thylacine60
Premium Platinum
- Banned
- #751
Is that like et al, CrackerMan?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Really want someone to start one of these discourses by putting "Have at you!" at the end of their post.Have to agree with B & S, when it comes to a player's goods or bads, I just can't get enthused enough to care to the amount this discussion seems to. Enjoy and appreciate the thrust and parry but.
Touche is actually a fencing term meaning "touch" and is your opponent indicating you have scored.
Next time someone says touche I hope you imagine them lifting their fencing mask first
Surely you can accept that:
1. arguments of statistical improvement;
2. alleged greater versatility;
3. Sydney supporters views;
4. B&F results;-
are highly subjective. Although the comparative stats for 2013 to 2014 you have posted and I had seen prior to my initial post involves some objectivity, they demonstrate to me minimal improvement for the reasons I have given. I accept you are entitled to think an increase in goal scoring from 5 to 13 etc represents a significant change beyond what might be expected from a player going from a strong club to a weak club. On this we must disagree.
I have explained my position regarding B&F results and, it seems to me, extracted a concession from you that coming 7th does not mean he was a top 7 player.
You seem to think Everitt has had some sort of break-out, transformational year. I don't. I think we recruited a guy who could play AFL footy, having showed it in 2013 and backed that up in 2014. My opinion, as is yours, is based on "what happened on the field". I remain of the opinion that if Jones has the level of improvement seen this year in Everitt then, because Jones has not yet shown he can play at the level, Jones will be a dud. At least Jones knows he must improve significantly.
* I note in footywire that Everitt had a career high 4 hit-outs in a single game in 2009 - nearly as many as he had this year in this "new found" role. I also note he won his Brownlow votes (and fair pump to his stats) in a single game against the Saints we won by 15 goals. I wonder what star(s) he was opposed to?
I'd join in but I haven't the patience for this sort of inanity.
ODN is right, Dre improved in output. Windhover is right that the improvement isn't truly huge, but is too harsh in his assumption that this is most likely external factors. If the statistical improvement matched the game-time improvement, then perhaps we would be dealing with a correlation, but we aren't, Dre, with more game time, and a confirmed role in the team, became a valuable member of our side.
This argument will essentially be the immoveable object vs the irresistible force
For some it is mandatory to adopt a contradictory stance. They think they are clever, but the reality is far removed from clever.Can't we just love what Dre did this year
Nowadays everybody wanna talk like they got something to sayCan't we just love what Dre did this year
that is my new shirtLooking a little pale Thy.
Also you need a new shirt
Gee Windhover and ODN argue their cases well. Respectfully, intelligently, using lots of words. Take note you lot.
Wait, wait, wait. You are telling me that my arguments are highly subjective when you based your argument he had not improved a lot on last year on games played, game time and supposed meaningless statistical increases.
Thanks. That is really my point in a nutshell.Everitt had shown he could play AFL football consistently in one season prior to coming to Carlton.
Sure. Here is a deal. I won't pretend adding midfield contributor to a player's attributes is meaningless if you don't pretend a "clearance gumby" (4 centre clearances and 21 clearances in 17 games in 14; 2 and 10 in 20 games in 13 for Sydney) is making a meaningful midfield contribution even if it is a "doubling" in output from the previous year. As I have previously indicated, doubling off a low base is often just statistical noise rather than a meaningful trend.It was a lot more one dimensional role wise and he was not earning the plaudits he earned this year. He had not shown himself as a run with player and had not run through the midfield a lot. Let's not pretend that going from being a tall flanker to a midfield contributor is meaningless.
Yes I do, thanks. That's why I have always said he improved on last year, just not by much. I have also said that playing for a lesser club is likely to improve one's stats - a point you seem to ignore.You also note that he improved in almost every statistical category from last year to this, often by a fair bit when spread over a season, and when moving from a defensive role to an attacking midfield role, we did not see a comparative downturn in his defensive stats.
I disagree. No matter how "open" one thinks one's eyes are, this is the exemplar of subjectivity.However, I've got a sure fire way of assessing these things, without getting into a subjective statistical argument and all this to and fro. Watching the games with the eyes open.
Thanks for the link. I wouldn't have bothered because it is just "subjectivity on subjectivity". (Not that there is anything wrong with subjectivity, it is unavoidable. It is just that I do not expect one subjective opinion to be swayed merely by the existence of some other subjective opinion. "Facts" like B&F votes, stats have at least some objectivity about them, although they must be interpreted).This Swans board thread is pretty underwhelming.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/andrejs-on-the-chopping-block.1037743/page-4
A few wanted to keep him but recognised he was battling to hold a spot and yes, the 20 game argument was raised.
Ah, herring.Brevity is the soul of wit.
Just saying how i like Andrejs at Blues! thylacine lolNo need to go on and on about it, gillo.....