Dan-Richie

[The_General]

We complain that we cough the ball up too much and need to get people with skills.

Here's Jackson who does exactly that. So what if he can shut down an opponent (who hasn't been in good form) and rack up 30 touches and turn a quarter of them over.

We've had plenty of glass half full types.

The types of players Jackson is, we need to upgrade on, or use strictly in a shut down role. We can't afford to have 15 players who can't dispose of it properly.

 

[GoodOne]

Thanks Disco but I'm not really that interested. I only commented because of claims that Jacko's dream team ranking summed up the quality of his possessions.

Supercoach actually does pick up that part quite well. It only gives points for effective disposal so if you get 30+ possessions and a relatively low score it only means one thing, they had plenty of ineffective disposals. But these only confirm what you see and Jackson definitely butchered the ball ALOT on the weekend. As AstuteTiger says very difficult to give him 3 votes based on that.

 

[Rosy]

Supercoach actually does pick up that part quite well.  It only gives points for effective disposal so if you get 30+ possessions and a relatively low score it only means one thing, they had plenty of ineffective disposals. 

Yet Dan's disposal efficiency was 66 and Tambo's was 70 so I don't understand that.  Doesn't it give extra points for goals like other stats sites do?  It's interesting Dan was rated better overall than Richard by Pro-Stats in the figures Disco gave.

 

[tigersnake]

Jackson, keeps improving and getting bigger and stronger. I can see him becoming a decent player. I can see him ironing out the too frequent poor decisions out of his game with experience.

Tambling temprament and hype reminds me of Ottens, doesn't seem to enjoy the game that much. Plays a reasonable game after criticism has built for a few weeks to shush it a bit and keep his spot. Having said that, he's the type of player who would be good in a good side, like Ottens.

 

[GoodOne]

Yet Dan's disposal efficiency was 66 and Tambo's was 70 so I don't understand that. Doesn't it give extra points for goals like other stats sites do? It's interesting Dan was rated better overall than Richard by Pro-Stats in the figeures Disco gave.

Disposal efficiency and clangers are two different things. Efficiency may be hitting a target as opposed to kicking into a space whereas a clanger is usually a failed or poor disposal or turnover. Clangers are dealt quite harshly both by hand and foot so disposal percentage efficiency may have been similar but translated to quite a few more clanger negative points for Dan it appeared. So as mentioned a high possession game yet relatively low total score will usually mean alot of clangers as they attract negative points and/or ineffective kicks. For Super Coach here's how points are awarded.

Effective kick 4 Points
Ineffective kick 0 Points
Clanger kick -8 Points
Handball effective 2 Points
Ineffective handball 0 Points
Handball clanger -6 Points
Handball receive 1 Point
Hardball get 4 Points
Loose-ball get 4 Points
Goal 8 Points
Behind 1 Point
Mark uncontested (maintaining possession) 1 Point
Mark contested (maintaining possession) 6 Points
Mark uncontested (from opposition) 4 Points
Mark contested (from opposition) 8 Points
Tackles 4 Points
Free kick for 4 Points
Free kick against -6 Points
Hitout to Advantage 3 Points