Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Let’s talk about that piece of trash Dee Ford again for a little while.
He’s no longer starting for the 49ers and has been on the field for 78/221 snaps in the past four games - 35 percent.
He’s a productive situational pass rusher. And that’s exactly how the 49ers are using him.
Trading him was absolutely the right thing to do. He’s being paid like a 3-down player/star and isn’t close to that.
If last night was a sign of Clark getting healthy/right and back in business, I’m confident Clark ends up having a better overall year and is the better player going forward.
Veach is shitting tiffany cufflinks this morning!!! [Reply]
Dee Ford -91.1 overall grade -17 pressures -4 sacks -12 QB hurries -1 QB hit -0 INT -118 snaps
Frank Clark -56.1 overall grade -17 pressures -1 sack -13 QB hurries -3 QB hits -1 INT -354 snaps (exactly triple the amount of snaps of Dee Ford’s snaps)
The only thing Dee Ford has was more sacks. That was it. And yes Clark has played far more snaps, BUT that means they know Dee Ford sucks vs the run. He isn’t playing on 1st down very often.
Yeah. Hated the compensation to get him, but Frank Clark is still better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
This was before last nights game
Dee Ford -91.1 overall grade -17 pressures -4 sacks -12 QB hurries -1 QB hit -0 INT -118 snaps
Frank Clark -56.1 overall grade -17 pressures -1 sack -13 QB hurries -3 QB hits -1 INT -354 snaps (exactly triple the amount of snaps of Dee Ford’s snaps)
The only thing Dee Ford has was more sacks. That was it. And yes Clark has played far more snaps, BUT that means they know Dee Ford sucks vs the run. He isn’t playing on 1st down very often.
Yeah. Hated the compensation to get him, but Frank Clark is still better.
The missing component from PfF grades, IMO, is positional/situational adjustments.
Ford is a situational speed rusher the Niners are protecting by hiding from non-passing situations.
So his grades, by their system, will always look awesome. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Let’s talk about that piece of trash Dee Ford again for a little while.
He’s no longer starting for the 49ers and has been on the field for 78/221 snaps in the past four games - 35 percent.
He’s a productive situational pass rusher. And that’s exactly how the 49ers are using him.
Trading him was absolutely the right thing to do. He’s being paid like a 3-down player/star and isn’t close to that.
If last night was a sign of Clark getting healthy/right and back in business, I’m confident Clark ends up having a better overall year and is the better player going forward.
Well, yeah...
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale:
As long as I don't have to wait another seven games for him to do it again... but it's a start.
THERE'S the answer I was looking for.
So yeah, establish a pattern please and let's revisit this a few weeks down the road. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
This was before last nights game
Dee Ford -91.1 overall grade -17 pressures -4 sacks -12 QB hurries -1 QB hit -0 INT -118 snaps
Frank Clark -56.1 overall grade -17 pressures -1 sack -13 QB hurries -3 QB hits -1 INT -354 snaps (exactly triple the amount of snaps of Dee Ford’s snaps)
The only thing Dee Ford has was more sacks. That was it. And yes Clark has played far more snaps, BUT that means they know Dee Ford sucks vs the run. He isn’t playing on 1st down very often.
Yeah. Hated the compensation to get him, but Frank Clark is still better.
this is actually pretty telling by pff on how bad they are. there is no way frank clark on any rating system would be that much worse then dee ford [Reply]
Originally Posted by TambaBerry:
this is actually pretty telling by pff on how bad they are. there is no way frank clark on any rating system would be that much worse then dee ford
It has to over value the pass rush and not account for setting an edge, which IMO is very important for the defensive end standpoint. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcclone:
It has to over value the pass rush and not account for setting an edge, which IMO is very important for the defensive end standpoint.
For edge players, they seem to place a high value on percentage of plays that generated a pass rush.
Obviously, a situational rusher who is playing roughly 1/3 of snaps, on passing downs, is going to have a higher percentage of pressures because they’re not out there for “unpredictable situation” throws. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
This was before last nights game
Dee Ford -91.1 overall grade -17 pressures -4 sacks -12 QB hurries -1 QB hit -0 INT -118 snaps
Frank Clark -56.1 overall grade -17 pressures -1 sack -13 QB hurries -3 QB hits -1 INT -354 snaps (exactly triple the amount of snaps of Dee Ford’s snaps)
The only thing Dee Ford has was more sacks. That was it. And yes Clark has played far more snaps, BUT that means they know Dee Ford sucks vs the run. He isn’t playing on 1st down very often.
Yeah. Hated the compensation to get him, but Frank Clark is still better.
I don't have a subscription, but I'd love to see a lot of grades for the Chiefs after last night's game. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TambaBerry:
this is actually pretty telling by pff on how bad they are. there is no way frank clark on any rating system would be that much worse then dee ford
Prison Bitch thinks he's one of the worst players in the NFL. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TambaBerry:
this is actually pretty telling by pff on how bad they are. there is no way frank clark on any rating system would be that much worse then dee ford
Ford's numbers were way better going into last night's game.
But why does Ford have a third of Clark's snaps? [Reply]