Opinion 2011 Top 50

[eaglespremiers]

It's meaningless without reference. My point is, having 9 Freo players in the Team of the Day (which is basically what it amounts to) is ridiculous, given how comprehensively they were spanked. Lower was good to great (lots of hard ball, shitty disposal), Sandilands was average-to-good (lots of hitouts to no-one, didn't do much in the first half) and you could probably make a case for 2-3 others like Barlow, Fyfe and Hill.

H. O'Brien, D. Jolly, J. Blair, C. Dawes, B. Sinclair and T. Young all played average or less than average games. Do you agree?

Some particularly confusing ones: Mzungu hit more Collingwood targets than most players in B&W. Crowley got his ass handed to him again and again by Davis, and only got into the game once Davis was subbed off and the game was over.

Having looked at the stats now a 50% disp. eff. and 8 clangers suggests a poor game by Mzungu. Even considering their woeful forward line.
I will drop him down the list.

My analysis of Crowley's game was my assessment that he kept Davis from being particularly devastating. What I seem to be hearing from you and The New Breid is that Davis was great he went off. I know Crowley only dominated in that last quarter but I only rated him that high because of his game on Davis.

So if we drop Mzungu and Crowley to mid-averages any other glaring mistakes?

 

[mdc]

H. O'Brien, D. Jolly, J. Blair, C. Dawes, B. Sinclair and T. Young all played average or less than average games. Do you agree?

Harry was good and Tom Young played a quarter so hard to judge. Agree on the others, and would add Goldsack to the list.

That said, I think we see the game fundamentally differently. In your answer to Barnzy, you almost shrugged off the Freo turnovers or at least you said you only view them as one small part of the picture. To me, they are the picture.

So if we drop Mzungu and Crowley to mid-averages any other glaring mistakes?

It's all a bit academic given this is a top 50 thread and not top 500, but basically, as I've said in the previous post, of the best 22 players I would have either 4 or 5 from Freo, depending on how generous I felt.

 

[eaglespremiers]

It's meaningless without reference. My point is, having 9 Freo players in the Team of the Day (which is basically what it amounts to) is ridiculous, given how comprehensively they were spanked.

FYI, my "team of the day", since you asked for it.

FB: Davis Brown O'Brien
HB: Duffield Reid Johnson
C: Pendlebury Swan Hill
HF: Fyfe Cloke Beams
FF: Didak Woods Krakouer
R: Sandilands Swan Barlow
Int: Sidebottom Broughton Fasolo
Sub: Hinkley

So there would be 15 of 22.
I struggled with putting Sandilands in the ruck but there was really no other option.

 

[eaglespremiers]

That said, I think we see the game fundamentally differently. In your answer to Barnzy, you almost shrugged off the Freo turnovers or at least you said you only view them as one small part of the picture. To me, they are the picture.

To me, that's a bit simplistic.
Say these Fremantle players play ay the standard that they did tonight against, say Melbourne. Because Melbourne's tackling, pressure, defense, efficiency etc... does not match Collingwood's these Fremantle players look a lot better than tonight.
However, things like pressure, defense and efficiency are creations of team strategies rather than all Collingwood individuals playing overwhelmingly better than Fremantle.
To an extent, they do play better. Because they do these 1%s better. And it pleases the coach more. Likely, this makes them more team-orientated. Yet it makes them more even. Less likely to stand out.
Fremantle had some kids throwing everything at Collingwood (Hill, Mzungu, Palmer, Hinkley etc...) yet they were getting little reward for effort.
Also, you are not considering the mediocrity of Fremantle's forward line. Bradley was the only one who had an impact (and only minor). The rest were trying to use their fingers to hold the dam wall at both ends of the ground.
Whereas, nearly all the forwards for Collingwood (excluding Dawes who was underdone) were on song. Even Woods was capitalizing on Fremantle's lack of coverage.

It's all a bit academic given this is a top 50 thread and not top 500

I know, and it would have been easier for me to just put up those who are in the estimations of AG's top 50.
Yet, if my opinion is to be valid occasionally I should test my readings on all the players and not just the top handful in each team.
Usually I don't put everyone up, but sometimes, for reproof, I do.

 

[mdc]

However, things like pressure, defense and efficiency are creations of team strategies rather than all Collingwood individuals playing overwhelmingly better than Fremantle.

Ridiculous. Every team has tried to imitate our strategy, most fail because their players simply can't do it. It's not a coincidence it's always the same players getting the tackles, deflections etc. It's players, it has always been players, and it will always be players.

Also, you are not considering the mediocrity of Fremantle's forward line. .

Nothing to do with their forward line, their backs and mids kicked it straight down the throat of a Collingwood player more than any team we've played in the last 2 years.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Ridiculous. Every team has tried to imitate our strategy, most fail because their players simply can't do it. It's not a coincidence it's always the same players getting the tackles, deflections etc. It's players, it has always been players, and it will always be players

Of course it's players. But you can't attribute your success with it to merely players.

Other teams fail, not because their players can do it any less than Collingwood players (thought they can't) but because their coaching staff are reactive and see a set-up and strategy that a winning team (namely Collingwood) use to exploit (in a good way) other teams inept coaching.

The players work to Malthouse's instructions because if they don't do it they will be dropped (and rightly so). You can do the press and use pressure because it has been drilled into you.

St Kilda were awesome with their pressure (2009-2010) because they stuck to Lyon's tactics. Sure, they had stand-out players (i.e. Hayes, Goddard, Riewoldt, Montagna, Fisher etc) but even their average players worked on unrelenting pressure. It's what made them a fantastic team.

Most teams fail because their don't have coaching staff with the tactical analysis or the training techniques to counter it. By the time they are attempting it on the field (in some sort of cohesion) it has evolved again.

It's a case of implementing these things slowly into a team's understanding of what is expected in a game by an individual. If you try to change your strategy completely you are left with a steep learning curve (and the likelihood of getting belted). Malthouse and Lyon were smart enough to insist on the basics (like tackling) and work on the strategy as an evolving thing.

West Coast are a prime example of this. Last year we were all at sea. Our young players couldn't hit the side of a barn (or the paddock the barn was in). Somehow though even our worst kicks have become reasonably efficient users of the ball this year (Ebert and Smith - though his last two weeks haven't been great). It's not that their disposals have actually got better (though you hope to an extent they have) but more to do with us playing the press than manages to open up space for players to lead/double back/create more space to kick to. Suddenly we've got players (despite limited individual progression) showing what they can do within a team structure.

Similar tactics were destroyed by teams last year because we didn't have the maturity to play a complete team game.

 

[AG]

1 Scott Pendlebury (Collingwood)
2 Chris Judd (Carlton)
3 Gary Ablett (Gold Coast)
4 Sam Mitchell (Hawthorn)
5 Marc Murphy (Carlton)
6 Lance Franklin (Hawthorn)
7 Travis Cloke (Collingwood)
8 Dean Cox (West Coast)
9 Nick Dal Santo (St Kilda)
10 Dane Swan (Collingwood)
11 Scott Thompson (Adelaide)
12 Dale Thomas (Collingwood)
13 Daniel Wells (North Melbourne)
14 Nathan Fyfe (Fremantle)
15 Todd Goldstein (North Melbourne)
16 Matthew Boyd (Western Bulldogs)
17 Matt Priddis (West Coast)
18 Luke McPharlin (Fremantle)
19 James Kelly (Geelong)
20 Ryan Griffen (Western Bulldogs)
21 Luke Ball (Collingwood)
22 Adam Goodes (Sydney)
23 Andrew Swallow (North Melbourne)
24 Heath Scotland (Carlton)
25 Joel Corey (Geelong)
26 Trent Cotchin (Richmond)
27 Sam Fisher (St Kilda)
28 Steve Johnson (Geelong)
29 Leon Davis (Collingwood)
30 Josh Gibson (Hawthorn)
31 Joel Selwood (Geelong)
32 Ben Reid (Collingwood)
33 Corey Enright (Geelong)
34 Jobe Watson (Essendon)
35 Brett Deledio (Richmond)
36 Bryce Gibbs (Carlton)
37 Drew Petrie (North Melbourne)
38 Matthew Scarlett (Geelong)
39 Ryan O'Keefe (Sydney)
40 Brad Sewell (Hawthorn)
41 Simon Black (Brisbane)
42 Nathan Bock (Gold Coast)
43 Luke Hodge (Hawthorn)
44 Jack Redden (Brisbane)
45 Matthew Pavlich (Fremantle)
46 Jimmy Bartel (Geelong)
47 Ben Rutten (Adelaide)
48 Josh Kennedy (Sydney)
49 Robert Murphy (Western Bulldogs)
50 Chris Tarrant (Collingwood)

Estimate at this stage. This will probably be the last year I do this because it feels pointless due to me not watching enough. Watched 2 other games last week. Missed last nights game. I'm not in a position to argue for and against players anymore.

Moved some players around. Scotland felt too high, Goodes too low. I'm happy with the top 16 (order can change). It's the middle part that is hard.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Estimate at this stage. This will probably be the last year I do this because it feels pointless due to me not watching enough. Watched 2 other games last week. Missed last nights game. I'm not in a position to argue for and against players anymore.

Moved some players around. Scotland felt too high, Goodes too low. I'm happy with the top 16 (order can change). It's the middle part that is hard.

Priorities AG priorities.
Anyway you don't have to catch last night's game to comment upon it. Apparently you can just look at the stats sheet.

I'd probably drop Judd to 3 and somehow bring Thompson into the top 10. IMO he sits in the top 10 much better than Nicky Dal.

 

[eaglespremiers]

From Dogs v Hawks:

Tier 1 (excellent):
L. Hodge - fantastic four quarter effort. Particularly in the early stages where the game was up for grabs.

Tier 2 (great):
L. Franklin - could've kicked more goals and was dominant. Capitalised from good work up the field.
Kicked an amazing goal in the first though.
B. Sewell - great as always. Picked up some of the Mitchell slack.

Tier 3 (good):
R. Griffen - never really got into his groove but still a pretty effectual game.
M. Boyd - I've seen better games from Boyd. A few turnovers hurt him.
R. Murphy - not bad in parts but, again, a few really bad turnovers.

Tier 4 (average):
J. Gibson - unfortunately one of the few Hawks beaten by his direct opponent. Hall kicked four on him. He wasn't far from breaking even though.

My votes probably would be something like:
5. L. Hodge
4. P. Puopolo
3. B. Sewell
2. L. Franklin
1. M. Boyd

From the Geel v Syd game:
Mumford was awesome. That is all.

 

[grab]

From Dogs v Hawks:

From the Geel v Syd game:
Mumford was awesome. That is all.

Can you please do your excellent great, good, average lists for this game too as it would be really good (great/excellent/average?) to see for when I am making my top 50

 

[eaglespremiers]

Can you please do your excellent great, good, average lists for this game too as it would be really good (great/excellent/average?) to see for when I am making my top 50

Since you ask so nicely:

Tier 1 (excellent):
Mumford
Goodes

Tier 2 (great):
Bolton
Bartel
Kelly
O'Keefe
Ling
Chapman

Tier 3 (good):
Enright
Selwood
Scarlett
Kennedy

They're probably the only ones you need for your top 50.

 

[Barnzy]

O'Keefe had 24 disposals (14 contested) and 11 clearances. I would have him a level higher at least. Especially when you have Kennedy in that same tier who only had 10 touches and 2 clearances. Had 12 tackles but not sure that saves him. Ling beat him convincingly.

 

[eaglespremiers]

O'Keefe had 11 clearances. I would have him a level higher. Especially when you have Kennedy in that same tier who only had 10 touches and 2 clearances. Had 12 tackles but not sure that saves him.

All fixed, thanks.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Oh and Tier 5 (poor):
S. Johnson - really bad.

 

[eaglespremiers]

From Brisbane v WCE. The bolded are the ones within top 50 contention.

Tier 1 (excellent):
C. Masten - yep that's right.

Tier 2 (great):
T. Rockliff
M. Leuenberger
N. Naitanui
D. Glass
D. Rich
L. Shuey
A. Gaff

Tier 3 (good):
S. Black
M. Priddis
J. Redden
P. Hanley
J. Drummond
A. Raines
S. Selwood
B. Waters

Tier 4 (average):
W. Schofield
Q. Lynch
J. Adcock
J. Polkinghorne
L. Power
A. Selwood
E. Mackenzie
P. McGinnity
M. LeCras
A. Hams
M. Golby
M. Nicoski
S. Hurn
C. Stiller
A. Cornelius
B. Ebert
M. Maguire
D. Cox
P. Karnezis

Tier 5 (poor):
B. Retzlaff
S. Sheldon
A. Embley
T. Banfield
J. Kennedy
A. MCGrath
A. Smith
B. Staker

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

I don't know how Matthew Boyd can be so high up in anyones list. The boys on Triple M were saying he rarely hurts opposition teams, because his kicking efficiency is at 50% this year. Watching him up close today, he made ordinary decisions and turned the ball over reguarly.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Best for the Hawks in order were:

1. Hodge
2. Franklin
3. Puopolo
4. Birchall
5. Sewell

 

[eaglespremiers]

Here's an update of what I believe the WC B&F will look something like:

In Top 50:
1. D. Cox
2. M. Priddis
Out:
3. D. Glass
4. L. Shuey
5. S. Hurn
6. N. Naitanui
7. D. Kerr
8. S. Selwood
9. J. Kennedy
10. M. LeCras
Others: A. Embley & Q. Lynch

Or something like that.

 

[Slattery_20]

I don't know how Matthew Boyd can be so high up in anyones list. The boys on Triple M were saying he rarely hurts opposition teams, because his kicking efficiency is at 50% this year. Watching him up close today, he made ordinary decisions and turned the ball over reguarly.

He is just not damaging. When the stats went up at 1/2 & 3/4 time I was amazed to see him up there. Just a cog in a machine that's not going all that well; he doesn't take it on or create with hands like a Judd or Watson.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

My top 10 would go like this

1. Franklin
2. Pendlebury
3. Swan
4. Mitchell
5. Murphy
6. Judd
7. Ablett
8. Cox
9. Thompson
10. Cloke

 

[eaglespremiers]

My top 10 would go like this

1. Franklin
2. Pendlebury
3. Swan
4. Mitchell
5. Murphy
6. Judd
7. Ablett
8. Cox
9. Thompson
10. Cloke

Some bias but I'll allow it.
Although I don't think Swan should be ahead of Mitchell, Judd and Ablett.
Unbelievable last month, great first four games but nothing to write home about in between.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Some bias but I'll allow it.
Although I don't think Swan should be ahead of Mitchell, Judd and Ablett.
Unbelievable last month, great first four games but nothing to write home about in between.

No bias, Buddy has been outstanding. A forward hasn't put up the kind of numbers he has put up this season since Carey. 19.2 possessions per game, 6.4 marks per game, 3.7 goals per game, several BOGs and in our best 5 frequently. What more can he do?

 

[eaglespremiers]

No bias, Buddy has been outstanding. A forward hasn't put up the kind of numbers he has put up this season since Carey. 19.2 possessions per game, 6.4 marks per game, 3.7 goals per game, several BOGs and in our best 5 frequently. What more can he do?

He could kick straight.
And I'm pretty sure Carey averaged over 1.7 contested marks a game.
Don't get me wrong, I love Buddy but I'm not convinced he's even the best forward this year.
That being said, here's hoping he smacks the daylights out of the finals series.

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

He could kick straight.
And I'm pretty sure Carey averaged over 1.7 contested marks a game.
Don't get me wrong, I love Buddy but I'm not convinced he's even the best forward this year.
That being said, here's hoping he smacks the daylights out of the finals series.

He averages 3.7 goals and 2.8 behinds, and considering he takes a lot of shots on the run and from 45+ out on hard angles, it hasn't been bad. I dunno, each to their own, but I can't see how you could ask for more than 19 touches, 6 marks ( 1.1 contested marks per game ) and nearly 4 goals a game, from a guy who doesn't play a traditional FF role.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d1=1488&tid2=5&pid2=1521&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S

 

[eaglespremiers]

He averages 3.7 goals and 2.8 behinds, and considering he takes a lot of shots on the run and from 45+ out on hard angles, it hasn't been bad. I dunno, each to their own, but I can't see how you could ask for more than 19 touches, 6 marks ( 1.1 contested marks per game ) and nearly 4 goals a game, from a guy who doesn't play a traditional FF role.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d1=1488&tid2=5&pid2=1521&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S

Very few forwards play traditional full forward roles these days.
He is still, for the greater part, a key forward and I'm not too concerned about how many disposals a game he is getting.