The lengths we will go to put some any sort of positive spin on our duds is tragic. We are in desperate need of another list overhaul that will take 6 years minimum to see progress for the better.
-
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.
Richmond vs Melbourne
- Thread starter tigerbeau
- Start date
Disco08 said:
Ok, so you're admitting that stats presently dont measure where and in what situations a player kicks the ball and nor do they measure the distance they're being kicked either and what the rate of effectiveness in those circumstances is. Until that happens, I place little credence in them. Football is not as linear as something like baseball Duckman, so dont fall into the trap of over subscribing to them.
As for comparing error rates with those players, again, I say the same to you and also point out that you need to be looking at the sample volumes as well.
You can place as little credence in them as you like. The facts are though that over a broad sample they provide effective indicators and are used by every AFL club to help evaluate their players' performances. You only need to look at the top ranked players in crucial categories to know that they have some purpose in the game. While first hand impressions are often far better in an immediate sense, they are easily forgotten and can tend to be far more misleading as the individual places his or her own prejudices into the equation.
The sample volumes are basically the same for the comparative stats I mentioned as it is basically comparing each players 20yo season (a fair thing to do IMO). All stats aside though, I kept a pretty close eye on this kid last year and in most cases liked what I saw from a 20yo beanpole. As I said, let's agree to disagree and see what happens.
The sample volumes are basically the same for the comparative stats I mentioned as it is basically comparing each players 20yo season (a fair thing to do IMO). All stats aside though, I kept a pretty close eye on this kid last year and in most cases liked what I saw from a 20yo beanpole. As I said, let's agree to disagree and see what happens.
Disco08 said:
Not so fast Duckman. Are you saying on one hand that over a broad sample they are effective indicators…. but then saying you’re supporting your belief that Pattison is a good kick off the basis of one season ? A season in which he had the paltry amount of 63 kicks for the entire year …and further…doing so without knowing in what situations he was effecting those kicks ?
And if you’re saying that you are, but only doing so on the basis of comparing that season with those nominated players when they too were 20 years old, then being the stats orientated person that you are, where is the statistical evidence to suggest that he too will improve to be the same calibre player ? In other words, what was Barry Brooks year as a 20 year old like ?
You’re not using your stats in a prejudicial manner are you Duckman ? !
But you’re right. Facts are that stats are EXACTLY what you say they are: indicators. And not the entire truth of the story.
I’m gonna nominate you for a job with the Oakland A’s. Beane would love you. Maybe you could take ‘em to a World Championship some day.
Redford said:
Barry Brooks STUNK as a 20yo, what's the point? As far as error rate goes he still stinks.
And I'd say comparing players to similar contemporaries at their similar stages of development is a legitimate thing to do. We shouldn't be asking our kids to live up to the performances of stars years older than them. And to me 63 is a fair sample, nothing conclusive but certainly more than useful for drawing some initial conclusions, which is all we're really doing here because as a big bloke, Pattison's D-Day is yet to arrive.
On the highlighted sentence, obviously stats can't provide any proof that any player will develop into anything. I'm encouraged by Pattison's performance so far, not convinced. There's a big difference.
What games are people basing there Pattison opinions on?
Facts are he hasn't done anything and has yet to show that he belongs in the big league.
I think people are getting most annoyed at the overall signs that we are not improving in terms of game play and skills. We are still making the same stupid mistakes as we always seem to do and worse, it's the young kids that are starting to make them also. It's as if the whole place is cursed, and whover enters the place, no matter how good the kid might initially look, will slowly but surely be infected by endless decision making and skill errors.
People are starting to worry as the batch of 2004 are starting to mature, and some out there are not too excited with what they see.
Facts are he hasn't done anything and has yet to show that he belongs in the big league.
I think people are getting most annoyed at the overall signs that we are not improving in terms of game play and skills. We are still making the same stupid mistakes as we always seem to do and worse, it's the young kids that are starting to make them also. It's as if the whole place is cursed, and whover enters the place, no matter how good the kid might initially look, will slowly but surely be infected by endless decision making and skill errors.
People are starting to worry as the batch of 2004 are starting to mature, and some out there are not too excited with what they see.
You might be onto something Harold in regards our kids being exposed to their less skilled teamates.The practice match against the swans a few weeks ago might have been enough for Terry to bring fwd the new guard qucker than 1st plannedHarry said:
Harry said:
What do you mean by "starting" to worry Harrison ? If you recall, I had doubts way back in 2004 at the time of the draft itself over several players that we took and whether or not in the long run they'd be what we require to be successful. Still time for me to be convinced, but that time is starting to run out. 2007 is a defining year for a few blokes - as I keep saying.
And I stress "what we require to be successful" because its not good enough for example for a player to get a bit of the ball or whatever.....its what he does with it and whether its gonna truly add value in comparison with the level and quality that other teams are performing at.
Wallace Q & A from the Melbourne game on the RFC site.
Article here.
http://richmondfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/6301/Default.aspx?newsId=39216
Article here.
http://richmondfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/6301/Default.aspx?newsId=39216
Liked this little snippet:
"As far as Richard Tambling is concerned, he was just put back to the early game following a little indiscretion during the week. He missed a rehab. session . . . it was just a mistake, he didn’t realise that it was on. But you’ve got to have disciplines in place, so we put him back. What Richard showed is that he’s clearly beyond that level nowadays. He’s a legitimate senior player. And, I don’t think he’s actually shown that at VFL level previously. He’s gone back and been an adequate player, but he was just head and shoulders above them at that level last weekend. We’re hoping it’s given him a bit of confidence and he can take that form into the seniors this week. Richard was really good from a leadership point of view in that game, too, soldiering up the troops."
"As far as Richard Tambling is concerned, he was just put back to the early game following a little indiscretion during the week. He missed a rehab. session . . . it was just a mistake, he didn’t realise that it was on. But you’ve got to have disciplines in place, so we put him back. What Richard showed is that he’s clearly beyond that level nowadays. He’s a legitimate senior player. And, I don’t think he’s actually shown that at VFL level previously. He’s gone back and been an adequate player, but he was just head and shoulders above them at that level last weekend. We’re hoping it’s given him a bit of confidence and he can take that form into the seniors this week. Richard was really good from a leadership point of view in that game, too, soldiering up the troops."