Changes for next week

[WaynesWorld19]

Now your clutching WW, in Burtons last 2 games his posession count has been 12 and 11 for no goals. Walkers last 2 games for the Crows were 15 & 14 for 1 goal, playing in a role that is not the position we want him to play.

As for Burton's kicking coming back to an acceptable level, when and how is that going to happen when he has lost the power in his leg?

.......you heard that on the TV commentary didn't you .......and now you've taken it and passing it on as fact .....oh you fool

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Have to defend Drummond here. Drummond does have the right to question WW's opinion. WW stated an opinion on a part of Walker's game that you cant not get from a highlights reel. That is a big difference to Drummond forming an opinion on a player he gets to see in a game and whether that players form warrants selection. Who cares if he doesnt see training, very few of us do, but does that mean we ignore what we see on game day because we didnt see how well they performed in a training drill under no game day pressure?

The club does .....do you think the Walker non selection is based purely on game-day ....of course not as a HUGE amount of credence is placed in training track form, and attitude to training.

The old adage you play as you train is absolutely true

BTW I am happy that I see enough from the tapes and other sources to sometimes voice a relevant opinion about a players performance if there has been enough footage ......given the small amount of game time time that a player actually is in contests the sample can be representative of performance

Happy though for you to disagree

 

[WaynesWorld19]

WW there is no point getting possession in dangerous spots like 40m out from goal if you cant reward the team effort on the scoreboard

your assumption that Birdman's kicking will return is an assumption only, IMO he has lost the power in his legs and given his age and history of injuries there is no certainty that his kicking will improve to AFL standard again. The other sign that his legs have lost is power is how easily he goes to ground, any slight body contact he goes to ground.

I also disagree that Burton offers more flexibility to the side, yes a 28yr old birdman that can play a wing or high HF role and use his tank to out work his opponent with exhausting two way running however this player is long gone. We have all watched over the past month Birdman offering offering no defensive pressure what so ever and I have gone on record in saying that the opposition runs around birdman like he is a wiches hat at training, in all honesty when is the last time he has stuck a tackle

Finally, this theory of credits in the bank can only go so far, I have no issue with a proven senior player been given a little more opportunity to turn his form around however a "gold pass" selection attitude at the selection table that grants players total team security is more harmful than good.

The club needs selection pressure, all players should feel that after 1-2 poor performance they will get another opportunity however after 3-4 poor performance well they should feel some heat

Firstly I offered an opinion on Burton on how I believe the club would be rationalizing Burtons performance

When I talked about Burton's kicking returning ....I meant his accuracy not the length of his kicking which I am astounded that people listen to a commentator who only sees the club play spasmodically and on the basis of one kick says Burton's leg is gone

The kick that the comment was made was from around 50mtrs and not 40 mtrs as you've suggested ......he's always been iffy from that distance anyway depending on how good he connects with the kick

His goal kicking accuracy career wise I believe is about 50% ....so he's not a known accurate kick ....I am talking about getting back to a career average

BTW accuracy wise and distance wise not a lot of difference ATM between Burton and Tippett ........if we dump Burton does it then also apply to Tippett?

BTW has Burton ever been a strong tackler .......I can hardly remember that being a strong aspect of his game

 

[relapse]

I meant his accuracy not the length of his kicking which I am astounded that people listen to a commentator who only sees the club play spasmodically and on the basis of one kick says Burton's leg is gone

The comments and observations about the lack of penetration of Burton's kicks have been on this board for the better part of three weeks. It is pretty obvious to everyone (well not everyone ) that Burton has consistently struggled this season to make the distance from 40 metres out. If you want to pretend that it is just a figment of everyone's imagination and that we are just merely responding to a seed planted from a commentator then go right ahead.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Firstly I offered an opinion on Burton on how I believe the club would be rationalizing Burtons performance

When I talked about Burton's kicking returning ....I meant his accuracy not the length of his kicking which I am astounded that people listen to a commentator who only sees the club play spasmodically and on the basis of one kick says Burton's leg is gone

The kick that the comment was made was from around 50mtrs and not 40 mtrs as you've suggested ......he's always been iffy from that distance anyway depending on how good he connects with the kick

His goal kicking accuracy career wise I believe is about 50% ....so he's not a known accurate kick ....I am talking about getting back to a career average

BTW accuracy wise and distance wise not a lot of difference ATM between Burton and Tippett ........if we dump Burton does it then also apply to Tippett?

BTW has Burton ever been a strong tackler .......I can hardly remember that being a strong aspect of his game

you have made an inncorect assumption that my opinion is based on last weeks game in isolation and your assumption that I am feeding of commentators is completely off the mark

read my posts over the past month, I have consistently raised issues re Birdman's lack of leg power and the impact on his overal game, not just his kicking. Over the past month he has consistently struggled to go the journey from more than 40m out, IMO this is sub standard for an AFL quality forward

Yes I agree Tippett accuracy has not been the best however Distance wise I totally disagree, last week Tippett kicked a goal from 50m and I have always stated that the further from goal Tippett is the better his technique is as he kicks through the ball.

In addition, I am struggling why you would compare Burton and Tippett as aplles for apples, form is more than just kicking you need to consider the overal package to the team.

I would strongly debate that Burton has lost his strengths, the loss of power in his legs have not only impacted his kicking but also his ability to provide that gut busting 2 way running where he hurts his opponent on the way back to goal, the ability to apply defensive pressure and to hold his feet in a contest.

I dont need a commentator to tell me that Burton is struggling, IMO he os currently playing for free kicks, looking for the easy fly from behind, easily losing his feet in contest, not applying defensive pressure and not slotting his opportunities, 3 goals in 4 weeks is a poor return for a senior forward.

 

[jackster83]

BTW accuracy wise and distance wise not a lot of difference ATM between Burton and Tippett ........if we dump Burton does it then also apply to Tippett?

Tippett has kicked 7 goals in the last fortnight. Burton has kicked none.

 

[ManInTheArena]

.......you heard that on the TV commentary didn't you .......and now you've taken it and passing it on as fact .....oh you fool

Can't you just admit that Burton has been as useless as **** on a bull?

Why oh why are you constantly trying to polish a terd on this forum?

 

[Coopers]

Anytime you want to back that up, go ahead.

what will you use?
- Salary
- B&F
- brownlow votes
- coaches award votes
- AFLPA MVP votes
- W/L when he doesn't play vs when he does?

- what geelong players said


There you go, backed up.

 

[Vader]

what is this? double or nothing day?

Okay, HunterCrow's comment is a bit nebulous.. but there are valid questions to be asked about the FSI - and you do seem to be relying on it a lot in your arguments over our injury list.

For starters, how do they determine what is the "best 22", from which players are missing? If, as previously stated, it now has Otten out of our best 22 and Davis in, then that's rubbish. Teams evolve over the course of a season, with some players (usually younger players) moving into the best 22, while others (usually older) move out. This becomes evident when players are omitted due to poor form - it is NOT evident when a player is MIA for the entire season due to a knee reconstruction. Will Nick Riewoldt drop out of St Kilda's best 22, as determined by the FSI, just because he hasn't played for a month? That's ludicrous.

Secondly, how are player weightings assigned? I have no problem with a player like Reiwoldt having a higher rating/weighting than Andy Otten. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ablett's weighting were around the same level as Otten. Ablett is a far, far better player than Otten, but he's also surrounded by higher quality players. One 10/10 player in a sea of 9/10 ends up with the same weighting as a 5/10 player in a sea of 4/10 players. What this boils down to is that the FSI gives a percentage of the team compared to its best 22. It makes no attempt to compare the value of one team's best 22 against another team's best 22 - a point which you have already made.

At the end of the day, the FSI is a statistic which is somewhat arbitrary in its nature. Your heavy reliance on it really doesn't help your arguments that much as a result. I'm not saying that it's completely meaningless, but it's not quite the potent weapon that you're making it out to be.

 

[fryingpan]

you obviously know more than "Hound Dog" as Bassett named Walker in his best players

Haha come on. If a guy is fighting for a spot in an AFL team do you really think Bassett would come out and say he was average and his performances don't warrant a spot in the Crows 22? Walker would get talked up by Bassett if he had 50 clangers and no goals. Needless to say he wasn't that bad but he certainly wasn't as good as a few people are making him out to be - and most sane people who saw the game agree. The ones who don't are the Norwood tragics & fans who want him replaced with Burton, regardless of form (or whether they've seen his last 3 weeks or not)

 

[Mismatched]

When I talked about Burton's kicking returning ....I meant his accuracy not the length of his kicking which I am astounded that people listen to a commentator who only sees the club play spasmodically and on the basis of one kick says Burton's leg is gone

The kick that the comment was made was from around 50mtrs and not 40 mtrs as you've suggested ......he's always been iffy from that distance anyway depending on how good he connects with the kick


BTW accuracy wise and distance wise not a lot of difference ATM between Burton and Tippett ........if we dump Burton does it then also apply to Tippett?

I'm sorry mate, but Burton has repeatedly failed to make the distance from shots well within the 50 this year, to say his goal kicking performance this year has been embarrassing, would be a severe understatement.

There is a massive difference between Tippett and Burton at the moment, Burton has kicked 2 goals versus Tippett's 10 goals. Tippett's form early in the season was average, however he had that extra string to his bow in terms of his ruckwork and there wasn't really an obvious replacement. He is now starting to hit form, so you wouldn't drop him. Burton however it seems can only play as a key forward now and does have an obvious replacement, simple as that.

 

[Allefgib]

Okay, HunterCrow's comment is a bit nebulous.. but there are valid questions to be asked about the FSI - and you do seem to be relying on it a lot in your arguments over our injury list.

For starters, how do they determine what is the "best 22", from which players are missing? If, as previously stated, it now has Otten out of our best 22 and Davis in, then that's rubbish. Teams evolve over the course of a season, with some players (usually younger players) moving into the best 22, while others (usually older) move out. This becomes evident when players are omitted due to poor form - it is NOT evident when a player is MIA for the entire season due to a knee reconstruction. Will Nick Riewoldt drop out of St Kilda's best 22, as determined by the FSI, just because he hasn't played for a month? That's ludicrous.

Secondly, how are player weightings assigned? I have no problem with a player like Reiwoldt having a higher rating/weighting than Andy Otten. However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ablett's weighting were around the same level as Otten. Ablett is a far, far better player than Otten, but he's also surrounded by higher quality players. One 10/10 player in a sea of 9/10 ends up with the same weighting as a 5/10 player in a sea of 4/10 players. What this boils down to is that the FSI gives a percentage of the team compared to its best 22. It makes no attempt to compare the value of one team's best 22 against another team's best 22 - a point which you have already made.

At the end of the day, the FSI is a statistic which is somewhat arbitrary in its nature. Your heavy reliance on it really doesn't help your arguments that much as a result. I'm not saying that it's completely meaningless, but it's not quite the potent weapon that you're making it out to be.

Righto here are some stats from analysing FSI over the first 3 rounds of this season. If people request the whole season I'll do it tonight at home - so long as people actualy start debating the points sensibily and not just disagreeing because they want to (that shoudl keep me fairly safe from more work....).

So - Looking at the FSI for teams for a game and the results in the first 3 weeks:

70% of the winners had a higher FSI. (17 of the 24)
54% of the winners were the home team (13 of the 24)

So stright away it seems to be more useful for tough tips than 'who is the home team'.

Before you ask... of the TRUE home games (I basically said any game involving at least one non-melb teams is a 'true home game' - rivalry round wasn't played yet so no issues there).

65% of winners had the higher FSI. (9 of the 14 games).
57% were home team winners. (8 of the 14 games).

Still reinforces FSI appears to be more useful for your tipping right there.

Looking at the home team concept a bit more - the games where the winner was the home team and had a lower FSI - Port over Kangas, Melbourne over us. Including those in the sample set of winners gives closer to 80% of results could have been 'tipped' qualitatively combining some home ground advantage concept with the FSI indicators. (19 of the 24 games). Thats a trifle weak given the qualitative assessment on when the home team should be a bigger advantage is to hard to think about right now.

So let's consider this then - games where the FSI was more than 5% different - 12.
Games with a greater tahn 5% difference and the winner had the higher FSI - 10.

Thats 83% of games.

Now - bigger sample base would be good given the changes to FSI occur as people start playing - if you want it I can do it.

To me FSI seems to be 'onto something' and bears some merit in consideration. Certainly appears to reinforce the evenness - to some degree - of the competition.

 

[Elite Crow]

.......you heard that on the TV commentary didn't you .......and now you've taken it and passing it on as fact .....oh you fool

WW I am trying my best to show restraint but posts like this make it difficult. I go to the games, I observe that Burton struggles to kick 40 metres. So stick your tongue elsewhere and before you come up with another crap post, think before you type.

 

[Vader]

Allefgib -
I have no problem with the concept of the FSI - and it makes perfect sense that teams which are close to full strength will perform better than those who are missing key players due to injury. This is backed up by the statistics you have provided.

My questions relate to the implementation of the FSI, something which you didn't address at all.

 

[jackster83]

I'm thinking along the same lines as Vader. Who decides the FSI and how closely do they pay attention to our games?

If you asked everyone on here to name their best 22, how many of us are likely to name the same 22 players? For most sides their best 22 is constantly changing, especially amongst the 20th-25th best players on their list due to fluctuations in form, fitness and the position they are playing.

FWIW I think the biggest problem isn't the long injury list but rather the number of underdone, struggling (mostly peak age ) players in the team.

 

[marvin]

Our FSI, according to the Herald Sun:

Week 1 (vs Freo) - 79%.

Week 2 (vs Sydney) - 84% based on outs of 17% (out Griffin, VB, Stevens, Sloane, Armstrong) and ins of 18% (Young, Burton, Sellar, Porps, Maric).

Week 3 (vs Melbourne) 90% Outs 3% (Sellar, Young) ins 6% (Knights, Schmidt).

Week 4 (v Carlton) 88% Outs 10% (Bock, Hentschel) ins 5% (Johncock, Davis)

Week 5 (v WB) 89% Outs 8% (Walker, Mackay) ins 5% (VB, Henderson)

Week 6 (v Port) 91% Outs 10% (Knights, Henderson, Dangerfield) ins 10% (Stevens, Bock, Jaensch).

Week 7 (v Rich) 94% - unchanged line up.

So over the course of the 7 matches so far, our total "out" effect has been 48%, and our total "in" effect has been 44%, yet our FSI has gone up by 15% from 79% to 94%?

How does FSI explain the change in the baseline? Well, our best team has changed.

Round 1 best team (from FSI data) - players in bold didn't play

McLeod Rutten Stevens
Reilly Bock Doughty
Otten Thompson Mackay
Vince Moran Burton
Knights Tippett Porplyzia
Maric Van Berlo Goodwin
Edwards Hentschel Symes Johncock

Round 7 best team (from FSI data) - players in bold didn't play

Johncock Rutten Davis
McLeod Bock Goodwin
Doughty Reilly Van Berlo
Porplyzia Stevens Vince
Dangerfield Tippett Douglas
Maric Thompson Edwards
Knights Mackay Hentschel Burton

So the FSI indicator included Moran, Symes and Otten in our best 22 at the start of the year, but now their places are taken by Dangerfield, Davis and Douglas in our best FSI team. Now, you can argue around the margins about which of those 6 players are in our best 22, but what you can't argue ist hat Moran, Symes and Otten dropped out of our best 22 on performance - they dropped out because they are injured and haven't played this year.

It's a team stability index to some extent, but to call it a full strength index when the baseline varies so much is crazy.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Can't you just admit that Burton has been as useless as **** on a bull?

Why oh why are you constantly trying to polish a terd on this forum?

.......and that's no way to speak about an Adelaide Crow player who has given great service .....irrespective of his current form

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Tippett has kicked 7 goals in the last fortnight. Burton has kicked none.

And that tells me what?

Why pick 2 games ...why not pick 1 qtr of a game to make a point .....cmon

 

[sydney_crow]

Allefgib -
I have no problem with the concept of the FSI - and it makes perfect sense that teams which are close to full strength will perform better than those who are missing key players due to injury. This is backed up by the statistics you have provided.

My questions relate to the implementation of the FSI, something which you didn't address at all.

Don't take this as gospel (I'm working from memory) but I think it goes something like this.

They calculate the Champion data rankings for each player (and each team). Those players with the highest ranking (either overall or in a given position - not sure which) are then considered to be in the team's 'full strength side' and the base number for the index is calculated from the sum of their CD rankings.

That is say Vince averages 110 points, Thompson 100, Tippett 90 and so on then our aggregate ranking for the side (say 1500 points) becomes our baseline against which the FSI is calculated.

Then come round 1 the FSI is calculated by totalling the average CD rankings of those players actually selected (taking into account injuries obviously) and comparing this total against our baseline. Say the total CD ranking points for the 22 who actually play is only 1200 (because Knights, Johncock, Otten, etc are out) then our FSI % that round is 80 (1200/1500).

Some observations:

• It is independent - you can like or dislike the CD rankings but it's based on these 'facts' rather than say a coach's assessment of someone's value
• Individual players are not given weightings per se they simply contribute a certain number of CD points (so Vince contributes more points than Doughty for instance)
• There's much more science behind it in terms of how the average CD ranking is done (rolling average over X number of weeks for instance, etc)
• It doesn't take account of the comparison of a team's aggregate points against their opposition...only against the main team's notional full-strength team. For instance St.Kilda may play Richmond and have an FSI of only 80% whilst Richmond's is 90% (i.e. closer to full strength) but yet the Saints may have a higher total CD ranking...and hence on this basis would be expected to win.

So certainly some vagaries to contend with but I think it does offer some insight if taken with a grain of salt.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

There is a massive difference between Tippett and Burton at the moment, Burton has kicked 2 goals versus Tippett's 10 goals. Tippett's form early in the season was average, however he had that extra string to his bow in terms of his ruckwork and there wasn't really an obvious replacement. He is now starting to hit form, so you wouldn't drop him. Burton however it seems can only play as a key forward now and does have an obvious replacement, simple as that.

Gee when this board gets a whipping boy ..........yes he's had some bad aspects of his game that I have already noted ......but who in the team this year hasn't

If you look at last weeks game OBJECTIVELY .....you'll see that Burton was actually a good contributor and not the one position player ......and certainly not a KPP

Burton has always had his distractors ......and I have been an anti Burton person on many occasions and was strongly in favor of trading him 3 years ago

But fair is fair .....and he's not the hopeless player he's being made out to be ......fact is despite everyones observations there's as much chance of Burton being dropped as there is of me getting a game

Players I would be questioning AS HARD would be Vince and Thompson .....when you look at the midfield stats this year they as prime movers have a lot of brownie points to build up again

Goodwin, Edwards, and Macleod should not be in the midfield at this stage of their career ..........that makes our midfield slow ......not purely leg speed, but their in-close sharpness has gone and is contributing to opposition clearances

But they're still doing better than Thompson and Vince which is why they're having to go into the midfield

 

[WaynesWorld19]

WW I am trying my best to show restraint but posts like this make it difficult. I go to the games, I observe that Burton struggles to kick 40 metres. So stick your tongue elsewhere and before you come up with another crap post, think before you type.

Why not just stop reading them then ....that's easy enough

 

[Bovo]

And that tells me what?

Why pick 2 games ...why not pick 1 qtr of a game to make a point .....cmon

I concur with you Wayne's-World.

If we want Burton bashing, I will look no further than the Power threads. Burton has not been at his best in front of goals (I think we can all agree on that). He has made some mistakes in a the last few weeks (but who in the Squad hasn't? Notice we are 1-6). What he does do is use his agility to get to where the ball is going. He has an enermous tank and can run through the game better than most of the kids.
He does do plenty of things which I think becomes unnoticed. Unfortunately it is easy to see him miss from set shots, and think they guy is useless.

I think the whole Burton bashing thing is a bit over the top. There are plenty of players who have been playing worse, IMO. My thoughts only.

 

[Vader]

Thanks for explaining that marvin & sydney crow.

I can live with them basing it on CD points. They're as good a measure as any for determining which is our best 22. Not perfect, but no method is.

The problem I have with that methodology is that it fails to account for players who haven't played a single game all season due to injury. Players like Otten, Moran and Symes (using our R1 FSI team as a baseline). Otten and Moran would definitely be in our best 22 when fit, Symes is borderline. The fact that they are currently injured does not change this, whereas the FSI assumes that they are no longer in our best 22 just because they haven't been selected.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I concur with you Wayne's-World.

If we want Burton bashing, I will look no further than the Power threads. Burton has not been at his best in front of goals (I think we can all agree on that). He has made some mistakes in a the last few weeks (but who in the Squad hasn't? Notice we are 1-6). What he does do is use his agility to get to where the ball is going. He has an enermous tank and can run through the game better than most of the kids.
He does do plenty of things which I think becomes unnoticed. Unfortunately it is easy to see him miss from set shots, and think they guy is useless.

I think the whole Burton bashing thing is a bit over the top. There are plenty of players who have been playing worse, IMO. My thoughts only.

Yep ..i can handle strong player assessment ....i do it all the time

BUT to isolate Burtons mistakes / supposed flaws and basically overlook 70% of the rest of the team player mistakes / flaws is just targeted fan obsession

All based on the premise that Burton is holding Walker out of the side

We're 1-6 in wins ........our turnovers are killing us, our stoppage clearances are killing us .... we're 15th IIRC for contested ball in the comp .....and yet it appears Burton is the player that all our rage is targeted at

As I have said fair is fair and Burton has been a good servant of the club and doesn't deserve this .....simply because of Walker

 

[Elite Crow]

Why not just stop reading them then ....that's easy enough

So you talk shit and call me a fool and the course of action you are suggesting is I stop reading the fact you are insulting me?