Player Watch #24: Tom Powell - signed thru 2028

[7577969923]

Lol “pass to larkey” .. okay.

If thats all you saw you must have been drifting in n out of consciousness during the replay because even without the replay I have more butchered footy in my memory

I watched and noted every disposal. But sure, your memory is probably far superior.

 

[DuckYeah]

I watched and noted every disposal. But sure, your memory is probably far superior.

Im probably 30 years younger, you’re not wrong

 

[7577969923]

Im probably 30 years younger, you’re not wrong

Yeah, but you were probably shitfaced.

 

[DuckYeah]

Yeah, but you were probably shitfaced.

Impossible. Had one better beer middy. Don’t drink any more. You said you took notes on all his possessions, did you hand write these with time stamps? Or was it just a “vibe” thing like Charlie has? Because old mates vibe said Dyl Stephens was shit and he collected coaches votes

 

[7577969923]

Impossible. Had one better beer middy. Don’t drink any more. You said you took notes on all his possessions, did you hand write these with time stamps? Or was it just a “vibe” thing like Charlie has? Because old mates vibe said Dyl Stephens was shit and he collected coaches votes

I've watched the game three times and took handwritten notes on all of Powell's possessions on the third viewing. You claimed his only good kick was a lace-out pass to Duursma. Our very first score came from a lace-out pass to Zurhaar, so it really does appear that your memory is shit and you're watching Tom with whipping boy goggles on.

 

[JZTIME!]

While he didn't have a great game he wasn't as bad as some are making out. His season has been good.
So far it is as follows, rated:

Elite for Kicks and Marks and goal assists
Above Average for Disposals, tackles, Clearances, intercepts, score involvements, score launches, shots at goal and inside 50s.

Finds space and plays his role well. Just needs to kicks straighter. Anyway those are just stats I know but he can play multiple roles. We have nobody in the VFL that can do the above better so get used to him playing

 

[Themanbun]

I've been critical of Powell, even copped shit on here for it. But sometimes we tend to go over the top with criticism once enough people notice it.

There's plenty of room in even the best sides for a 20+ disposal player who can do a satisfactory job on multiple lines, and can on occasion break a game open. Not as often as we'd like but many players go their whole careers without doing that.

My main issue with his place in the side has been is lack of defensive intent and hardness at the footy. He sorts that out and he's a bench player at a minimum.

 

[FootySmartSimpson]

They were vanilla 15 metre hanballs...

Madagascan vanilla bean.

 

[DuckYeah]

I've watched the game three times and took handwritten notes on all of Powell's possessions on the third viewing. You claimed his only good kick was a lace-out pass to Duursma. Our very first score came from a lace-out pass to Zurhaar, so it really does appear that your memory is shit and you're watching Tom with whipping boy goggles on.

Screen shot your notes and post them

 

[Souup]

Would love a breakdown of how this stat works. Also where do you get it?

I am finding a lot of the newer metrics are significantly flawed and are more suited to a sport like baseball.

This is how I would rank each possession based on traffic lights. I should do this for a few others as well. I think LDU and Sheez would rack up a lot of 50/50 contest kicks.

- Green - positive
- Orange - neutral
- Red - Negative

** Kicks to player resulting in 50/50 contest shoukd include medium-long kick
View attachment 2575077

You can find it from the stats website Wheelo.

It measures how much a player improves their team's chances to score based on where they have the ball on the field and how they help progress the play. It takes into account pressure, field position, options available to the player with the ball etc.

Essentially:
Effective, attacking kick = positive
Safe, sideways touch = small positive/neutral
Turnover = negative
Missed easy shot on goal = negative
Taking ground/running with the footy up the field (either by run and carry or ball use) = positive

It takes into consideration where the actual touch happens:
A turnover inside defensive 50 = big negative equity
A turnover deep inside your forward 50 = still negative but not as much

But then a safe long kick down the line to a contest when there's a better option available = negative equity

Champion Data don't give a full explanation on exactly what every possession does from an equity point of view because each touch has its own context, but in essence, its their attempt to provide something more helpful than something like disposal efficiency.

It's not going to be perfect, but it's a really bloody good gauge and I've found it aligns well with the eye test.

They have a ball winning stat too which tries to do the same thing but about how/where a player wins the ball (so takes into account pressure, proximity of other players, contested marks vs. uncontested, field position etc. - so a kick out gives you nothing, a handball receive gives you a bit, but a contested pack mark in your defensive 50 or a clean pick up under a lot of pressure in an important area are worth gold)

 

[7577969923]

Screen shot your notes and post them

You think I'm lying about taking notes? GAGF

 

[DuckYeah]

You think I'm lying about taking notes? GAGF

I want to see what you wrote to compare when I watch.

 

[7577969923]

I want to see what you wrote to compare when I watch.

It would be pretty meaningless to you, as it is all in shorthand and abbreviations, and my handwriting is appalling. if you really want to compare, here's my summary:

5 handballs - all very good and creative with significant involvement in scoring chains
6 kicks that either weren't deep in the forward pocket or under extreme pressure. These resulted in two perfect hit-ups of leading forwards, another good forward kick to a target in the F50 that didn't come off, one clean pass from CHB to LMAC on the flank, one kick smothered by the man on the mark on the HBF, one missed set shot at goal from 25 out, and the other point he kicked, which may or may not have been an attempted pass to Larkey.
The rest of his kicks included two chips to the top of the square from deep in the pocket, which I assume would be team instructions. He had no time or space to create with any other kick.

Like I have pointed out several times, I'm not arguing he had a great game, or even that he had a great game with the ball in hand. I am arguing that the narrative that he was terrible with his disposal is completely overblown.

I would also point out that in a team that has struggled with the connection between mids and forwards, Tom is one of our better exponents (I would say currently better than most of the first-choice midfielders). I would be happy to bet that the conversation he has with the coaches this week is not an evisceration of his ball use.

 

[JZTIME!]

It would be pretty meaningless to you, as it is all in shorthand and abbreviations, and my handwriting is appalling. if you really want to compare, here's my summary:

5 handballs - all very good and creative with significant involvement in scoring chains
6 kicks that either weren't deep in the forward pocket or under extreme pressure. These resulted in two perfect hit-ups of leading forwards, another good forward kick to a target in the F50 that didn't come off, one clean pass from CHB to LMAC on the flank, one kick smothered by the man on the mark on the HBF, one missed set shot at goal from 25 out, and the other point he kicked, which may or may not have been an attempted pass to Larkey.
The rest of his kicks included two chips to the top of the square from deep in the pocket, which I assume would be team instructions. He had no time or space to create with any other kick.

Like I have pointed out several times, I'm not arguing he had a great game, or even that he had a great game with the ball in hand. I am arguing that the narrative that he was terrible with his disposal is completely overblown.

I would also point out that in a team that has struggled with the connection between mids and forwards, Tom is one of our better exponents (I would say currently better than most of the first-choice midfielders). I would be happy to bet that the conversation he has with the coaches this week is not an evisceration of his ball use.

As i stated earlier. He is elite or above average in a lot of metrics. He is whipping boy for so many and we are winning. Go figure

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

You obviously missed the replay. The vibe of his game was good. stats are rubbish, its just about the vibe..





The Vibe I had was he was awful and only Konstanty is a worse performer with ball in hand. Was downright filthy.

Don't be deliberately obtuse, it's childish and I know you're not an idiot

 

[DuckYeah]

Don't be deliberately obtuse, it's childish and I know you're not an idiot

Only if you acknowledge Dylan Stephens played a good game?

 

[Moti]

You can find it from the stats website Wheelo.

It measures how much a player improves their team's chances to score based on where they have the ball on the field and how they help progress the play. It takes into account pressure, field position, options available to the player with the ball etc.

Essentially:
Effective, attacking kick = positive
Safe, sideways touch = small positive/neutral
Turnover = negative
Missed easy shot on goal = negative
Taking ground/running with the footy up the field (either by run and carry or ball use) = positive

It takes into consideration where the actual touch happens:
A turnover inside defensive 50 = big negative equity
A turnover deep inside your forward 50 = still negative but not as much

But then a safe long kick down the line to a contest when there's a better option available = negative equity

Champion Data don't give a full explanation on exactly what every possession does from an equity point of view because each touch has its own context, but in essence, its their attempt to provide something more helpful than something like disposal efficiency.

It's not going to be perfect, but it's a really bloody good gauge and I've found it aligns well with the eye test.

They have a ball winning stat too which tries to do the same thing but about how/where a player wins the ball (so takes into account pressure, proximity of other players, contested marks vs. uncontested, field position etc. - so a kick out gives you nothing, a handball receive gives you a bit, but a contested pack mark in your defensive 50 or a clean pick up under a lot of pressure in an important area are worth gold)

Thanks. Not sure I have the headspace to learn another stat algorithm but always good to see the game getting more attention

 

[7577969923]

As i stated earlier. He is elite or above average in a lot of metrics. He is whipping boy for so many and we are winning. Go figure

When you watch the game with the whipping boy goggles on, they filter out a lot of the play.

 

[Chadwiko]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about Powell with some of you posters.

I know your intentions are honourable and honest, but when confronted with pretty overwhelming stats that suggest Powell was poor (and not just one individual stat, but multiple advanced analytics), combined with the fact that a majority of posters came into this thread after the game and expressed their opinions about how Powell was poor... for you to turn around and basically go "yeah but I watched the game and I like Powell so you're wrong" is kind of ridiculous.

Like, I'm sorry... I'm not trying to suggest Champion Data are perfect and unimpeachable, nor am I trying to suggest that the AFL stats are the start-and-end of a story.

But cmon folks. Take off the biased goggles and look at reality.

Against Carlton, Powell's key stats included;

• "Disposal Efficiency" (where Powell went at 50% for the entire game)
• "Clangers" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players on 7)
• "Turnovers" (where Powell was 2nd worst out of all NMFC players)
• "Meters Gained" (Where Powell was the 5th worst out of all NMFC players, despite Powell playing 73% TOG as a half-forward flank)
• "Frees Against" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players)
• etc etc

It's okay to admit when one of your favourite players has a bad game - I did it with Toby Pink this week! - but to deny reality or stick your head in the sand does no one any favours.

 

[shinboner magic]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about Powell with some of you posters.

I know your intentions are honourable and honest, but when confronted with pretty overwhelming stats that suggest Powell was poor (and not just one individual stat, but multiple advanced analytics), combined with the fact that a majority of posters came into this thread after the game and expressed their opinions about how Powell was poor... for you to turn around and basically go "yeah but I watched the game and I like Powell so you're wrong" is kind of ridiculous.

Like, I'm sorry... I'm not trying to suggest Champion Data are perfect and unimpeachable, nor am I trying to suggest that the AFL stats are the start-and-end of a story.

But cmon folks. Take off the biased goggles and look at reality.

Against Carlton, Powell's key stats included;

• "Disposal Efficiency" (where Powell went at 50% for the entire game)
• "Clangers" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players on 7)
• "Turnovers" (where Powell was 2nd worst out of all NMFC players)
• "Meters Gained" (Where Powell was the 5th worst out of all NMFC players, despite Powell playing 73% TOG as a half-forward flank)
• "Frees Against" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players)
• etc etc

It's okay to admit when one of your favourite players has a bad game - I did it with Toby Pink this week! - but to deny reality or stick your head in the sand does no one any favours.

Go read the Phillips thread ffs

Yes I think we drop all Guys that had 8 score involvements.

People think Powell needs to be a superstar to stay in the side.

 

[hotchilli]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about Powell with some of you posters.

I know your intentions are honourable and honest, but when confronted with pretty overwhelming stats that suggest Powell was poor (and not just one individual stat, but multiple advanced analytics), combined with the fact that a majority of posters came into this thread after the game and expressed their opinions about how Powell was poor... for you to turn around and basically go "yeah but I watched the game and I like Powell so you're wrong" is kind of ridiculous.

Like, I'm sorry... I'm not trying to suggest Champion Data are perfect and unimpeachable, nor am I trying to suggest that the AFL stats are the start-and-end of a story.

But cmon folks. Take off the biased goggles and look at reality.

Against Carlton, Powell's key stats included;

• "Disposal Efficiency" (where Powell went at 50% for the entire game)
• "Clangers" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players on 7)
• "Turnovers" (where Powell was 2nd worst out of all NMFC players)
• "Meters Gained" (Where Powell was the 5th worst out of all NMFC players, despite Powell playing 73% TOG as a half-forward flank)
• "Frees Against" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players)
• etc etc

It's okay to admit when one of your favourite players has a bad game - I did it with Toby Pink this week! - but to deny reality or stick your head in the sand does no one any favours.

You do understand that you are very much a major part of the problem it’s difficult to have a discussion around Powell.

Nobody has argued Powell had a great game, some people have at least been able to acknowledge that there were also some positive contributions that he made to the game that do offset some of the negatives that you choose to only focus on.

 

[Moti]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about Powell with some of you posters.

I know your intentions are honourable and honest, but when confronted with pretty overwhelming stats that suggest Powell was poor (and not just one individual stat, but multiple advanced analytics), combined with the fact that a majority of posters came into this thread after the game and expressed their opinions about how Powell was poor... for you to turn around and basically go "yeah but I watched the game and I like Powell so you're wrong" is kind of ridiculous.

Like, I'm sorry... I'm not trying to suggest Champion Data are perfect and unimpeachable, nor am I trying to suggest that the AFL stats are the start-and-end of a story.

But cmon folks. Take off the biased goggles and look at reality.

Against Carlton, Powell's key stats included;

• "Disposal Efficiency" (where Powell went at 50% for the entire game)
• "Clangers" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players on 7)
• "Turnovers" (where Powell was 2nd worst out of all NMFC players)
• "Meters Gained" (Where Powell was the 5th worst out of all NMFC players, despite Powell playing 73% TOG as a half-forward flank)
• "Frees Against" (where Powell was the worst out of all NMFC players)
• etc etc

It's okay to admit when one of your favourite players has a bad game - I did it with Toby Pink this week! - but to deny reality or stick your head in the sand does no one any favours.

When you fundamentally disagree with the way the stats are created, why would you care what they say?

Also, if you could add context, why wouldn't you?

His free kicks as an example, one was because a player ducked and should have been play on, one was an errant arm so fair, the other was a direct result from LDU making a poor deciison to handball and him getting whacked as a result. Why would I care he had 2 of the 3 frees against then?

Turnovers, again only 1 went to an opposition player directly and even that was centering the ball from 40m away. If someone kicks directly to the opposition 4 times streaming out of defence, that mans they had a better game?

I am not sure whether you ever played the game, it sounds like maybe just on the PlayStation, but judging performance on stats alone is a pretty simple mans pursuit.

 

[Chadwiko]

Go read the Phillips thread ffs

RIP our king.

Yes I think we drop all Guys that had 8 score involvements.

Thanks for proving my point.

But to address your claim directly;
Powell did have 8 score involvements, but only 1 goal assist. From a half-forward.

Seriously, look at his player map from this week's game and where he got his hands on the ball;



Do you understand how difficult it is for a player to have 17 possessions within 70m~ of your own goals, but have zero goals and only 1 goal assist?

When you consider that of those 8 score involvements, 2 include his own missed shots on goal, 2 include wide open kicks to Zurhaar and Duursma, and the rest are just where he's touched the ball three or four possessions before an eventual shot on goal, it looks a little less impressive, no?

People think Powell needs to be a superstar to stay in the side.

I haven't seen anyone say that. It's certainly not what I've said.

I just don't think it is unfair to say that a midfielder or HFF who goes at 50% DE, with 7 clangers and 5 turnovers from 13 kicks has had a poor game and should be in danger of being dropped.

And let's face it; Powell is trending in the wrong direction over a sustained period of time now.

Look at his "player rating" trend for the last three years over on Wheelo Ratings (which just parses Champion Data analytics):

 

[7577969923]

Go read the Phillips thread ffs

Yes I think we drop all Guys that had 8 score involvements.

People think Powell needs to be a superstar to stay in the side.

Some posters lack self-awareness, mischaracterise others' arguments, and then quote selective stats out of context.

 

[Chadwiko]

Some posters lack self-awareness, mischaracterise others' arguments, and then quote selective stats out of context.

And other posters just go "Yeah nah, I like Powell".