View Full Version : knights questions Hille's omission from the 40 man AA squad
Matthew Knights and insiders at Windy Hill are surprised at David Hille's omission from the 40 man AA squad.
It is surprising that Drew Petrie ( who i rate highly as a player ) was selected as a ruckman in the squad, when he played less than half the games in the ruck to fill in for the injured Hamish McIntosh.
I listened to Gerald Healy on 3AW who justified Hille's omission on the basis of DreamTeam points.
- Cox and Petrie had 11 or more DT games where they received 100 points
- Sandilands had 8
- Hille had 5
So this means that if Cox had 11 games of more than 100 points and the remaining 11 games of less than 50 points, it is a better performance than Hille having 5 games of 100+ points and his remaining games were all in the 80's and 90's.
This is a ridiculous argument from an AA selector and makes me wonder how much expertise is on the panel.
WeAreHatedAgain
4 Sep 2008, 02:49
Cox, sandilands and petrie didn't miss a game.......hille missed 2
Cox had a season low of 56 with no scores under 50
Sandilands had a season low of 52 with no scores under 50
Petrie had a season low 44 with 2 scores under 50
Hille had a season low 28 and 3 scores under 50
Petrie had a season high 176 against Collingwood with 11 scores 100 or more
Sandilands had a season high 172 against Geelong with 8 scores 100 or more
Cox had a season high 171 against Brisbane with 11 scores 100 or more
Hille had a season high 168 against west coast with 5 scores above 100 and all scores above 100 were against teams outside the 8
If you seriously believe Hille should be in the top 3 provide some concrete reasons
Adelaide Hawk
4 Sep 2008, 06:54
Cox, sandilands and petrie didn't miss a game.......hille missed 2
Cox had a season low of 56 with no scores under 50
Sandilands had a season low of 52 with no scores under 50
Petrie had a season low 44 with 2 scores under 50
Hille had a season low 28 and 3 scores under 50
Petrie had a season high 176 against Collingwood with 11 scores 100 or more
Sandilands had a season high 172 against Geelong with 8 scores 100 or more
Cox had a season high 171 against Brisbane with 11 scores 100 or more
Hille had a season high 168 against west coast with 5 scores above 100 and all scores above 100 were against teams outside the 8
If you seriously believe Hille should be in the top 3 provide some concrete reasons
But this time try to argue the point without producing a mass of non-sensical numbers like I did.
What are these "scores" of 100 or more? He's a footballer, not an olympic platform diver!!!!
Jonesy1987
4 Sep 2008, 07:46
Dreamteam points is the weakest excuse, you don't get points for bumps, physical pressure, shepherding and bringing the ball to ground in contests. If they need DT points as measuring stick maybe they shouldn't be analyzing the sport.
That said its understandable that Hille didn't make it, towards the end of the year Hille lost a bit of form and missed two and half games.
Cox, sandilands and petrie didn't miss a game.......hille missed 2
Cox had a season low of 56 with no scores under 50
Sandilands had a season low of 52 with no scores under 50
Petrie had a season low 44 with 2 scores under 50
Hille had a season low 28 and 3 scores under 50
Petrie had a season high 176 against Collingwood with 11 scores 100 or more
Sandilands had a season high 172 against Geelong with 8 scores 100 or more
Cox had a season high 171 against Brisbane with 11 scores 100 or more
Hille had a season high 168 against west coast with 5 scores above 100 and all scores above 100 were against teams outside the 8
If you seriously believe Hille should be in the top 3 provide some concrete reasons
Oh so we're handing our AA's based on DT scores?
I rate Petrie highly, but as a ruckman he's got nothing on Hille.
Petrie didn't spend enough time in the ruck to justify his position as the third ruckman. If he said he was given the "utility" slot then I would have no problems
My impression was that Sandi and Cox made it as ruckman. Petrie as utility.
Petrie should be competing with Richo for a spot.
Hille was definately one of the top 3 ruckman this year.
This was a post i wrote last week:
Games:
Cox 22
Sandilands 22
Hille 20 ***Important note Hille has 2 less games
Hitouts:
Sandilands 646
Cox 571
Hille 364
Petrie
Hitouts to advantage:
?? If anyone could find this it would be greatly appreciated.
??
??
Disposals:
Cox 486
Sandilands 330
Hille 324
Contested Disposals:
Sandilands 196
Cox 183
Hille 161
Clearances:
Sandilands 88
Cox 87
Hille 60
Marks:
Cox 126
Hille 103
Sandilands 77
Contested marks:
Sandilands 28
Hille 24
Cox 10
Marks inside 50:
Hille 19
Sandilands 13
Cox 5
Rebound 50:
Cox 51
Hille 23
Sandilands 18
Inside 50:
Cox 61
Hille 58
Sandilands 45
Goals:
Hille 19.18
Cox 9.10
Sandilands 8.11
Clangers:
Sandilands 49
Cox 52
Hille 53
Disposal efficiency:
Cox 70.9%
Sandilands 65.7%
Hille 64.2%
Goal assists:
Cox 9
Sandilands 7
Hille 5
Tackles:
Cox 34
Hille 34
Sandilands 29
1%:
Sandilands 47
Hille 41
Cox 28
Supercoach Average:
Cox 111.8
Sandilands 93.3
Hille 87.8
Jolly 80.3
Petrie 95.7
From what i can gather, Sandilands has the most impact around the clearances. He wins the most contested ball, he leads the 1%, has the most clearances and DOMINATES the hitouts.
Cox has the best alround best game. Coming close to Sandilands impact at the clearances but leading the other 2 in outside work by a fair margin. He rebounds from defensive 50 and puts the ball inside 50 more than any other ruckman. He DOMINATES the disposal tally.
Hille has the strongest presence up forward, he has taken the most marks inside 50, is a close 2nd to Sandilands in 1% and contested marks and equal 1st with Cox in tackles. Hille DOMINATES the goal tally adding more than Cox and Sandilands combined.
Someone will ask why i haven't included Jolly or Petire. If you look up Jolly in the stats he just doesn't come close overall and looks a clear 4th. Therefore i haven't bothered to include him in the comparison. Petrie has had a great season. He's taken 150 marks and had 355 disposals. My problem is he's only a seldom ruckman. Its only since McIntosh went down that Petrie has been thrown the task more often. At the moment he's had 196 hitouts which in my opinion should exclude you from being named AA as a ruckman. If this was AA utility on the other hand. He'd be up there.
Add in Petrie:
Hitouts: 196 (4th)
Disposals: 355 (2nd to Cox)
Contested Disposals: 150 (4th)
Clearances: 37 (4th)
Marks: 150 (1st)
Contested Marks: 33 (1st)
Marks inside 50: 23 (1st)
Rebound 50: 48 (2nd to Cox)
Inside 50: 49 (3rd to Cox, Hille)
Goals: 16.15 (2nd Hille)
Clangers: 37 (1st)
Disposals efficiency: 74.37 (1st)
Goal Assists: 7 (equal 2nd to Sandilands, behind Cox)
Tackles: 51 (1st)
1%: 86 (1st, note spoils are included here. Good backman lead this stat)
Supercoach average: 95.7 (2nd to Cox)
His numbers stack up, but only having 196 hitouts should exclude you the AA ruckman position. He should be named as a utility competing against Richo, Pavlich and McPharlin. None of those players have played a settled position, all have had excellent years.
Longy413
4 Sep 2008, 08:57
Paul Roos probably thinks Jolley is stiff.
Hille improved a great deal this season, we should be satisfied with that and hope he builds on it next year.
No doubt he was close, but I think there are bigger things for Knights to worry about.
gumblebear
4 Sep 2008, 09:36
Matthew Knights and insiders at Windy Hill are surprised at David Hille's omission from the 40 man AA squad.
It is surprising that Drew Petrie ( who i rate highly as a player ) was selected as a ruckman in the squad, when he played less than half the games in the ruck to fill in for the injured Hamish McIntosh.
I listened to Gerald Healy on 3AW who justified Hille's omission on the basis of DreamTeam points.
- Cox and Petrie had 11 or more DT games where they received 100 points
- Sandilands had 8
- Hille had 5
So this means that if Cox had 11 games of more than 100 points and the remaining 11 games of less than 50 points, it is a better performance than Hille having 5 games of 100+ points and his remaining games were all in the 80's and 90's.
This is a ridiculous argument from an AA selector and makes me wonder how much expertise is on the panel.
gerald healy should not be on the board if he is judging the all austalian positions on dream team points.
thebigboy
4 Sep 2008, 09:42
If were going on dream team points, Matty Priddis would go close to being AA captain!.
At least Hille and Jolly should have made it ahead of Petrie. How a bloke that plays 10 games in the ruck can be seen as a potential AA ruckman is beyond me.
If were going on dream team points, Matty Priddis would go close to being AA captain!.
At least Hille and Jolly should have made it ahead of Petrie. How a bloke that plays 10 games in the ruck can be seen as a potential AA ruckman is beyond me.
How did Joel Bowden miss all australian selection then?!?!
Runknisse
4 Sep 2008, 13:02
Cox, sandilands and petrie didn't miss a game.......hille missed 2
Cox had a season low of 56 with no scores under 50
Sandilands had a season low of 52 with no scores under 50
Petrie had a season low 44 with 2 scores under 50
Hille had a season low 28 and 3 scores under 50
Petrie had a season high 176 against Collingwood with 11 scores 100 or more
Sandilands had a season high 172 against Geelong with 8 scores 100 or more
Cox had a season high 171 against Brisbane with 11 scores 100 or more
Hille had a season high 168 against west coast with 5 scores above 100 and all scores above 100 were against teams outside the 8
If you seriously believe Hille should be in the top 3 provide some concrete reasons
The reason Healy has given is one of utter bullshit. Dream Team points??? FFS. It's not a reason, it's a cop out of immense proportions. If he's using this a genuine reason and not taken the mickey then he's a disgrace.
Not only does this show how out of touch he is despite having a constant eye over the game, his influence is now having an effect on players careers. That's not on.
Hille deserved to be named in the 40 players this year, even if he didn't deserve to get in the actual team. To say anything against that is nothing short of pure idiocy.
Hille will win best & Fairest at Essendon. Well done David and here's hoping next year is even better.
Like i have said all year, Sandilands has been more consistant, the only way Hille could of got over him would of been having a great end to the year.
The only reason why a lot of Victorians say Hille should be in the side is because they haven't seen much Freo games.
I'm sorry to say, but i think the AA selection of Cox, Sandilands was correct. Petrie as a ruckman though.. ummm
Ludwig van Bertstare
4 Sep 2008, 13:22
Hopefully it keeps Hille hungry to make even bigger improvements next season.
kelvin_sheedy
4 Sep 2008, 13:26
Like i have said all year, Sandilands has been more consistant, the only way Hille could of got over him would of been having a great end to the year.
The only reason why a lot of Victorians say Hille should be in the side is because they haven't seen much Freo games.
I'm sorry to say, but i think the AA selection of Cox, Sandilands was correct. Petrie as a ruckman though.. ummm
Well I look at it another way.
Freo have a ruckman, their full back and best utility and their full forward and best player in the AA squad.
How many teams can boast that their 3 most important players have had great seasons yet their team only won 5 games?
Sandilands work in the middle looks good from a stats perspective but was not effective enough... ditto Pavlich - missing crucial goals.
As I said in on the other board. The AA selection is a joke, has always been a joke and it's going to continue to be a joke in the future. If I was David Hille I wouldn't give a shit.
Crumpler83
4 Sep 2008, 13:55
I'm really not fond of this growing trend of judging player's performances on Super Coach and Dream Team points.
It does have some merit but it's a cheap and easy way out.
"Haven't seen enough of a particular player to judge their season, just check out their dream team points and you'll be sorted?!"
Fantasy points do not tell the full story.
WeAreHatedAgain
4 Sep 2008, 14:35
The points i posted post 2 in this thread were actually champion data points
Champion data takes into account over 50 individual measures
It is the best measurable tool we have
bombersno1
4 Sep 2008, 14:58
The points i posted post 2 in this thread were actually champion data points
Champion data takes into account over 50 individual measures
It is the best measurable tool we have
Are we playing football or diving..FFS. It should be about impact not points, heck if Sandilands was so good he'd be doing more than winning Freo 1 game a season.
IMO the most pertinent thought is that emanating from Windy Hill.
The coaching staff understand the importance of individual players within a club and they were genuinely surprised that Hille didn't make the 40 person squad.
TimeIsRunningOut
4 Sep 2008, 16:39
If we are basing the AA team on SC points I'd shudder thinking about the backline.
Crichton Medal or selection in a bull**** team that will never play. Wonder which honour Hille would prefer?
Darealrath
4 Sep 2008, 18:59
Crichton Medal or selection in a bull**** team that will never play. Wonder which honour Hille would prefer?
Exactly.
Let's leave it to clubs like st kilda who never have any team success to worry about these types of awards.