How good are we at developing players?

[TradeDraft]

Nathan Jones is another over 23. And this is a team that his for a long time been poor developing talent, and turning over 1000+ games of experience yearly creating an exceptionally young team list.

So even Melbourne are out-doing us with the over 23s.

So you think Melbourne will go past us in a Year or 2 and we will be Down the Bottom of the Ladder then in 2-3 Years?

 

[Knightmare]

So you think Melbourne will go past us in a Year or 2 and we will be Down the Bottom of the Ladder then in 2-3 Years?

It's not out of the question. Paul Roos is a good coach. They will improve. They drafted exceptionally well this year and if they can develop their young talent and get some of those guys who have been in their system for a few years to improve, maybe find someone through free agency and maybe they do pass us by.

 

[TradeDraft]

It's not out of the question. Paul Roos is a good coach. They will improve. They drafted exceptionally well this year and if they can develop their young talent and get some of those guys who have been in their system for a few years to improve, maybe find someone through free agency and maybe they do pass us by.

Well IF that Happens. There be a lot of people in the Footy Department that won’t have a Job for long.

Isn’t Roos gone in a year or 2?

 

[Knightmare]

Well IF that Happens. There be a lot of people in the Footy Department that won’t have a Job for long.

Isn’t Roos gone in a year or 2?

Simon Goodwin will be Roos' successor.

Roos is coach for another 2 years. They look a different team after team one, and now they know how he likes the game played, and they don't lose by so much, defending better than they did previously. They can continue to trend upward.

 

[TradeDraft]

Simon Goodwin will be Roos' successor.

Roos is coach for another 2 years. They look a different team after team one, and now they know how he likes the game played, and they don't lose by so much, defending better than they did previously. They can continue to trend upward.

We have had 3 Years of High Draft Picks and they could change what has happened the last few years as they are lot Higher then Picks we have had for a while

 

[mike123]

But has anyone else at Melbourne Improved?

Neville Jetta?

 

[Knightmare]

We have had 3 Years of High Draft Picks and they could change what has happened the last few years as they are lot Higher then Picks we have had for a while

If anything is the difference for Melbourne I expect it will be the development of those guys who have been on the list for a few years.

We've seen Neville Jetta, Matt Jones and Dean Terlich as some players who are all 23+ years of age and that's about the age Paul Ross, a little like Ross Lyon really likes them before helping them really play good footy.

I expect a few more of those mid career unknowns to continue to come through and come good and break out later than you'd typically expect.

 

[TradeDraft]

Neville Jetta?

Well I guess you can’t get any worse then getting De-Listed

 

[Hagla]

Nathan Jones is another over 23. And this is a team that his for a long time been poor developing talent, and turning over 1000+ games of experience yearly creating an exceptionally young team list.

So even Melbourne are out-doing us with the over 23s.

Using Melbourne as an example just shows how silly this imaginary line in the sand is though, they haven't managed to move out of the bottom 4 in that time. The only reason they are able to get players to develop so late is because they never developed properly when they were younger. Yes I get where you are coming from and it is interesting, and in a weird way it is sort of concerning if I squint my eyes just right... But then I look at our list of younger guys and see how far they have already come (lots of them are already further developed than the examples you are using).

- Sidebottom was brilliant this year and last half of last year.
- Dayne Beams was elite in 2012 (the fact that he was so young should make it an even bigger accomplishment, not the other way around).
- Jamie Elliott stepped up again this year to become one of the best small forwards in the league.
- Jack Frost came in and held down a key position spot all year and did so very well.
- Ben Reid was sent forward and had everyone extremely excited by what he might provide up there before going down with injury.
- Keefe was amazing before going down with an ACL in 2012.
- Marley Williams attacks the ball like a bull and I love it.

None of these players fit into the exact guidelines you have created to find an anomaly in the development though. If you look at the 17 players on our list who currently fit into the right age bracket for your guidelines then there are a few that I haven't given up on. Jessie White, Travis Varcoe, Tyson Goldsack, Brent Macaffer, Levi Greenwood and Ben Reid are all players that I feel could still improve or have a "second wind" in their careers. I'm not willing to give up on those players and just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't happen at all. I think I should just leave it at "yes I can see the statistics you are putting forward and it is interesting but when I look at the whole package it doesn't overly concern me".

 

[jmac70]

So you think Melbourne will go past us in a Year or 2 and we will be Down the Bottom of the Ladder then in 2-3 Years?

Melbourne are a pack of losers TD. Won't happen.

 

[TradeDraft]

Melbourne are a pack of losers TD. Won't happen.

That is what I was trying to get across. Lot needs to change there for them to get out of the Bottom 4

 

[Gone Critical]

I don't see 2010 as the starting point of the analysis but instead 2011 when our list was at it's best - with the H+A season where we achieve historically I imagine our highest even end of season percentage.

Starting from 2011, I would say with confidence no one after the age of 24 has demonstrated any improvement when you assess the totality and total quality of their games.

2011 was Cloke's best season. 2013 he also performed well playing deeper, but I wouldn't describe it as an improved season and he was greatly aided by a well performed Reid in that second half of 2013 as the only time in his career since establishing himself where he has played alongside a second high level key forward. Then this past year he had his worst season since 2006, looking slow and immobile.

Toovey in 2011 became who he is. He hasn't declined but he hasn't improved.

Pendlebury again in 2011 played his best football and since has not achieved the same numbers. His game has stayed in essence the same.

Reid again in 2011 played his best footy, had a good 2013 season when he switched forward for that second half but injuries have hurt.

Blair in 2011/2012 played relatively his best football and his game hasn't advanced in any way since.

Goldsack from his first season really has remained the same player and an argument could be made that his first season (2007) was his best season.

Brown has had his injuries. Played his best footy in those two grand finals and hasn't at any stage added anything to his game.

Sidebottom and same could be said of Beams received more opportunity up the field under Nathan and as such both achieved greater numbers. Both Beams and Sidebottom in 2012 played their best football.

Caff played his best football in 2010. He has had his injuries, and the tagging role has in some ways suited him and he started out hot until a seeming rule change and poor play since.

Then Wellingham and Dawes who have both gone both played their best footy in 2010.

Lumumba played his best football in 2010, his all australian year. Since he has been inconsistent and from 2011, and certainly 2012 wasn't the same player. 2013 was a rebound season in a new role on a wing then again down back last year was poor I felt.

Shaw's best season was 2007 with 2012 his last strong season.

Swan played his best football in 2010 and has since with every season regressed slightly with 2014 a complete drop in standard. He fits into the previous generation category where he developed under Mick and pre 2011.

Dale Thomas is another. Played his best football in 2011 and hasn't been the same since.

--

I challenge anyone to find a player on our list who after the age of 24 has beyond doubt improved since the 2011 season since Nathan has taken over as head coach. There isn't a since player and for the past year it has been blatantly obvious that it has been an area of grave concern. The development of over 24s, the decline of 30 year olds, the injuries. They're the issues the club needs to fix to achieve any meaningful success any time from now.

I could similarly go through all the names of all the guys who have declined as soon as they hit 30 since 2011. *Hint. It's been the entire list just as all players as they have hit the age of 24 have stopped developing.

KM I think you are being a little bit too static in your argument and considering individual seasons as their own entity unrelated to the rest of a career

For me a players improves his standing and his career if he can reach say an A grade or elite level and then maintain it. That is very difficult to do and as we have seen with say a Daisy or Mark Murphy or a Scott Selwood etc etc. what makes an Ablett, Swan, Selwood or Judd great ultimately is their continued elite output.

On that basis Cloke and Pendles have clearly grown as players and improved since 2010-11. Even the champs don't just put out season after season of ever improving performance. What sets them apart is their longevity. On that basis our A graders of Swan, Pendles and Cloke have clearly elevated themselves. It's very pick to characterise a Swan who was AA from 2009-13, 5 in a row as being on a slow decline. I don't think you are giving recognition to how hard it is to maintain those levels.

 

[Bard]

I agree that on the stats sheets you'd say, yes, we don't really have players improving once they hit 23/24, and yes it is concerning. But it's not as black or white as that. You have to consider that:

Perhaps our development of players below that age threshold is so good that we get some of these players to their capable levels /before/ they're 24 years old. This means that where at other clubs they would have had small increments of improvement per year, at ours it happened all at the beginning. This of course leads us supporters astray because we expect the improvement to continue, but if they're hitting their supposed limits early then it's pretty acceptable that they won't continue to improve.

Also in previous years, aside from our wayward free agency, how many older players have been in a position where they /should/ improve? Do you mean to say that in 2012 you thought Macaffer or Blair would improve out of sight to be a 40-goal-a-year forward? Wellingham is a curious one, and I think most would have picked him to improve, but he's been curtailed both by injury and a poor frame of mind it's hard to say any club could have gotten more out of him with a high chance.

I personally believe our issue with older players comes down to two things:

- Injuries curtailing their careers prematurely.
- Poor mature-aged talent identification.

One is far more easily remedied than the other. Will Greenwood and Varcoe follow the trend of their recent counterparts, or will we have hit jackpot for once since 2010? Who knows.

 

[Knightmare]

KM I think you are being a little bit too static in your argument and considering individual seasons as their own entity unrelated to the rest of a career

For me a players improves his standing and his career if he can reach say an A grade or elite level and then maintain it. That is very difficult to do and as we have seen with say a Daisy or Mark Murphy or a Scott Selwood etc etc. what makes an Ablett, Swan, Selwood or Judd great ultimately is their continued elite output.

On that basis Cloke and Pendles have clearly grown as players and improved since 2010-11. Even the champs don't just put out season after season of ever improving performance. What sets them apart is their longevity. On that basis our A graders of Swan, Pendles and Cloke have clearly elevated themselves. It's very pick to characterise a Swan who was AA from 2009-13, 5 in a row as being on a slow decline. I don't think you are giving recognition to how hard it is to maintain those levels.

Consistency is critically important, and you want your stars performing to a star level for a number of years but again 2010 was Swan's best season and 2011 Pendlebury's best season. They've all done a terrific job to remain stars of the game for such a long time. But neither have added anything significant to their games since.

I actually consider it that we're failing our stars. Again starting the calculation from 2011. Both Pendlebury and Swan have declined with each season (and in the case of Swan the decline really started after 2010).

The important thing with both players as per the rest of the list of those in the 23+ age group is their games are not evolving and their not continuing to add further tricks or weapons into their arsenal, or those tricks they have attempted to add, it hasn't shown up out on the field to an extent where it's making a meaningful difference.

You have to continue doing what makes you great, but at the same time you also have to keep evolving. Just as LeBron James in the NBA continues to improve his jump shot, why can't Swan and Pendlebury both become stronger marks overhead? Why can't they both improve their conversion in front of goal?

It's a game where if you stay the same, others go past you and that's exactly what has happened, and has been eventuated with the premature declines of our veterans.

I agree that on the stats sheets you'd say, yes, we don't really have players improving once they hit 23/24, and yes it is concerning. But it's not as black or white as that. You have to consider that:

Perhaps our development of players below that age threshold is so good that we get some of these players to their capable levels /before/ they're 24 years old. This means that where at other clubs they would have had small increments of improvement per year, at ours it happened all at the beginning. This of course leads us supporters astray because we expect the improvement to continue, but if they're hitting their supposed limits early then it's pretty acceptable that they won't continue to improve.

Also in previous years, aside from our wayward free agency, how many older players have been in a position where they /should/ improve? Do you mean to say that in 2012 you thought Macaffer or Blair would improve out of sight to be a 40-goal-a-year forward? Wellingham is a curious one, and I think most would have picked him to improve, but he's been curtailed both by injury and a poor frame of mind it's hard to say any club could have gotten more out of him with a high chance.

I personally believe our issue with older players comes down to two things:

- Injuries curtailing their careers prematurely.
- Poor mature-aged talent identification.

One is far more easily remedied than the other. Will Greenwood and Varcoe follow the trend of their recent counterparts, or will we have hit jackpot for once since 2010? Who knows.

It's that black and white because there is zero variance on our list. There isn't even one outlier who goes against the trend of the list. It's that conclusive.

I don't believe in a cap in any players ability. Anyone can continue to improve and add to their games.

Look at Luke Ball in 2011 at the Pies. Everyone I imagine going into 2011 everyone would assume that 2010 was the best season we'd get from him and that it would be all downhill from there and how much longer would he have left to develop? The next season (2011) he comes back and he shows that he can play forward of centre, take some marks and become a deadeye set shot goalkicker. That came from absolutely left field and there was nothing to suggest based on his play prior to this that it would be within his capabilities to achieve this.

So if Luke Ball who couldn't kick 40m at the end of 2009 and could hardly move can get his range back up nearing 50m, get his speed back to reasonable levels and then improve his production both in 2010 then 2011 but then also add further elements to his game. Really it's possible anyone do the same and at least improve one thing to a level where you can notice it.

When such a specific segment within the playing list for a period of years can't do it, it's a major concern.

At the end of 2011 I don't think anyone would look at the state of the list and say "everyone has maxed out". Beams and Sidebottom were always with increased midfield minutes in 2012 going to achieve stronger numbers as 21 year olds.
As for the others I certainly was looking at to improve further. I was expecting a rebound season from Didak for starters who had a poor 2011 season with his footskills not what they were. Wellingham and Dawes as two young players who had shown glimpses naturally you expect improvement from. Macaffer I expected to improve as a forward. Seeing the likes of Brown/N.Riewoldt/Pavlich produce such strong footy in their mid-late 20s I expected further improvement from Cloke which we haven't seen since 2011 with his 2012 and 2014 seasons a large step down. Reid improved rapidly in 2011 and with his rate of improvement and at his young age I was expecting substantially more improvement from with his potential on a level where he could be a historically great centre half back. Dale Thomas with that freakish pressuring 2011 season I expected further improvement from with his contested ball winning and footskills some areas I saw as requiring further growth to complete his game. Pendlebury I saw as needing to further improve his ability overhead and ability forward of centre to be a threat as such a tall midfielder as we've seen Fyfe be able to do, I also expected Pendlebury to develop more of an outside game which actually has gone backward for him with his pace declining.

Regarding the other areas you mention. We have been poor regarding talent identification of opposition list talent, and it's an area we are under-resourced in not having a full timer focused on opposition talent identification. But that's a different issue again and our relative failing from a recruiting perspective.

Regarding injuries they are a significant factor, and it's part of the larger issue that requires fixing, no doubt.

But lots of things internally require fixing and these are among those mix of things that need to improve for our on field fortunes to change and for us to move back into premiership relevance where we all want to see the club return to.

 

[Anzacday]

Unique in style as his game is and as many hitouts as he concedes, there may not be a ruckman in the history of the game to average more disposals per game and play more like an extra midfielder

Martin only played 12 games last year KM.
Pretty small sample size, albeit that he averaged in excess of 22 disposals.
One Jimmy Stynes fits the bill, 264 games and averaged just under 19 disposals

 

[Kirby]

Martin actually did play as an extra midfielder as he is not a ruckman's a-hole. He just doesn't really ruck at all.

This whole argument that none of our senior pl,ayers have improved since 2010 is absolute bull and to suggest that pendles has added nothing to his game since 2011 is ridiculous. He has clearly added a much stronger defensive side to his game whilst maintaining everything else.

 

[PTpie]

Most of our players have added consistency to their game.

I agree we haven't had a "late bloomer" take the AFL by storm like J-Pod, or re-invented someone late in their career like Leon Davis for quite some time.

That doesn't mean that we haven't seen continued improvement in our players. Improvement can be measured in so many different metrics it's not funny. Are we talking numbers? Possessions? DE%? Goals and accuracy? Tackles? What about DI? What about off field development? Completing schooling and gaining qualifications for post footy. What about Life/work balance? Or media training, so our players actually seem reasonably intelligent in interviews nit just dumb footballers.

If you are actually focused on raw numbers I think the decline in older players can also be attributed to the rapid development of our youth. These young blokes aren't gifting easy possessions to Swan and Pendles like GWS and GCS to Ward and Ablett.

I'd rather have our blokes trending this way where our young players are driving the old blokes (who still regularly contribute at elite levels) than an unhealthy reliance on a few aging guys like Geelong, St Kilda and Hawthorn.

 

[Anzacday]

Martin actually did play as an extra midfielder as he is not a ruckman's a-hole. He just doesn't really ruck at all.

He did also average 28 hit-outs in those 12 games, I'm not querying the numbers.
We just need a larger sample size before calling him in a unique role player.

 

[PieLebo87]

Its tricky trying to figure whether its smart recruitment by Hine or good development by the club when it comes to later picks. Collingwood definitely went through a stage where we were the best at developing quality AFL footballers. Geelong have been at the peak of the mountain for a few years and Hawthorn have managed to unearth some quality youngsters in recent years.

As for us -

Rookies and late picks like Toovey, Harry O, Maxwell going back a few years, Goldsack and Blair a short time later, and more recently, guys like Williams, Dwyer, Seedsman, Sinclair are top 22 players or there-abouts is an indication that we are good at developing players.

We've had in influx of first round picks in recent years, so it becomes harder to judge. It is still early to make any predictions or statements about any player we've gotten into the system in the last few years. You need to give a player a couple of seasons in the top flight to see how they manage before judging their development.

 

[TradeDraft]

I agree that on the stats sheets you'd say, yes, we don't really have players improving once they hit 23/24, and yes it is concerning. But it's not as black or white as that. You have to consider that:

Perhaps our development of players below that age threshold is so good that we get some of these players to their capable levels /before/ they're 24 years old. This means that where at other clubs they would have had small increments of improvement per year, at ours it happened all at the beginning. This of course leads us supporters astray because we expect the improvement to continue, but if they're hitting their supposed limits early then it's pretty acceptable that they won't continue to improve.

Also in previous years, aside from our wayward free agency, how many older players have been in a position where they /should/ improve? Do you mean to say that in 2012 you thought Macaffer or Blair would improve out of sight to be a 40-goal-a-year forward? Wellingham is a curious one, and I think most would have picked him to improve, but he's been curtailed both by injury and a poor frame of mind it's hard to say any club could have gotten more out of him with a high chance.

I personally believe our issue with older players comes down to two things:

- Injuries curtailing their careers prematurely.
- Poor mature-aged talent identification.

One is far more easily remedied than the other. Will Greenwood and Varcoe follow the trend of their recent counterparts, or will we have hit jackpot for once since 2010? Who knows.

Very Good Point as out Player when they get to 23/24 are very well Developed compared to other players from other clubs so they have lot less Development to do around that time of the Career then other Prospects

 

[Gone Critical]

Consistency is critically important, and you want your stars performing to a star level for a number of years but again 2010 was Swan's best season and 2011 Pendlebury's best season. They've all done a terrific job to remain stars of the game for such a long time. But neither have added anything significant to their games since.

I actually consider it that we're failing our stars. Again starting the calculation from 2011. Both Pendlebury and Swan have declined with each season (and in the case of Swan the decline really started after 2010).

The important thing with both players as per the rest of the list of those in the 23+ age group is their games are not evolving and their not continuing to add further tricks or weapons into their arsenal, or those tricks they have attempted to add, it hasn't shown up out on the field to an extent where it's making a meaningful difference.

KM I think you are cherry picking facts to try and squeeze them into what is a fairly nonsensical argument. You seem to be placing great store in minor changes to Swan and Pendles stats to claim both are declining as players for the last few seasons. Sorry that is just not a reasonable position, with especially Pendles, who has clearly elevated his standing int the game to a clear top 3-5 player of the competition though that time.

At the same time you argue against 2013 being Clokes best season when statistically it clearly is. You cannot have it both ways. If Pendles and Swan are declining because their stats have dropped marginally then why hasn't Trav had a career best season when his stats improved. You also mentioned the advantage Cloke had in 2013 with Reid beside him from R 15 onwards but if you look at Clokes stats they were clearly more impressive in the 1st half of 2013.

Stats alone are not enough though. In 2010-11 the team was flying , we were winning games by bigger margins, it was a great time to be a mid or KPF. 2012-14 have been harder years to dominate in as the team has declined. The fact that players maintain their game while the team as a whole drops needs consideration.

Others such as Toovey have clearly added to their games in Tooveys case he became more attacking and took the game on. He became a more potent stopper of tall mobile forwards. Sorry to be critical but I think you are trying a bit to hard to make your interpretations fit your theory.

 

[Knightmare]

KM I think you are cherry picking facts to try and squeeze them into what is a fairly nonsensical argument. You seem to be placing great store in minor changes to Swan and Pendles stats to claim both are declining as players for the last few seasons. Sorry that is just not a reasonable position, with especially Pendles, who has clearly elevated his standing int the game to a clear top 3-5 player of the competition though that time.

At the same time you argue against 2013 being Clokes best season when statistically it clearly is. You cannot have it both ways. If Pendles and Swan are declining because their stats have dropped marginally then why hasn't Trav had a career best season when his stats improved. You also mentioned the advantage Cloke had in 2013 with Reid beside him from R 15 onwards but if you look at Clokes stats they were clearly more impressive in the 1st half of 2013.

Stats alone are not enough though. In 2010-11 the team was flying , we were winning games by bigger margins, it was a great time to be a mid or KPF. 2012-14 have been harder years to dominate in as the team has declined. The fact that players maintain their game while the team as a whole drops needs consideration.

Others such as Toovey have clearly added to their games in Tooveys case he became more attacking and took the game on. He became a more potent stopper of tall mobile forwards. Sorry to be critical but I think you are trying a bit to hard to make your interpretations fit your theory.

I'll take the 2011 Cloke over the 2013 Cloke.

In 2011 Cloke had 70 tackles v 29 in 2013. 127 inside 50s v 73 in 2013. 391 disposals v 323 disposals in 2013. 95 contested marks v 58 in 2013. He also had the 11 brownlow votes in 2011 v 6 in 2013. 2011 Cloke for me is the Cloke I'd take with the 2013 Cloke helped by immensely over the second half of the season with the addition of Reid forward and as a result in that time scoreboard impact and consistency of scoreboard impact increased due to being doubled less with Reid a genuine marking target in his own right. He didn't have Reid with him in 2011, instead that season he Chris Dawes who had in fact regressed from the season prior with Dawes' hands overhead not acceptable for a AFL key forward.

Toovey offensively hasn't even improved to a Nick Smith standard. He is still a stopper first, incapable of providing meaningful rebound or finding consistent ball in the back half due to the nature of his negating role. If anything he has regressed slightly with his defensive game going backward and certainly not as strong this past year as it was in years prior. Toovey is a clean enough user of the footy, but he's not running it 40m or kicking it 60m. He isn't even able to find Marley Williams type numbers or provide his level of run and carry from the back half and as such it's not a meaningful progression. In 2011 Toovey cleaned up his disposal so really he is the same player, if slightly worse of a stopper.

Martin only played 12 games last year KM.
Pretty small sample size, albeit that he averaged in excess of 22 disposals.
One Jimmy Stynes fits the bill, 264 games and averaged just under 19 disposals

The closest thing to Stefan Martin is Dean Cox through 2008 season from a possession per game through the ruck perspective. It just speaks to how good Martin was during that period. It's historically good what he was doing. Even better than more recognised players and greats of our game.

Also noteworthy for a completely different reason was Aaron Sandilands achieving the greatest hitout numbers ever achieved over a season and I imagine also per game.

 

[Gone Critical]

I'll take the 2011 Cloke over the 2013 Cloke.

In 2011 Cloke had 70 tackles v 29 in 2013. 127 inside 50s v 73 in 2013. 391 disposals v 323 disposals in 2013. 95 contested marks v 58 in 2013. He also had the 11 brownlow votes in 2011 v 6 in 2013. 2011 Cloke for me is the Cloke I'd take with the 2013 Cloke helped by immensely over the second half of the season with the addition of Reid forward and as a result in that time scoreboard impact and consistency of scoreboard impact increased due to being doubled less with Reid a genuine marking target in his own right. He didn't have Reid with him in 2011, instead that season he Chris Dawes who had in fact regressed from the season prior with Dawes' hands overhead not acceptable for a AFL key forward.

Toovey offensively hasn't even improved to a Nick Smith standard. He is still a stopper first, incapable of providing meaningful rebound or finding consistent ball in the back half due to the nature of his negating role. If anything he has regressed slightly with his defensive game going backward and certainly not as strong this past year as it was in years prior. Toovey is a clean enough user of the footy, but he's not running it 40m or kicking it 60m. He isn't even able to find Marley Williams type numbers or provide his level of run and carry from the back half and as such it's not a meaningful progression. In 2011 Toovey cleaned up his disposal so really he is the same player, if slightly worse of a stopper.



The closest thing to Stefan Martin is Dean Cox through 2008 season from a possession per game through the ruck perspective. It just speaks to how good Martin was during that period. It's historically good what he was doing. Even better than more recognised players and greats of our game.

Also noteworthy for a completely different reason was Aaron Sandilands achieving the greatest hitout numbers ever achieved over a season and I imagine also per game.

Again I would say you are reading to much into stats. In 2013 Cloke took more marks /game , kicked more goals /game. Reality is he had developed into a true dangerous contested marking KPF. 2011 and 2013 are his real standout seasons. Splitting them is hard but in 2011 we had an average winning margin of 10 goals, we won more games, we had more forward entries, our forwards were under less defensive pressure, we kicked bigger scores. It was an easier season for Cloke to dominate than 2013. Not sure why you are reading so much into Reid going forward in 2013 when this coincided with Clokes stats declining from early season ( Disposals R1-14 v R15-EF 15.6 v 13.6, marks 9.5 v 7.6, goals 3.0 v 3.2)

Toovey was not the player he had been in 2014 as he was coming off an ACL and I think it is fair to expect he will be better in 2015. However in 2012 and into 2013 there is no doubt he had grown and developed as a player and had entered the strongest part of his career. I got that by watching him play not by his stats.

Suffice to say I dont agree with your assessment. I don't think your data is strong enough for the claims you are making. Stats can be bent about too easily.

 

[Robroy22]

In 2010-2011 Cloke played mainly as a CHF with Dawes and Brown the other tall targets in our front half. In 2013-2014 he was a FF playing with far less space and often twice as many opponents. Stats are stats unless you see them in the perspective of what's actually happening.

 

[TradeDraft]

Again I would say you are reading to much into stats. In 2013 Cloke took more marks /game , kicked more goals /game. Reality is he had developed into a true dangerous contested marking KPF. 2011 and 2013 are his real standout seasons. Splitting them is hard but in 2011 we had an average winning margin of 10 goals, we won more games, we had more forward entries, our forwards were under less defensive pressure, we kicked bigger scores. It was an easier season for Cloke to dominate than 2013. Not sure why you are reading so much into Reid going forward in 2013 when this coincided with Clokes stats declining from early season ( Disposals R1-14 v R15-EF 15.6 v 13.6, marks 9.5 v 7.6, goals 3.0 v 3.2)

Toovey was not the player he had been in 2014 as he was coming off an ACL and I think it is fair to expect he will be better in 2015. However in 2012 and into 2013 there is no doubt he had grown and developed as a player and had entered the strongest part of his career. I got that by watching him play not by his stats.

Suffice to say I dont agree with your assessment. I don't think your data is strong enough for the claims you are making. Stats can be bent about too easily.

Very True - I remember a few years back when Ablett had about 49 touches against us but the Suns lost by 98 points.

That is a reason how stats can Easily Lie