Opinion 2011 Top 50

[jonesy86]

Ben Reid goes up after tonight IMO

Gets subbed off at 3/4 time and Lions bang on 7gls in last qtr.

 

[hawks_time]

Gets subbed off at 3/4 time and Lions bang on 7gls in last qtr.

Correlation doesn't equal causation.

 

[AG]

Goodes brilliant, so he'll move up. O'Keefe was ok, Bolton quiet again. Richards BOG imo and I had Kennedy 6th best for us.

Kennedy/Richards are right on the edge of the 50. I'd nearly have both ahead of Bolton now so there could be some reshuffling with the Swans rankings.

Fisher good in the 1st half but Goodes ended up getting on top. Dal Santo quiet by his standards. That's probably it for the Saints. McEvoy and Montagna were probably the next two in line and they were both woeful.

 

[lozza63]

Goodes brilliant, so he'll move up. O'Keefe was ok, Bolton quiet again. Richards BOG imo and I had Kennedy 6th best for us.

Kennedy/Richards are right on the edge of the 50. I'd nearly have both ahead of Bolton now so there could be some reshuffling with the Swans rankings.

Fisher good in the 1st half but Goodes ended up getting on top. Dal Santo quiet by his standards. That's probably it for the Saints. McEvoy and Montagna were probably the next two in line and they were both woeful.

AG where do you rate Mummy? For mine he was BOG today and must be closing in on a Swans spot?

 

[AG]

Missed too many games and not dominant enough to compensate. He didn't do much in the middle of the year with the injury and took time to get going.

Kennedy will probably come in for Bolton. Richards very close.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Can't seperate the top four.
Judd was average, Mitchell slightly better.
Ablett was great, Pendlebury good.
If it was me I'd leave them at =1 unless someone has a blinding two games (or Judd has a brilliant last game).
Can't really see anything between them and all would be deserving no. 1.

 

[mdc]

Can't seperate the top four.
Judd was average, Mitchell slightly better.
Ablett was great, Pendlebury good.
If it was me I'd leave them at =1 unless someone has a blinding two games (or Judd has a brilliant last game).
Can't really see anything between them and all would be deserving no. 1.

I enjoy reading your posts ep, but your Judd bias is strong here. He had a worse game than Ablett or Pendlebury have had in 2 years. Mitchell wasn't great, but he was much, much better than a woeful Judd.

 

[AG]

1. Ablett
2. Pendlebury
3. Murphy
4. Mitchell
5. Judd

If I had said the week prior the top 5 were pretty much level, then that's probably the only option I have.

6. Franklin
7. Cloke
8. Cox
9. Dal Santo
10. Thompson
11. Thomas
12. Swan
13/14/15. Wells/Fyfe/Goldstein
16. Boyd

Has Boyd overtaken Griffen now Dogs posters?

Might not have time to do the full list this week.

 

[eaglespremiers]

I enjoy reading your posts ep, but your Judd bias is strong here. He had a worse game than Ablett or Pendlebury have had in 2 years. Mitchell wasn't great, but he was much, much better than a woeful Judd.

We've all got to have bias, it's what makes us interesting.
I'm happy to substitute poor instead of average (FYI, that's what I meant when I said "average").
Was unimpressed with Judd, Mitchell, Murphy and Gibbs on Friday night.
Lewis was pretty awesome tag-teaming Judd. Judd still had 5 clearances, 8 contested disposals and an 80% DE (which he hasn't achieved all year).
Had no influence on the game but was certainly not the worst out there. Was certainly his worst this year.

Also in regards to the "2 years" I seem to recall Pendlebury not playing well against St Kilda early last year when you didn't kick a goal in the second half. Can't remember if he was as bad as Judd was Friday night but was certainly not an impressive game. Not making excuses for Judd and as I alluded to I'd be happy for any of the top 4 to be no. 1.

 

[MR]

Martin should be back in the mix. He has dominated the entire year and has nearly ran out of fuel. He had a huge game this week, (21 possies, 3 goals, 7 i50.) Alex Rance would also be unlucky to miss out. His last half of this season has been exceptional.

 

[Barnzy]

I wouldn't have Martin in. Too many down games lately which has dropped him down (perfectable understandable). Still in unluckies though and on the fringe of the 50. 22 disposals a game and around 30 goals so far is amazing for 2nd year player. Rance has been good but wouldn't have him in either. Next year will be in though for sure.

 

[Roobs321]

Redden not making the 50 is a blight on this list. Has had a better season than a number of players in there.

 

[TigerTime88]

Would think Riewoldt although down on last year is still in the top 50 players given he sits 2nd on the goal tally and has more GA's than last year!

Martin would also be unlucky given he has kicked over 30 goals and averages 22 touches. Ecspecially given names like O'Keefe are in ahead.

 

[AG]

Lids and Cotchin only Richmond players worthy imo.

Riewoldt will be lucky to finish top 5 in your B&F.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Some thoughts from tonight's game. Hope I remembered everyone.
I'm sure there will be differing opinions. We all miss certain perspectives.
If you think I've placed someone in the wrong category feel free (as I'm sure you will ) to let me know:

Tier 1 (excellent):
N. Lower
D. Swan

Tier 2 (great):
D. Beams
S. Pendlebury
A. Didak
T. Cloke
D. Thomas
S. Hill
B. Reid
T. Mzunga

Tier 3 (good):
B. Johnson
M. Barlow
A. Krakouer
N. Fyfe
L. Brown
S. Sidebottom
P. Duffield
R. Crowley
L. Davis
A. Sandilands
G. Broughton
C. Wood
T. Goldsack

Tier 4 (average):
R. Palmer
N. Suban
A. Fasolo
C. Hinkley
Z. Clarke
H. O'Brien
C. Pearce
D. Jolly
J. Blair
C. Mayne
K. Bradley
J. Anthony
L. McPharlin
B. Schammer

Tier 5 (poor):
C. Dawes
B. Sinclair
P. Faulks
G. Ibbotson
T. Young

 

[The New Breid]

Can't see too much wrong with it. Drop Thomas down and bump Davis up, IMO.

 

[mdc]

eaglespremier, come on now. Looking at your rankings we must have just scraped over the line tonight.

Not going to go through each one, but the really egregious errors imo:
Pendles (equal BOG) and >>>>> Lower (even if you don't consider his dog act)
Mzungu was hilariously bad.
Hill (and Didak actually) were nowhere near great, mediocre to good for both.

Many, many Freo players qualified for the poor category tonight, unless you don't care about disposal at all (which maybe you don't, judging by the Judd love )

 

[eaglespremiers]

eaglespremier, come on now. Looking at your rankings we must have just scraped over the line tonight.

It wasn't as one-sided as the score suggested.
Sure the game was over pretty early but there were Dockers players who had reasonable games.
IMO, 14 out of the top 23 for Collingwood sits about right for mind.

Pendlebury>Lower smacks of bias also . Can't agree with you on that one.
I particularly liked Hill's game and pretty happy with where he is.
Perhaps Didak and Mzunga can slip.

Now, mdc, I didn't take Thomas' dog act into consideration so I'm happy not to take Lower's. He was epic around the contests and I think he or Swan would be deserving BOG.

Here's my updated list from your comments:

Tier 1 (excellent):
N. Lower
D. Swan

Tier 2 (great):
D. Beams
S. Pendlebury
T. Cloke
B. Reid
S. Hill

Tier 3 (good):
D. Thomas
B. Johnson
M. Barlow
A. Didak
L. Davis
A. Krakouer
N. Fyfe
L. Brown
S. Sidebottom
T. Mzunga
P. Duffield
R. Crowley
A. Sandilands
G. Broughton
C. Wood
T. Goldsack

Tier 4 (average):
R. Palmer
N. Suban
A. Fasolo
C. Hinkley
Z. Clarke
H. O'Brien
D. Jolly
C. Pearce
J. Blair
L. McPharlin

Tier 5 (poor):
C. Mayne
K. Bradley
J. Anthony
B. Schammer
C. Dawes
B. Sinclair
P. Faulks
G. Ibbotson
T. Young

 

[mdc]

It wasn't as one-sided as the score suggested.

It was far more one-sided than the score suggested. Freo get points for effort, but we shut things down late in the 3rd. It was heading for a 130 point game.

Pendlebury>Lower smacks of bias also . Can't agree with you on that one.

Champion Data has him BOG by a mile. Basically all their stats are similar, except Lower had 8 clangers, and Pendlebury had 0.

Now, mdc, I didn't take Thomas' dog act into consideration so I'm happy not to take Lower's.

Thomas' was an act of stupidity. Lower took out a guy with his head over the ball. Tiny difference, no?

In any case, each to their own, but you asked for comment so I thought I'd put my 2c in.

 

[Barnzy]

It wasn't as one-sided as the score suggested.

Oh dear.

Someone didn't watch the game and just looked at the stats sheet.

 

[eaglespremiers]

It was far more one-sided than the score suggested. Freo get points for effort, but we shut things down late in the 3rd. It was heading for a 130 point game.

Well I have 14 of your guys in the excellent - good category. Does that seem fair?

Champion Data has him BOG by a mile. Basically all their stats are similar, except Lower had 8 clangers, and Pendlebury had 0.

My remarks and rankings are based on watching the game and not using champion data. I'm happy for you to quote champion data at me but I thought Pendlebury wasn't in the top 3 players on the ground in terms of impact on the game. Halfway through the second quarter I thought to myself, "gee, Pendlebury's having an off day". He got significantly better but BOG I did not think so. Thought Swan was the influential player when it mattered.

Thomas' was an act of stupidity. Lower took out a guy with his head over the ball. Tiny difference, no?

Not sure if I agree with this assessment. Thought both seemed pretty incidental. Both players could have a sit on the sidelines for their actions but both choices seemed to be split second decisions rather than malicious plans to hurt opponents.

In any case, each to their own, but you asked for comment so I thought I'd put my 2c in.

And I certainly appreciate your criticisms.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Oh dear.

Someone didn't watch the game and just looked at the stats sheet.

Are you talking about me?
I watched the whole game.
Sure, Collingwood were hitting the scoreboard more effectively and Fremantle were very fumbly under pressure (which was nearly all the time). However, their players weren't overly bad around the stoppages. Sure, they turned it over. But this seemed to be more due to the pressure of the Collingwood mids and the superiority of their backmen (and the lack of key forwards for Freo).
When the Pies players got it they used it much better than their Freo counterparts. However, I believe this was due very much to the overlap provided by those running by (usually Swan, Beams, Thomas, Pendlebury, Johnson, Sidebottom etc...).
Even though the scoreboard was one-sided (and probably flattered Freo in the end) it did feel like Fremantle were competitive for large patches of the game - in certain parts of the ground. But, as Collingwood do, this can still mean a belting.

To be honest, I haven't looked at the stats sheet.
According to mdc the stats sheet would tell me that Pendlebury was best on ground.

 

[mdc]

Well I have 14 of your guys in the excellent - good category. Does that seem fair?

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.

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.

My remarks and rankings are based on watching the game and not using champion data.

So are mine. But when you claim bias, I have to quote the one unbiased source we have.

Both players could have a sit on the sidelines for their actions but both choices seemed to be split second decisions rather than malicious plans to hurt opponents.

Please watch the Lower one again. Saw Thomas over the ball, ran at his head with his hip. Will be out 5-6 weeks.

Fwiw, unless Judd plays a blinder this week, I'd have Pendlebury entrenched as 1 to end the season. Swan should be in the top 10 as well after tonight's game. Something like:

1. Pendlebury
2. Judd
3. Yablett
------
4. Mitchell
5. Franklin
------
6. Dal Santo
7. Thomas
8. Swan
9. Murphy
--------
etc

 

[eaglespremiers]

Fwiw, unless Judd plays a blinder this week, I'd have Pendlebury entrenched as 1 to end the season. Swan should be in the top 10 as well after tonight's game. Something like:

1. Pendlebury
2. Judd
3. Yablett
------
4. Mitchell
5. Franklin
------
6. Dal Santo
7. Thomas
8. Swan
9. Murphy
--------
etc

Judd is not playing this week (because of the bye). As such I fully anticipated him being replaced this week as no. 1 (and staying replaced for the last round).
If Ablett has a blinder - which is likely against Melbourne - I would expect him to be no. 1, Pendlebury no. 2 and Judd no. 3.

Also, I certainly agree with Swan falling 9-11ish. Great form of late.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Oh dear.

Someone didn't watch the game and just looked at the stats sheet.

FYI, now looking at the advanced stats, perhaps I should've rated Sandilands higher as he had 24 touches; 17 contested; 37 HOs and 10 clearances.
Yet I know that he was pretty ordinary tonight. But I can't put my finger on why....