List Mgmt. 2025 List Management

[serial_thrilla]

 

[Eski3]

Funny how all the geniuses who thought the Darcy contract in the first place wasn’t totally idiotic , and 2 rucks can work are now tying themselves into twisties trying to come up with ways to keep him on the list at all

IF … IF ….IF ….IF …. IF

It's normal for people with an ounce of emotional connection to the club and the players to not want players like Darcy to leave

 

[Dockeroo]

 

[Docker82]

64 points is too large for it to actually be believable despite the stats being there IMO.

Assume they removed the Geelong game where Reidy and Jackson played (actually kind of makes sense to) and only took games from this season. Feels we've played a lot of easier games with Jackson as the sole ruck tbh.

 

[Purple Suit]

64 points is too large for it to actually be believable despite the stats being there IMO.

Assume they removed the Geelong game where Reidy and Jackson played (actually kind of makes sense to) and only took games from this season. Feels we've played a lot of easier games with Jackson as the sole ruck tbh.

Stats are just used for stories and talking points. There are a lot of factors that come into it and there is always an angle to use. The data based footy shows are notorious of just looking for stats and time frames to back up their point of view.

Some people want Fyfe dropped but

Fyfe in team = 100% winning record
Fyfe not in team = 55% winning record

 

[eastfreo75]

I call bs.

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

Important to note this is comparing Jackson ruck (+12 per 100 mins) vs Jackson playing other positions (-52 per 100 mins). The Jackson not playing minutes are a lot better than -52.

It's worth noting because of the stark difference, but the sample size is pretty dogshit. Just using ruck contests as an approximation of time spent in the ruck, the -52 largely comprises:

• About 30 mins against Geelong
• Somewhere around 50 mins against St Kilda
• Again about 30 mins against Collingwood
• Probably 35-40 mins against Gold Coast
• Another 40 against North Melbourne

There might be spot minutes in other games, but it's about 200 mins this season that we've seen Jackson play non-ruck positions. A lot of that is our 2 biggest spankings this year, which felt fairly independent of ruck minutes coz everything went wrong. It's not nothing, but if we decided everything based on about 200 mins of game time, Tom Emmett would be in our leadership group.

 

[anchor man]

Stats are just used for stories and talking points. There are a lot of factors that come into it and there is always an angle to use. The data based footy shows are notorious of just looking for stats and time frames to back up their point of view.

Some people want Fyfe dropped but

Fyfe in team = 100% winning record
Fyfe not in team = 55% winning record

I really do love this post.
Stats are for Fantasy football people.
Only one stat that counts is the score on the score baord at games end.
Let's face it, if it weren't for stats, we woudn't have to put up with David King.Such a shame that really.
And not waanting to pot Jacko,but I think we really would have been disappointed to see him not take the first game 19 year old to the cleaners.Yes he played very well, but......

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Important to note this is comparing Jackson ruck (+12 per 100 mins) vs Jackson playing other positions (-52 per 100 mins). The Jackson not playing minutes are a lot better than -52.

It's worth noting because of the stark difference, but the sample size is pretty dogshit. Just using ruck contests as an approximation of time spent in the ruck, the -52 largely comprises:

• About 30 mins against Geelong
• Somewhere around 50 mins against St Kilda
• Again about 30 mins against Collingwood
• Probably 35-40 mins against Gold Coast
• Another 40 against North Melbourne

There might be spot minutes in other games, but it's about 200 mins this season that we've seen Jackson play non-ruck positions. A lot of that is our 2 biggest spankings this year, which felt fairly independent of ruck minutes coz everything went wrong. It's not nothing, but if we decided everything based on about 200 mins of game time, Tom Emmett would be in our leadership group.

Yeah, I've made my case repeatedly on Jackson onball over everything but I immediately had 50 questions over those numbers and imagine they are completely useless.

 

[Righteo]

I still have no long term faith in Luke Jackson not asking to be traded to Melbourne either.

Why not? Because of Gawn's comments, or because of the speculation surrounding his personal life which none of us truly understand? Or do you think he cracks the shits about not being no1 ruck? Normally you'd make a call like this with actual solid evidence.

 

[Taylor]

Why not? Because of Gawn's comments, or because of the speculation surrounding his personal life which none of us truly understand? Or do you think he cracks the shits about not being no1 ruck? Normally you'd make a call like this with actual solid evidence.

I think family reasons will force a move, not hers or his, theirs.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I think family reasons will force a move, not hers or his, theirs.

You would very much like a contract extension and for it to be very bluntly stated he will under no circumstance be traded under contracted before trading Darcy. Might be pie-in-the-sky stuff though

 

[thistimeforsure]

It's normal for people with an ounce of emotional connection to the club and the players to not want players like Darcy to leave

What a very Freo way to think

It’s not out of the realms of possibility Darcy and Jacko find their mojo and drive us up the ladder

Surprising stuff happens all the time in sport

Very low probability if you ask me

Guess I’m just a bad fan

 

[Andy Brennan]

I think family reasons will force a move, not hers or his, theirs.

This kind?

 

[ignoramus]

Important to note this is comparing Jackson ruck (+12 per 100 mins) vs Jackson playing other positions (-52 per 100 mins). The Jackson not playing minutes are a lot better than -52.

It's worth noting because of the stark difference, but the sample size is pretty dogshit. Just using ruck contests as an approximation of time spent in the ruck, the -52 largely comprises:

• About 30 mins against Geelong
• Somewhere around 50 mins against St Kilda
• Again about 30 mins against Collingwood
• Probably 35-40 mins against Gold Coast
• Another 40 against North Melbourne

There might be spot minutes in other games, but it's about 200 mins this season that we've seen Jackson play non-ruck positions. A lot of that is our 2 biggest spankings this year, which felt fairly independent of ruck minutes coz everything went wrong. It's not nothing, but if we decided everything based on about 200 mins of game time, Tom Emmett would be in our leadership group.

The only thing more lacking in any kind of intelligence than that CD story is people reposting it to support their arguments that Jackson should be no.1 ruck over Darcy.

 

[ubiquitous226]

Funny how all the geniuses who thought the Darcy contract in the first place wasn’t totally idiotic , and 2 rucks can work are now tying themselves into twisties trying to come up with ways to keep him on the list at all

IF … IF ….IF ….IF …. IF

I'm still not sure personally what the best option is.

1. Has Jackson developed enough we're genuinely better with him solo rucking?
2. Can Darcy get back to full fitness and form?

I think if Darcy can get fit the pairing remains a real weapon for our team, and I still believe they can both play and be impactful - I don't care if that means Jackson's peak is a little less if it's better for the overall team.

But on the flipside if Jackson can perform well enough on his own, then maybe we do have an opportunity to improve our list in other areas, so I can see both arguments.

We haven't seen enough of them together yet while fit for me to make my mind up.

I do appreciate the geniuses though that can make those decisions so easily.

 

[eastfreo75]

I'm still not sure personally what the best option is.

1. Has Jackson developed enough we're genuinely better with him solo rucking?
2. Can Darcy get back to full fitness and form?

I think if Darcy can get fit the pairing remains a real weapon for our team, and I still believe they can both play and be impactful - I don't care if that means Jackson's peak is a little less if it's better for the overall team.

But on the flipside if Jackson can perform well enough on his own, then maybe we do have an opportunity to improve our list in other areas, so I can see both arguments.

We haven't seen enough of them together yet while fit for me to make my mind up.

I do appreciate the geniuses though that can make those decisions so easily.

Last year the combo won 70% of games.

 

[thistimeforsure]

I'm still not sure personally what the best option is.

1. Has Jackson developed enough we're genuinely better with him solo rucking?
2. Can Darcy get back to full fitness and form?

I think if Darcy can get fit the pairing remains a real weapon for our team, and I still believe they can both play and be impactful - I don't care if that means Jackson's peak is a little less if it's better for the overall team.

But on the flipside if Jackson can perform well enough on his own, then maybe we do have an opportunity to improve our list in other areas, so I can see both arguments.

We haven't seen enough of them together yet while fit for me to make my mind up.

I do appreciate the geniuses though that can make those decisions so easily.

We have a guy showing potential for Prime Fyfe level dominance but people want to move him to another position so we can fit Nic Suban in the guts

 

[Righteo]

I think family reasons will force a move, not hers or his, theirs.

Surprised to see you putting so much stock in muckraking but you do you.

 

[Righteo]

I'm still not sure personally what the best option is.

1. Has Jackson developed enough we're genuinely better with him solo rucking?
2. Can Darcy get back to full fitness and form?

I think if Darcy can get fit the pairing remains a real weapon for our team, and I still believe they can both play and be impactful - I don't care if that means Jackson's peak is a little less if it's better for the overall team.

But on the flipside if Jackson can perform well enough on his own, then maybe we do have an opportunity to improve our list in other areas, so I can see both arguments.

We haven't seen enough of them together yet while fit for me to make my mind up.

I do appreciate the geniuses though that can make those decisions so easily.

I think we need to see them play together as much as possible in the last 9 games, but that will mean we can't carry anyone else who isn't capable of running out 4 quarters. We'd be at too much of a loss defensively. I don't think we can afford to carry Fyfe to 250. I would give Fyfe one more full game this week to see of he's truly cooked or not but after that some hard decisions need to be made.

 

[Taylor]

Surprised to see you putting so much stock in muckraking but you do you.

If they are having a family it's going to be much sooner than the likes of Brayshaw and Serong.

 

[eastfreo75]

Important to note this is comparing Jackson ruck (+12 per 100 mins) vs Jackson playing other positions (-52 per 100 mins). The Jackson not playing minutes are a lot better than -52.

It's worth noting because of the stark difference, but the sample size is pretty dogshit. Just using ruck contests as an approximation of time spent in the ruck, the -52 largely comprises:

• About 30 mins against Geelong
• Somewhere around 50 mins against St Kilda
• Again about 30 mins against Collingwood
• Probably 35-40 mins against Gold Coast
• Another 40 against North Melbourne

There might be spot minutes in other games, but it's about 200 mins this season that we've seen Jackson play non-ruck positions. A lot of that is our 2 biggest spankings this year, which felt fairly independent of ruck minutes coz everything went wrong. It's not nothing, but if we decided everything based on about 200 mins of game time, Tom Emmett would be in our leadership group.

Reid kicks 4 goals in 6 minutes is an outliner.

These clowns don't understand stats.

 

[BurnedScones]

One thing that I haven't seen brought up in the Darcy/Jackson debate is how it affects JL's structure if Darcy leaves.

To me it seems that JL's preference, even before Jackson arrived, is to play two ruckmen in the side. For instance there were a number of occasions that we would play Meek and Darcy in the same side. Not to mention Lobb who was more than capable as a 2nd ruck.

So what happens if we trade Darcy out? My money would be on trying to find a ruck to replace him. Same courses, different horse.

 

[eastfreo75]

One thing that I haven't seen brought up in the Darcy/Jackson debate is how it affects JL's structure if Darcy leaves.

To me it seems that JL's preference, even before Jackson arrived, is to play two ruckmen in the side. For instance there were a number of occasions that we would play Meek and Darcy in the same side. Not to mention Lobb who was more than capable as a 2nd ruck.

So what happens if we trade Darcy out? My money would be on trying to find a ruck to replace him. Same courses, different horse.

Or we just get rid of JL and let the new coach decide.

 

[fnerd]

If they are having a family it's going to be much sooner than the likes of Brayshaw and Serong.

Hmmm And why would that be???

 

[BurnedScones]

Or we just get rid of JL and let the new coach decide.

Yeah but my brain only has room for one hypothetical at a time