Andrew Mackie

[Gladbaqs]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Some people just can't see the game.

Agreed, Mackie was a muppet. Dropped chest marks!

Hawkins? What the. Guy played well in the ruck and from two of his ruck contests in the last qtr we got goals from it. Tapped to advantage and we got the breakaway from the middle. I thought he put in during the ruck, sure, looked average up at FF, but I thought he did exactly what was required.

Agreed, thegerman. For example, I'd struggle from your account to know if you had seen the match.

We all know the chest mark Mackie dropped was a sticker. Please tell me the other ones he dropped? You've clearly stated there were multiple dropped chest marks. Time to come up with some evidence.

If you want some evidence of appalling ruck work from Hawkins. Have a look at the second quarter at 15:18 minutes remaining and 3:50 minutes remaining. On both occasions he allowed Wood easy hitouts to advantage by being utterly switched off mentally.

 

[_Me_]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

mackie was ok
wojo seems to have gone from star potential to his usual inconsistent
can he snap back as his start was awesome

 

[Cattery]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Agreed, thegerman. For example, I'd struggle from your account to know if you had seen the match.

We all know the chest mark Mackie dropped was a sticker. Please tell me the other ones he dropped? You've clearly stated there were multiple dropped chest marks. Time to come up with some evidence.

I'll second that.

After multiple viewings I've found one, I did however find a number of occasions where he made crucial spoils on Pies players, probably none more important then the one on Thomas that prevented him taking a chest mark 25 meters out directly in front of goal.

To suggest Mackie gets dropped on his performance Friday night is ...... well perplexing is as polite a word as I can think of.

 

[David the Cat]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

I'll second that.

After multiple viewings I've found one, I did however find a number of occasions where he made crucial spoils on Pies players, probably none more important then the one on Thomas that prevented him taking a chest mark 25 meters out directly in front of goal.

To suggest Mackie gets dropped on his performance Friday night is ...... well perplexing is as polite a word as I can think of.

Spot pn Cattery...I have done the same. Mackie was ok on Friday night...did some good things and deserves his spot.

I also reviewed the game and would like to say that Tom Hawkins first quarter in particular was very good!! Hard tackles, creative play and a good presence. Fell away a little but popped again from time to time...he is well worth persevering with...I won't bother defending Varcoe...done enough of that...

I don't understand the negativity toward certain players on this Board. God knows what it must be like when we actually lose a game!!!

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

As I have stated previously in this thread, I really liked Mackie's game on the weekend. He contributed well, and deserves to keep his spot based on that effort.

To be fair to the OP and the others on this thread who were calling for him to be dropped; 1) I think this thread was actually started during the 2nd quarter of the match, when his early error was not yet redeemed by some of his better - later play, and 2) Prior to round 7, Mackie had put in a number of average to poor performances.

I went through the stats tonight, and I think they show that a certain level of prior frustration is understandable. I'm not sure how the formatting will look, but the numbers are below, and are for the entire season to date (including the Collingwood game):

I have only looked at defenders, and excluded Taylor Hunt due to his injury.


Disposal Efficiency per Game %

DE%
Mackie 69
Scarlett 87
Taylor 80
Lonergan 86
J Hunt 80
Enright 80
Milburn 77

Mackie has the worst disposal efficiency of our defenders (8% worse than the next worst - Milburn - and 18% worse than the best, Scarlett).


Clangers Per Game:

Mackie 3.5
Scarlett 1.5
Taylor 1.1
Lonergan 1.8
J Hunt 2.8
Enright 2.0
Milburn 1.8

Mackie has 0.7 Clangers per Game more than the next worst offender (J Hunt), and 2.4 per game more than the best, Harry Taylor.

Players have different possession counts right? Well:


Possessions per Game and Clanger Ratio:

Poss Per Game - CL/POSS (% of possessions which are clangers)
Mackie 18 - 20%
Scarlett 22 - 7%
Taylor 16 - 7%
Lonergan 11 - 16%
J Hunt 16 - 18%
Enright 23 - 9%
Milburn 19 - 10%

By dividing Clangers per game into possessions per game, it turns out that 20% of all Mackie's possessions this season have been clangers (the worst defender). This is marginally worse than Josh Hunt (18%), and significantly worse than Scarlett (the best - at 6.9%)


KICKS Direct to Opposition

Mackie 1.7
Scarlett 1
Taylor 0.9
Lonergan 0.4
J Hunt 1.3
Enright 0.7
Milburn 0.3

Mackie also has significantly more kicks per game which go direct to the opposition than any other player. He is actually worst in the entire club on this measure. Additionally, he is also the worst offender on a ratio basis (not included here).

So, of our defenders, Mackie has the:

1) Worst disposal efficiency (which counts ineffective possessions as well as clangers).
2) Most clangers per game
3) Highest Ratio of Clangers as a % of total possessions
4) Most kicks per game of any player in the club that go direct to the opposition.


I think it's worth keeping all this in mind, especially considering, IMO, during Thompson's reign, form seemed to have less and less relevance when it came to team selection.

On his day, Mackie can be truly excellent, having a real impact on matches. I also think, however, that no player should be guaranteed a place in the side simply because of his name or potential. If a player has been poor, he should be dropped so that he can regain form, confidence, and desire. Also, players in the twos who rightfully deserve a chance can also be rewarded by this policy.

Again, in no way do I believe Mackie should be dropped on his performance versus Collingwood, but it's a dangerous thing to immediately dismiss talk of dropping players because of their name, potential, or perceived importance.

 

[David the Cat]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Good post Speak and very very interesting.

I would suggest though, that if you removed the Fremantle game from that equation, where Mackie's disposal was for some reason absolutely horrendous, his stats might look a little better.

It seemed to me that his Freo game was so terrible, it might skew these figures a little.

We are all entitled to one bad day, even though after that game I wanted his head.

 

[DanA]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

So the first stat suggest that Mackie has had poor foot skills this season.......
as does the 2nd.....and the 3rd..... and 4th.

Don't think anybody would have argued with the first stat. The three others however are misleading as they represent the same thing expressed slightly differently.

The reason you can't drop Mackie is not because we have a warped sense of loyalty to the player it's because there's simply no better option at the moment.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Good post Speak and very very interesting.

I would suggest though, that if you removed the Fremantle game from that equation, where Mackie's disposal was for some reason absolutely horrendous, his stats might look a little better.

It seemed to me that his Freo game was so terrible, it might skew these figures a little.

We are all entitled to one bad day, even though after that game I wanted his head.

Thanks David. You might be surprised. Remove Freo - round 2 from the equation:

Clangers per game falls by 0.1 to 3.4 - still the worst defender
Effective Disposal % rises 0.5% to 69.8
Clangers as a % of total possessions: WORSE 20.2% v 19.8%.

He had his worst efficiency that day, but only 4 of his 21 possessions were actually clangers (19%), which had the effect of lowering his clanger ratio.

Still our worst defender on all measures listed, even excluding the Freo match.

I suppose I could check marks and rebound/inside 50's (a strength of his), but they are not as useful if one is handing the ball back to the opposition, even as the ball is cleared.

He is willing to take a risk, which probably hurts him here, but as you pointed out, some of the quality of disposal (helicopter and mongrel punts etc.) has left a little to be desired at times.

Just pointing out the numbers.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

So the first stat suggest that Mackie has had poor foot skills this season.......
as does the 2nd.....and the 3rd..... and 4th.

Don't think anybody would have argued with the first stat. The three others however are misleading as they represent the same thing expressed slightly differently.

The reason you can't drop Mackie is not because we have a warped sense of loyalty to the player it's because there's simply no better option at the moment.

I think you are slightly over-simplifying. It is quite possible to have higher clangers per game if you are getting a lot more of the ball (hence clangers per possession) versus total per game. One can be misleading so you have to look at both. Marks are included in clangers too so we are talking foot and hand skills amongst other general skills too.

Disposal efficiency, well that only bares a loose resemblance to clangers DanA. Clanger is clear mistake such as dropped mark or kick/handball straight to opposition, ineffective means no clean possession taken by home team from a disposal and could be more indicative of poor general ball use. Also obviously includes handball.

The final one I added because he has the distinction of having the highest number for the entire team, which is worth noting.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

By the way I wasn't saying we should drop him now at all, or that there is a current warped selection policy. Personally I thought there was one last year, but that problem has gone.

It was more a general statement. Also people here can be very defensive versus certain players, and I was merely stating what the numbers show, and including alternative views as evidence that I wasn't only including one possible interpretation.

 

[Vdubs]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

He will play. Who thinks he will get the vastly improved Walker? Who will get Walker?? He's a great mark and very accurate kick, difficult matchup.

Betts, Garlett, Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Simpson all need attention.

 

[Vdubs]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

I'm at risk of overrating the opposition, I know, but I rate this game as our most difficult to date after Saints, as they are FAST and HUNGRY, and quite capable of another good win against us. Surely we would have to be feeling the effects of the Pies game. Wonder if there are any stats on teams the week after Pies.

No, I checked it out, nothing profound and nothing sinister.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

I now have some other stats - some good, some bad, but i'll wait till tomorrow to post them as it's too late now.

 

[David the Cat]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Thanks Speak..very interesting. I thought his Freo game was particularly bad....but there ya go.

I am not one calling for his head, and I have no doubt that the hierarchy have an eye on this, and working on his limitations weekly.

One would hope so.

 

[Claude Balls]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Don't think anybody would have argued with the first stat. The three others however are misleading as they represent the same thing expressed slightly differently.

No they aren´t. They provide worthwhile depth to the first set of stats.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Ok so here is what I have. It's not about trying to only find the bad, it's just to see if the numbers can tell us anything. Considering the topic is about Mackie, and so I don't take up too much space, again, I will just mention where re ranks in regards to the 7 defenders mentioned previously.

The Good

Rebound 50's - - 1/7 (has significantly more than his teammates)
Tackles per game - - 1/7 (equal with Josh Hunt - went from 3 to 1 after Collingwood game)
1%'ers - - 2/7 (this would be spoils/smothers although I'm not sure what else - a good effort)


The Not So Good

Contested Possessions - - 6/7
Clangers Per Possession - - 7/7
Disposal Effectiveness (%) - - 7/7
Marks - - 6/7
Contested Marks - - 5/7


The tackles stat is close, with all teammates having a roughly similar amount, but he is still equal first so that's good to see. He has 2 more rebound 50's per game than Scarlett, and 3-4 more per game than the other defenders which shows his attacking mindset - not afraid to kick long.

The 1%'ers stat was a good one to see as it seems to show he does a good job at helping the other defenders out and making spoils, smothers etc.

The other stat I have is for inside 50's where he ranks 4/7, so in the middle of the range. I was expecting him to be higher here but that's not such a negative. Enright, Josh Hunt, then Scarlett were the top three for that stat.

Looks like there are some things to work on, but he is contributing in a few of the more intangible areas.

 

[catswhiskers]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Are Kick ins from points counted in the disposal efficiency?

 

[topic97]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

The only thing I see about his disposal efficiency this season compared to the other backline players is that he has been playing a lot more of a floating role between HB and HF this season, whereas all the other defenders bar enright play primarily back.

That reason alone can fudge the stats a little as most teams this season are playing some sort of forward press so anyone playing up the ground finds it hard to have a good disposal efficiency.

Enright only has a better one because he is a better player.

 

[Scottland2007]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

I thought he did a reasonable job of bringing it to ground level for the opposition forwards............. But was a hard night for football.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

The only thing I see about his disposal efficiency this season compared to the other backline players is that he has been playing a lot more of a floating role between HB and HF this season, whereas all the other defenders bar enright play primarily back.

That reason alone can fudge the stats a little as most teams this season are playing some sort of forward press so anyone playing up the ground finds it hard to have a good disposal efficiency.

Enright only has a better one because he is a better player.

Possibly, although I'd point out that Mackie is only 4th of the 7 for inside 50's. Given that he's 1 of 7 for rebound 50's, the stats at least seem to indicate that he's actually using the ball a bit from the back 50. Slightly off topic, I wouldn't mind finding a long-kick stat actually - I just haven't seen one anywhere.

I don't mind his style in that he is willing to break lines by kicking long to advantage. This can lead to more ineffective disposal as you are not always taking the safe option. Many of the highest impact players operate this way - Guys like Chad Cornes (going back a little) and Lenny Hayes use/have used it to be very damaging.

When you play like this - and kick a series of mongrels however, (e.g. Mackie v Freo), things can get ugly quickly.

 

[speaknoevil]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Are Kick ins from points counted in the disposal efficiency?

I'm not sure to be honest. My guess is that they only count if the player kicks to himself first, so the kick becomes a normal stat. I've played with a few guys who loved using that trick to pad their disposal count a little. Reason why I don't think they would count is that without playing-on the kicker is not awarded a stat, and if they had 15 effective kicks from kick-ins, you would end up with a player who has >100% kicking efficiency, which I have never seen. The others, (below), i think do count as they are more like extras rather than official stats.

I have a feeling, however, that rebound 50's are counted from kick-ins, as Chris Newman for instance often seems to get credit for these. I also would think that clanger kicks would probably have to count from a kick-ins, although I don't have evidence for this.

 

[oozeboss]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

He's a lock to play this week.

I hope he and that #4 he wears are allowed to take the coin toss at the start of the game, and that the spirit of that particular guernsey inspires him.

 

[witsend]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

He's a lock to play this week.

I hope he and that #4 he wears are allowed to take the coin toss at the start of the game, and that the spirit of that particular guernsey inspires him.

Beat me to it!
Here's an opportunity for Andrew to do the memory of the late, great Bobby Davis proud. Personally I think Mackie will, and it will turn his confidence and season around.

 

[David the Cat]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

He's a lock to play this week.

I hope he and that #4 he wears are allowed to take the coin toss at the start of the game, and that the spirit of that particular guernsey inspires him.

What a wonderful idea.....I hope so too.

Kudos for that idea mate

 

[maxy87]

Re: Mackie MUST be dropped

Mackie could rack up 25 disposals, be damaging on the counter attack, hold a few marks and people would still find a way of bagging him.

FWIW there was one instance on Friday (an overhead mark in blustery conditions) where I thought he could've gone harder.. Not going to start a thread about it though