yet to make a splash signing that is likely to move the needle much.  If they don't get D Hop then they have to commit their 1st round pick and 2 of their next 3 picks to offense.  The defense will have to make do.

 

 

Well said. Completely agree. It’s my fear that they are handling this like they have in the past by signing complimentary pieces on offense and then will go d heavy in the draft again. We still don’t have a boundary receiver outside of Diggs and Davis. It’s the same situation we were in last year at this point. Hopefully they address it with Hopkins or with a top pick. 

[Dopey]

11 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

Well said. Completely agree. It’s my fear that they are handling this like they have in the past by signing complimentary pieces on offense and then will go d heavy in the draft again. We still don’t have a boundary receiver outside of Diggs and Davis. It’s the same situation we were in last year at this point. Hopefully they address it with Hopkins or with a top pick. 

In the past three seasons, we’ve been 2nd, 3rd and 2nd in points per game. It’s an exaggeration that Josh doesn’t have a supporting cast. Are there teams with better personnel? Sure, but we’re not crap in that area. If SB wins are the ultimate determining factor, I guess Cincy is wasting Burrow’s talents. Philly wasted Hurts’ talents, since they didn’t win it. If SB wins is the criteria. 
Please don’t ask where we would be without Allen. That’s the dumbest response anyone could give. 

[whorlnut]

40 minutes ago, Dopey said:

In the past three seasons, we’ve been 2nd, 3rd and 2nd in points per game. It’s an exaggeration that Josh doesn’t have a supporting cast. Are there teams with better personnel? Sure, but we’re not crap in that area. If SB wins are the ultimate determining factor, I guess Cincy is wasting Burrow’s talents. Philly wasted Hurts’ talents, since they didn’t win it. If SB wins is the criteria. 
Please don’t ask where we would be without Allen. That’s the dumbest response anyone could give. 

The fact that you wrote “please don’t ask where we would be without Allen” tells me you already know the answer. He’s doing all he can with a crap oline and lack of weapons outside of Diggs. 

[BigAl2526]

Obviously, any evaluation like that is going to be somewhat subjective, no matter how astute the expert might be.  It is a bit disturbing, however that every position on offense is below average in Clay's eyes except QB while every spot on defense is above average.  That would seem to support the claim that some have made that Buffalo has neglected the offense in the draft, particularly in the early rounds.

[CincyBillsFan]

1 hour ago, Dopey said:

In the past three seasons, we’ve been 2nd, 3rd and 2nd in points per game. It’s an exaggeration that Josh doesn’t have a supporting cast. Are there teams with better personnel? Sure, but we’re not crap in that area. If SB wins are the ultimate determining factor, I guess Cincy is wasting Burrow’s talents. Philly wasted Hurts’ talents, since they didn’t win it. If SB wins is the criteria. 
Please don’t ask where we would be without Allen. That’s the dumbest response anyone could give. 

Cincy made it to the Super Bowl in 2021 and the AFC Championship game in 2022. They are definitely NOT wasting the talents of Joe Burrow.  Just this season the Bengals let 2 very good safety's walk in order to sign a high end LT to enhance the one part of their offense that they needed to upgrade.

 

Philly has assembled as much talent around Hurtz as possible and they earned a trip to the SB as a result.

 

It's obvious tat without Allen would not even be making the playoffs.  The real question is can Allen & Diggs ALONE lead us to a Super Bowl and the answer is they can't.  So while KC, Pilly, Cincy and now even the LA Chargers are trying to surround their elite QB's with the best offensive talent available we appear to be taking a more cautious, cheaper approach. 

 

I hope that 6 weeks from now the Bills will have made the bold moves to fortify their offense that fully exploit the talents of their generational QB. I'm hopeful that they might actually be in the process of doing just that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[PrimeTime101]

4 hours ago, DCOrange said:

I already explained that though. It's because of the significant gap in QBs and how heavily the QB position is weighted. With the way the positions are weighted for the weighted average, the QBs make up roughly half of the offense grade and the other offensive positions make up the other half. If you changed the QB grades to both be 3.0s, Dallas would have a higher offense grade by roughly 0.2, but because Burrow is graded so much higher than Dak, it's enough to give both teams roughly the same offensive grade.

Math. This is supposed to be done with a mathematical equation and until now you can't explain it. you have one offense with 3 of the 5 positions in the green and a little red and another team with 2 green and 3 red. It does not add up. period. There is no where in this formula that says a QB weighs more than another position group...   If that were true then somewhere it would say that in the formula the QB position or say the WR position outweighs other positional groups. but it does not say that. 

[DCOrange]

51 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Math. This is supposed to be done with a mathematical equation and until now you can't explain it. you have one offense with 3 of the 5 positions in the green and a little red and another team with 2 green and 3 red. It does not add up. period. There is no where in this formula that says a QB weighs more than another position group...   If that were true then somewhere it would say that in the formula the QB position or say the WR position outweighs other positional groups. but it does not say that. 

It does say that. The QB position is weighted as 28% of the total team grade whereas the other offensive positions add up to a total of 30% of the team grade.

 

If you have Excel, punch in the ratings and weights like I have below. The mathematical formula for the total grade is SUMPRODUCT(ratings,weights)/SUM(weights) to get your weighted average. To get the offensive team rating, you'd do the same thing except limit the SUMPRODUCT part of the equation to just the offensive positions. To get the defensive team rating, you'd do the same thing except limit the SUMPRODUCT part of the equation to just the defensive positions.

 

[PrimeTime101]

26 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

It does say that. The QB position is weighted as 28% of the total team grade whereas the other offensive positions add up to a total of 30% of the team grade.

 

If you have Excel, punch in the ratings and weights like I have below. The mathematical formula for the total grade is SUMPRODUCT(ratings,weights)/SUM(weights) to get your weighted average. To get the offensive team rating, you'd do the same thing except limit the SUMPRODUCT part of the equation to just the offensive positions. To get the defensive team rating, you'd do the same thing except limit the SUMPRODUCT part of the equation to just the defensive positions.

 

GOT YA! TY for explaining it. Way to much wait for QB compared to the other positional values. IS it a QB driven league? oh yea lol! BUT!  to say the QB position is over 100% more important than the WR position? Last year with buffalo is proof how wrong that value is. 

 

TY SIR for explaining it. I guess bottom line, his values are bad. especially where he puts them with some teams. RB .. dime a dozen... but .03? christ.. lets drop cook and sign a crap HB if thats the true value of a HB on a team?  .03? come on man. 

 

FYI i did not see these numerical numbers on top of the SS till I blew it up.

 

Thanks again mate. 

[prissythecat]

1 hour ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Math. This is supposed to be done with a mathematical equation and until now you can't explain it. you have one offense with 3 of the 5 positions in the green and a little red and another team with 2 green and 3 red. It does not add up. period. There is no where in this formula that says a QB weighs more than another position group...   If that were true then somewhere it would say that in the formula the QB position or say the WR position outweighs other positional groups. but it does not say that. 

 

 

Ummm.  You are seriously adding things up by using color counts?  The weights are right there in the chart and it is clear that the QB position contributes the most to the offensive group at 28%.  Everything else is much lower . 

[PrimeTime101]

1 hour ago, prissythecat said:

 

 

Ummm.  You are seriously adding things up by using color counts?  The weights are right there in the chart and it is clear that the QB position contributes the most to the offensive group at 28%.  Everything else is much lower . 

no.. read back a couple posts. I did not see the math equations in small print. now go back and read my last reply to orange. 

[prissythecat]

2 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

no.. read back a couple posts. I did not see the math equations in small print. now go back and read my last reply to orange. 

Didn’t see the subsequent replies as I had my response just sitting there before I got to click submit

 

Good that you finally understand The methodology .  It may not sit well with some folks but at least it tries to do a ranking. in systematic fashion rather than pure gut feel

[PrimeTime101]

Just now, prissythecat said:

Didn’t see the subsequent replies as I had my response just sitting there before I got to click submit

 

Good that you finally understand The methodology .  It may not sit well with some folks but at least it tries to do a ranking. in systematic fashion rather than pure gut feel

the values themselves are messed up... not just in general for each position but for the positions on teams themself. Doubling down + some on QB, when WR is a need in this league is crazy. and .03 for HB? mine as well say you do not need a HB at all.... thats my biggest issue with all of this.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Red across the offense. Sounds about right