frickenel said:
Thats a very good post.
Of course alot comes back onto the individual but a player becomes what you make them become.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Mike Sheehan's Dribble!
- Thread starter frickenel
- Start date
Thats a very good post.
Of course alot comes back onto the individual but a player becomes what you make them become.
Why not Scoop? I'll bet you the guys with the 10 (or 20, or 50) highest averages last year were 10 of the best players in the league last year. Aside from ripping defenders off because you get no recognition for beating your opponent it's usually accurate enough in picking out the best players in each game. Why don't you pick any game you like and show me where a player with a very good score had a bad game or a player with a very low score had a great game?
I could understand disregarding Dreamteam scores because basic raw stats can often be very misleading, but as I said at least Supercoach scores are somewhat intuitive because of the weighting given to the players who get their team moving and the players that use the ball very well.
I could understand disregarding Dreamteam scores because basic raw stats can often be very misleading, but as I said at least Supercoach scores are somewhat intuitive because of the weighting given to the players who get their team moving and the players that use the ball very well.
Disco08 said:
Today's game.
Jackson got 87 and was soundly beaten all day. Collins got 54 and was by far the more effective player out of the two.
So far you have asked for two examples of things and I have proved both points by pointing out Richmond games.
Ryan Griffen is by no means a elite footballer yet but he is the Hume Highway ahead of Richard Tambling.
Big Cat Lover said:
actually we dont, can u imagine if the dogs were losing games, griffen would be targeted by his own supporters....15 touches last week against the tiges and 5 were frees....i actually like griffen but ur the one with the blinkers on, he's a good player i agree but it aint no star (yet) nor is he a gamebreaker...is he ahead of tambling yes he is...
when teams win it masks some players actual out put, like Dale thomas had 11 touches V the lions...travis cloke 7 possies and has kicked 5 goals from 4 games this year as a key fwd from the 04 draft.
the heat remains off some players when ur winning mark my words....
Lids 23 disposals today, mark murphy 22 and gibbs 24 disposals yesterday...had we won nothing would be made of 23 disposals that i can asssure you.
frickenel said:
very good summation frickenel, i was reading that too and thought to myself our pics have more than matched the dogs of the last 5 yrs...even ahead..
1999 to 2003....thats whats *smile* us! top of my head raines, tuck, cogs and newman of any real value...
2005 was a disaster for us, only matt white looks likely, casserly gone, hughes if he doesnt show anything this year will be delisted and JON good play arole but surely aint a top 10 pic more 40's to 50's what were u thinking millertime....oh how would a shaun higgings go about now in our fwd line.
2004 shallow draft thems the brakes....lids (star) bling (playing like a pic 50) patto only decent big man in my eyes in the 04 draft but in terms of star quality just average but can play a role perhaps more so in the fwd line...polo good player...meyer (gone)
mcguane and thursty (rookie) helped soften the blow overall....it was a pass but in all honesty not what we expected from the 04 draft...
a roughhead or buddy at pic 4 would've made it oh so sweeter...
I think port powers 04 draft every player chosen is now gone...im 99.9% of that but if anyone knows different please tell.
SCOOP said:
No you haven't. Those scores seem pretty decent to me given Jackson had 20 touches (5 contested) without turning it over, made 5 tackles and got 2 clearances. Collins' 4 clangers and no contested possession lowered his score substantially, as they should IMO.
All you've done is put your own subjective slant on two middle-of-the-road performances.
SCOOP said:
See it's this Liverpoolesque hyperbole that I disagree with. Yes Griffen is a very good young player. Yes he could easily improve and become a top liner. Yes his performances so far have been better than Tambling's. No it hasn't been by a huge margin. Both have had their share of good games and both have had their share quiet, ineffective games.
Disco08 said:
I would put it too anyone who watched the game would thiknk that Collins had the better game.
Disco08 said:
Please, don't even put the hyperbole crap on me. Tambling was running around in the VFL this week. Tell me how many weeks would Ryan Griffen have to stink it up before he got to the VFL?
Your defence based on Supercoach ofa VFL player who is yet to dominate a game is very flimsy.
SCOOP said:
You don't think turnovers should lower a player's score and contested possessions should be valued higher than soft receives? They're the only things keeping Collins from getting a higher rating than Jackson.
SCOOP said:
More hyperbole - a VFL player who up until this week had played 40 odd games straight in the AFL. Please. You want to judge the overall performance of these two players on their standing this week then go right ahead, just don't expect me to take you seriously. Buddy was getting flogged by Polo in a VFL game a couple of years ago when Tambling was playing AFL. Did that demonstrate their respective ability at the time?
We can forget about Supercoach ratings if you like. What about just straight stats? Again, by most measures they have Griffen 10-15% ahead of Tambling last year in terms of actual performance. Same story for Pro-stats ratings, which successful clubs like Geelong and Hawthorn pay big money for. Then again we could just forget about using any form of objective critique and just rely on the faulty perception of biased individuals.
40 straight games? How many were earned or were a lot packaged?
I judge them were they are today becuase it is a fair indication of where the two sit. Tambling is struggling to get a game or have a impact for a bottom four side while Griffen is playing a key role in a top four side and has done so for two years. That is today, judging on the overall performance.
And you talk about Pro- Stats. Look at 2009.
http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/compare_players?tid1=115&pid1=2005122&tid2=112&pid2=2005096
Griffen is getting almost 10 more touches a week. More then your 10-15%.
I judge them were they are today becuase it is a fair indication of where the two sit. Tambling is struggling to get a game or have a impact for a bottom four side while Griffen is playing a key role in a top four side and has done so for two years. That is today, judging on the overall performance.
And you talk about Pro- Stats. Look at 2009.
http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/compare_players?tid1=115&pid1=2005122&tid2=112&pid2=2005096
Griffen is getting almost 10 more touches a week. More then your 10-15%.
SCOOP said:
2009 consists of two games for Tambling, far from conclusive. I'll be more than happy to write him off if his performance is this bad after 10 or 15 games but I think comparing their previous full year is more revealing at this point.
Tambling's demotion was clearly a message that last week's game wasn't good enough, not a reflection of his entire career to date IMO.
Another somewhat objective way to look at them might be comparing their results from their respective team's B&F counts last year. People at Richmond's reckon Tambling would have been about 11-12th and Griffen finished 9th at the Dogs'. Even allowing for the Dogs' overall stronger list that's not a huge difference out of a 40 man list.
I don't know if Tambling was gifted games or not. Rightly or wrongly maybe like some other clubs do with their young players the coaches at Richmond thought he was worth investing games in because they think he has potential.
Anyway, I think it's fair to say we simply disagree and I don't think it's really a point worth getting too involved with. Time will tell whether he turns out to be a good player or not no matter what you, me and 99.9% of the population think of him at this point.
Yeah, fair play Disco. I suppose it is a case of I just think that Griffen is further ahead and has a much higher ceiling as a player then Tambling. I didn't think that for a long time but over the past twelve months I feel the gap is not going to get closer. But the debate is what this is about. Nothing personal, nothing outside the issue just back and forth.
