2013 Team

[NYJetsfor2029]

I have seen over 50% of WCE's games live and in their entirety over the past two years, and parts of many more . (I am a footy tragic)

If you don't think Scott Selwood is still a run with player, maybe you need to watch him a bit closer. He will be allocated a player each match, and even though he backs himself in beat his man, the tell tale signs are he will line up on this player at all stoppages and interchanges when his allocated player tests. The exception being if the player heads deeper forward, and Adam Selwood will take up a more defensive tag.

Pardon my intrusion. I think you partially right here cjwalkley.

Out of our starting midfielders Scooter Selwood has the best defensive side to his game. For this reason you are quite right in that he will almost always line up on the most damaging mid of the opposing team. He will be accountable for them like every player is accountable for a opposition player in our setup, but then is he a "run-with" player? I'm not sure that he is.

 

[Panthera]

A certain J. Selwood would be pretty damn happy at not having to face up against him either.

Yeah, he'd be terrified having Andrew Raines following him around the ground

 

[POBT]

How many teams looking at finals would have him playing for them?

Clint Jones played grand finals for St Kilda. There is a place for a role player in every side.

Head to head midfield match ups is unrealistic and the stuff of fantasy. Coaches would have nightmares. At least one of your midfielders needs to sacrifice his game, at least in part, to quell the influence of a gun.

Coaches aren't morons. There is a reason why they employ a tag.

 

[weevil]

Fact is that we've been shocking in there for years and he's a major reason for it

Him being the major reason for it is not a fact, it is your opinion.

 

[karix]

. Fact is that we've been shocking in there for years and he's a major reason for it

I can't agree with him playing in our team.

If it was as simple as one player being a major reason for us being 'shocking' in the clearances do you really think we would've continued to play him there? Or if he was such a liability wouldn't he have been dropped in the NAB cup as soon as we got Moloney?

I have to assume that you don't watch him very closely when he plays, because the impact he has on opposition guns is quite impressive, and last season he started to have an impact going the other way on the score board.

Your opinions seem to be an accurate description of the Raines of 2010. Maybe you made your mind up back then about him?

I strongly suggest you go back and watch the work he does especially on guys like Ablett and Selwood who are the major play makers for their teams, but also when he is on other 'smaller lights' he does a great job and towards the end of last year he start dropping off his man to hit the clearance at speed and take a shot at goal or deliver into the F50.

Which is exactly what we want to see more of, isn't it?

 

[Panthera]

Him being the major reason for it is not a fact, it is your opinion.

Raines attends the 2nd most centre clearances per game, yet averages a mere 2 per game. These are facts. It's a major reason we lose the clearance count nearly every week.

 

[patfullfankezz]

Raines attends the 2nd most centre clearances per game, yet averages a mere 2 per game. These are facts. It's a major reason we lose the clearance count nearly every week.

What if winning clearances isn't his job? We don't know what Vossy has told him to do.

 

[chopperduck]

doesn't win clearances because it's not his job. Looking at how many clearances his opponent wins each game woudl be more accurate. fact is, none of our mids win enough clearances, and that's why, as a group, we don't win the clearances.

 

[weevil]

Raines attends the 2nd most centre clearances per game, yet averages a mere 2 per game. These are facts. It's a major reason we lose the clearance count nearly every week.

It's one narrow fact and then it's your opinion after it.

We have no player on our list with a Q in their name, this is why did not win the premiership last year.

 

[Panthera]

If it was as simple as one player being a major reason for us being 'shocking' in the clearances do you really think we would've continued to play him there? Or if he was such a liability wouldn't he have been dropped in the NAB cup as soon as we got Moloney?

I have to assume that you don't watch him very closely when he plays, because the impact he has on opposition guns is quite impressive, and last season he started to have an impact going the other way on the score board.

Your opinions seem to be an accurate description of the Raines of 2010. Maybe you made your mind up back then about him?

I strongly suggest you go back and watch the work he does especially on guys like Ablett and Selwood who are the major play makers for their teams, but also when he is on other 'smaller lights' he does a great job and towards the end of last year he start dropping off his man to hit the clearance at speed and take a shot at goal or deliver into the F50.

Which is exactly what we want to see more of, isn't it?

Please don't assume anything when it comes to me watching my Lions.

8 goals for a season is not scoreboard impact. It's just 8 goals.

Work on Ablett huh? 33 possessions in a little over 3 quarters in rd. 4, whilst he must have got the better of Raines later in the season with 37 possessions (+ 8 tackles) in taking home the Ashcroft Medal.

Maybe your version of "great job" and mine are a little different. Each to their own I suppose

Can't wait to see how he goes on the new Blues captain this Friday night - hopefully he keeps him to under 30 possessions.

 

[Panthera]

doesn't win clearances because it's not his job. Looking at how many clearances his opponent wins each game woudl be more accurate. fact is, none of our mids win enough clearances, and that's why, as a group, we don't win the clearances.

Then he shouldn't be in there, that's my point

Do you think that the midfielder he plays on wouldn't get at least 3 clearances per game??? I think they would, especially considering he ranked only 12th for pressure acts at the club. Our wonderful tagger, the one that commentators speak of in the same breath as Ling, Kirk etc. ( ) has 11 players who pressure opponents more than him.

 

[pulsade]

Raines attends the 2nd most centre clearances per game, yet averages a mere 2 per game. These are facts. It's a major reason we lose the clearance count nearly every week.

For me tracking individual clearances doesn't say that much, there should be a way to track +/- clearance of sets of players, in the centre square especially. Especially if you could control for a ruckman tapping to advantage. I think very little can be read into of individual player stats. Systems and team mates are so important, I think individual AFL stats are extremely misleading. But still it will be interesting to see how the team changes over the year. I really thought Lester was in the team for round 1 but he wasn't picked against Carlton and he is getting much better at clearances.

Also I really hope we get to see a healthy Black in the midfield next to Moloney at some stage.

 

[Gibbo_88]

Ablett at times can have 40+ disposals in a game and the better taggers in the comp struggle with him when he's on. Panthera's obviously made his mind up about Raines and you can always select certain stats to make your point. A number of the times through the year I recall Raines being moved onto someone else in the game and whilst he didn't necessarily stop them having disposals his opponents weren't able to run through the midfield marking the ball and setting up play, they had to handball. Can't wait to see Rainsey play this year.

 

[Panthera]

For me tracking individual clearances doesn't say that much, there should be a way to track +/- clearance of sets of players, in the centre square especially. Especially if you could control for a ruckman tapping to advantage. I think very little can be read into of individual player stats. Systems and team mates are so important, I think individual AFL stats are extremely misleading. But still it will be interesting to see how the team changes over the year. I really thought Lester was in the team for round 1 but he wasn't picked against Carlton and he is getting much better at clearances.

Also I really hope we get to see a healthy Black in the midfield next to Moloney at some stage.

Champion Data does this for us; Lions ranked 17th in 2012 in clearances with about 5 less than our opposition per game across the season. This led to a F50 entry ranking of 15th in the AFL.

Voss and co. need to be scrutinised on this; in his 4 seasons, we have ranked 2nd last in clearances in every year. Simply not good enough considering we've had one of the best clearance players of the past 25 years within our ranks.

Regarding Black and Moloney, we should win over 50% of centre clearances these guys attend (along with a Rich, Redden, Rockliff).

 

[pulsade]

Champion Data does this for us; Lions ranked 17th in 2012 in clearances with about 5 less than our opposition per game across the season. This led to a F50 entry ranking of 15th in the AFL.

Voss and co. need to be scrutinised on this; in his 4 seasons, we have ranked 2nd last in clearances in every year. Simply not good enough considering we've had one of the best clearance players of the past 25 years within our ranks.

Regarding Black and Moloney, we should win over 50% of centre clearances these guys attend (along with a Rich, Redden, Rockliff).

I'm sure they do but I mean I wonder how Raines Rich Redden does compared to Black Rocky Rich etc. Is this type of data available to the public? I'd love to have a look. Clearances has definitely been a poor area for us recently but on the positive side we have Rich Redden and Rocky now who have quite a lot of experience for their ages. Team clearances is certainly important but I'm not sure about individuals. Adelaide for example were 13th in clearances with -2.6 per game in 2011 and went to second in 2012 with +5.8 and as far as I know that was pretty much the same midfield but with a new coaching staff and an improvement by Sloan and Dangerfield. But for context Bulldogs were 3rd +/- for clearances. We definitely need to improve. I also wonder how effective Raines is and wonder if he can keep his spot at the end of the year given guys like Beams and Lester are really pushing for a consistent spot. But then I don't know that much about footy and every time I think I have a solid read on the team Voss does something that surprises me, like how Crisp played more games in the second half of the season than Polec and Patty K combined! There is only so much we can know as outsiders.

 

[Panthera]

Ablett at times can have 40+ disposals in a game and the better taggers in the comp struggle with him when he's on. Panthera's obviously made his mind up about Raines and you can always select certain stats to make your point. A number of the times through the year I recall Raines being moved onto someone else in the game and whilst he didn't necessarily stop them having disposals his opponents weren't able to run through the midfield marking the ball and setting up play, they had to handball. Can't wait to see Rainsey play this year.

I have - but I am not that biased that I can't see reason. Happy to listen to anyone who can provide me logical reasons why he's a positive influence on our team. Stats are vital in AFL, they provide statistical data on how a player / team is tracking - it's why they are given to the coaching staff every 3 minutes in the box.

Raines' stats in 2012 were really bad, his opponents were good to excellent in 95% of games he played on them.

I can't understand how people can argue with the below:

1. Average of 4 kicks per game that the Lions kept possession after
2. Average of 2 clearances per game (out of about 30 attended per game)
3. Average of 3 tackles per game
4. 6 score assists for the year
5. Ranked 12th at the club for pressure acts
6. Free kicks for 15 Free kicks against 27

It's a pathetic set of numbers, he shouldn't be playing at the Lions

 

[ZoBlitz]

I have - but I am not that biased that I can't see reason. Happy to listen to anyone who can provide me logical reasons why he's a positive influence on our team. Stats are vital in AFL, they provide statistical data on how a player / team is tracking - it's why they are given to the coaching staff every 3 minutes in the box.

Raines' stats in 2012 were really bad, his opponents were good to excellent in 95% of games he played on them.

As much as I hate using pure stats to evaluate a player, I thought I'd do a little research myself. Using the match ups and possession counts mentioned earlier in this thread as a basis for analysis, let's see whether Raines limited the disposals of his opponents compared to their average for the season:

R3: Stephen Hill 14 - AVG 17.7 - WIN
R4: Gary Ablett 33 - Ablett injured in Q4 - AVG 33.8 - WIN
R5: Joel Selwood 18 - AVG 25.7 - WIN
R7: Pendlebury 33 - AVG 29.5 / Swan 34 - AVG 34.5 - LOSS (but hard to judge when switching players)
R8: Scully 14 - AVG 20.3 - WIN
R9: Brent Harvey 27 - AVG 22.6 - LOSS
R10: Kerr 18 - AVG 23 - WIN
R12: Sam Mitchell 25 - Micthell racked up junk time possessions late Q4 - AVG 27.2 - WIN
R13: Griffen 22 - AVG 27 - WIN
R14: Moloney 16 - AVG 17.1 - WIN
R15: Jack 23 - AVG 24 - WIN
R16: Dal Santo 16 - AVG 23.3 - WIN
R17: Ablett 37 - AVG 33.8 - LOSS
R18: Priddis 29 - AVG 26.1 - LOSS
R19: Cotchin 21 - AVG 27.5 - WIN
R20: Murphy 26 - AVG 26.3 - WIN
R21: Dangerfield 30 - AVG 26.7 - LOSS
R22: Boak 25 - AVG 23.7 - LOSS
R23: Griffen 27 - AVG 27 - DRAW

So 12 times Raines limited his opponent to a lower possession count than usual out of 19 games with one draw. Not a bad record for a tagger I would have thought. Admittedly some of the wins aren't big ones but if the job of the tagger is to reduce the ability of their opponent to get the ball then I reckon he's done ok.

 

[Haso]

Raines wasn't on Danger for the whole game in round 21. JPatz was on him in the first quarter, and I think that Raines stuck with Thompson in the last. I remember a 50 going to Raines because Thompson wouldn't get up off of him when the umpire was talking to him.

 

[Sanchez365]

I would probably also consider games where he kept his opponent only .3 off his disposal average as a draw, not a win. But that's just me.

 

[ZoBlitz]

I would probably also consider games where he kept his opponent only .3 off his disposal average as a draw, not a win. But that's just me.

I was debating which way to go with that but decided to stick with being incredibly pedantic.

 

[Grimreepah]

So 12 times Raines limited his opponent to a lower possession count than usual out of 19 games with one draw.

Worth noting that many of his match ups would be getting tagged by other teams aswell, so the differential shouldn't be seen as Raines' contribution, but rather Raines' improvement on other opponents. I think Raines' ability to limit the hurt factor of an opponent is much greater than Panthera is giving him credit for. Even if a player got a reasonably high number of possessions, the limited time and space to work in that the player had was still fairly evident. In fact whenever Raines was shifted from one opponent to another, his nullifying abilities really stood out. I also think it's worth noting his strong finish to the year, particularly his attacking game, when assessing his form line.

Regarding the 'accepting mediocrity' comment, I think that could have been left out of the debate. We all want what's best, it's just that there are differing opinions on what that is.

 

[patfullfankezz]

Raines wasn't on Danger for the whole game in round 21. JPatz was on him in the first quarter, and I think that Raines stuck with Thompson in the last. I remember a 50 going to Raines because Thompson wouldn't get up off of him when the umpire was talking to him.

I was trying to forget about Joel's time in the midfield.

In the end, given that Raines ranked equal 11th in 2012 in the Merrett-Murray Medal, I think people more qualified than us agree that he's a good aquisition for us.

 

[karix]

I can't understand how people can argue with the below:

1. Average of 4 kicks per game that the Lions kept possession after
2. Average of 2 clearances per game (out of about 30 attended per game)
3. Average of 3 tackles per game
4. 6 score assists for the year
5. Ranked 12th at the club for pressure acts
6. Free kicks for 15 Free kicks against 27

It's a pathetic set of numbers, he shouldn't be playing at the Lions

It's a set of numbers you've cherry picked to prove your point, so they're irrelevant when trying to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the player.

Stats are limited to things that are easy to count and record, so they miss a large portion of the little things that players do.

It's like the console in your car, it gives you a lot of accurate and useful information about your vehicle. You need that information to help you drive, it's vital. But you can't drive just using that information alone, because it doesn't show you the whole picture, it just makes it easy for you to understand information that is gathered by the gauges in the the car.

Can you produce the stats for the following:

Possessions denied to direct opponent
Direct opponents lost disposal efficiency
Direct opponents rushed possessions
Direct opponents frustration/psychological handicap
Restriction of direct opponent run and carry
Possessions transferred from the direct opponent to Raines

These are the vital things that a tagger does. You could probably also attribute frees against of his direct opponent towards a taggers 'total effectiveness', because often the presence of the tagger pushes normally good/level headed players to do undisciplined acts.

The last one I listed, possessions transferred from the direct opponent to Raines, is an absolute gem. When the tagger drops off his man to receive a disposal that was destined for his opponent, or bodies his opponent into a poor position to bring the ball to ground runs off with it. Those situations are better than a normal possession for the tagger, but the loss doesn't register in the stats for his opponent, and it doesn't register as better than normal possession for the tagger.

If a tagger does that 5 times a match they could potentially be 5 scoring opportunities (or the beginning of a run of possession that results in one), or 5 foiled opposition scoring opportunities. But the stats don't reflect that, or the tremendous impact that interrupting a slick run of play can have on a team, they all stream forward to receive, only to have to turn on a dime and peddle back to defend, their structures are put under stress and if we can get the ball into our forward line then we'll get a chance to score. But the contribution of the tagger to that chain of events on the stats will minor, and won't accurately reflect how important it was to the team.

I stand by my comment that you need to watch Raines play more closely and be mindful of the benefit his acts provide the entire team (and hurt the opposition) rather than just selectively choosing stats to back up an opinion you've settled on. If you do this, I think he will change your mind.

 

[dlanod]

Worth noting that many of his match ups would be getting tagged by other teams aswell, so the differential shouldn't be seen as Raines' contribution, but rather Raines' improvement on other opponents. I think Raines' ability to limit the hurt factor of an opponent is much greater than Panthera is giving him credit for. Even if a player got a reasonably high number of possessions, the limited time and space to work in that the player had was still fairly evident. In fact whenever Raines was shifted from one opponent to another, his nullifying abilities really stood out. I also think it's worth noting his strong finish to the year, particularly his attacking game, when assessing his form line.

Regarding the 'accepting mediocrity' comment, I think that could have been left out of the debate. We all want what's best, it's just that there are differing opinions on what that is.

The example I remember was one of the Gold Coast's games, where Ablett's kick percentage and disposal effectiveness was significantly lower than his usual percentages because of the pressure from Raines, even though his patented "run behind the man with the football for free possessions" method meant he still got good numbers.

 

[Panthera]

It's a set of numbers you've cherry picked to prove your point, so they're irrelevant when trying to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the player.

No, they are his stats. I didn't make them up. And just because you don't agree with my point, doesn't mean that these stats aren't real.

Stats are limited to things that are easy to count and record, so they miss a large portion of the little things that players do.

It's like the console in your car, it gives you a lot of accurate and useful information about your vehicle. You need that information to help you drive, it's vital. But you can't drive just using that information alone, because it doesn't show you the whole picture, it just makes it easy for you to understand information that is gathered by the gauges in the the car.

Can you produce the stats for the following:

Possessions denied to direct opponent
Direct opponents lost disposal efficiency
Direct opponents rushed possessions
Direct opponents frustration/psychological handicap
Restriction of direct opponent run and carry
Possessions transferred from the direct opponent to Raines

No, you are the one who is defending him, you give us the stats if you want to use them. The prosecution doesn't assist the defence in building their case. Don't be lazy.

These are the vital things that a tagger does. You could probably also attribute frees against of his direct opponent towards a taggers 'total effectiveness', because often the presence of the tagger pushes normally good/level headed players to do undisciplined acts.

The last one I listed, possessions transferred from the direct opponent to Raines, is an absolute gem. When the tagger drops off his man to receive a disposal that was destined for his opponent, or bodies his opponent into a poor position to bring the ball to ground runs off with it. Those situations are better than a normal possession for the tagger, but the loss doesn't register in the stats for his opponent, and it doesn't register as better than normal possession for the tagger.

If a tagger does that 5 times a match they could potentially be 5 scoring opportunities (or the beginning of a run of possession that results in one), or 5 foiled opposition scoring opportunities. But the stats don't reflect that, or the tremendous impact that interrupting a slick run of play can have on a team, they all stream forward to receive, only to have to turn on a dime and peddle back to defend, their structures are put under stress and if we can get the ball into our forward line then we'll get a chance to score. But the contribution of the tagger to that chain of events on the stats will minor, and won't accurately reflect how important it was to the team.

I stand by my comment that you need to watch Raines play more closely and be mindful of the benefit his acts provide the entire team (and hurt the opposition) rather than just selectively choosing stats to back up an opinion you've settled on.

If you do this, I think he will change your mind.

I have watched Raines very closely, this is why I made an opinion about him and backed it up with stats. I didn't just make up a theory and ask others to validate them.

Ask yourself this; do you honestly think he'd be getting a game at Richmond, Carlton, Essendon, North, St.Kilda, Fremantle??? Because these are the teams that we'll be potentially fighting with for 7th / 8th spot. My answer is a 0/6.