doodles98
Cancelled
- Aug 6, 2012
- 6,867
- 8,711
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Big Dud?Have you read TG's opinions on Wells? This question will take the thread to a dark place.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Big Dud?Have you read TG's opinions on Wells? This question will take the thread to a dark place.
TG is Garth Marenghi obviously.Have you read TG's opinions on Wells? This question will take the thread to a dark place.
You can talk whatever you like because we don't have them covered in any metric other than CD's! IMO, its attitudes like yours that are half the issue.
For so long we've thought things would just happen because we look good on paper, we think individual players are better than others or once the injury curse lifts we'll be right!
Whatever it is I'm over it. We're currently bog average as individuals and a collective so we need to fix it moving forward! Hopefully 2017 is the start of it.
Ted Hopkins, the devil from 1970, but also Champion Data founder, has been capturing alternate stats in relation to this for a few years now.The best I can come up with is scoring chain involvements, but a series of quick handballs in a contest deep in the back pocket that sees the ball wind up with a stoppage in your F50 wouldn't be measured.
I do also think we'll see that become less effective in 2017. There'll be teams that try to emulate it, but I hope we're ahead of the curve and work on another method of "escape" that allows us to hold our shape on the outside of those contests.
In one sense I can understand where you are coming from.Ah ok then.
Btw it was opinion not an attitude.
In one sense I can understand where you are coming from.
I think Pendlebury is individually better than the Bulldog's best mid (Bont).
And even Treloar might be individually better than their next best (Dahlhaus) (tbh I really rate Dahlhaus but I would give you that one.)
After that, I think you might not be correct. Individually, Libba/Wallis/Mccrae/Boyd/Daniel/Smith etc I think are not near Pendle/Treloar or Bont or Dahlhaus but they are better than our next best (or were up until 2016).
That's a coaching issue isn't itI consider Pendlebury, AT and possible Wells as match winners. I can only include Bontempelli from the dogs.
I'm happy to take Sidey, Adams, Crisp over Libba (he is a star), Wallis and Daniel. (Boyd is a defender and Smith a forward).
Our issue isn't the personally its how they function together.
Purely statistical based on their own metrics where they rate quality of depth over star power. For instance all of Sidebottom, Wells, Pendles, Treloar, Adams, Grundy and Crisp based on CD metrics are rated above average by position ergo our number 1 midfield ranking. The problem is it completely ignores how they operate as a group.
As to their credibility well that's purely down to how much weight you out in statistics.
The CD rankings are meaningful as the quantify the potential upside of the group once they start OPERATING AS A GROUP.
I think people here see this upside potential when feeling confident about our midfield group, and that's hard to argue against given this CD data.
I consider Pendlebury, AT and possible Wells as match winners. I can only include Bontempelli from the dogs.
I'm happy to take Sidey, Adams, Crisp over Libba (he is a star), Wallis and Daniel. (Boyd is a defender and Smith a forward).
Our issue isn't the personally its how they function together.
And your point is? I'm confused because you quoted me and then went on an unrelated tangent. We all see potential just no one to harness it, IMO.
CD data is not about predicting or projecting into the future.The CD rankings are meaningful as they quantify the potential upside of the group once they start OPERATING AS A GROUP.
I think people here see this upside potential when feeling confident about our midfield group, and that's hard to argue against given this CD data.
How many games do you think you need as a group to get the unity required to be an elite cohesive unit rather than a tidy looking midfield on paper ?Quite a few. That group missed a combined 10 or so games in 2016 with Adams most of those himself.
How many games do you think you need as a group to get the unity required to be an elite cohesive unit rather than a tidy looking midfield on paper ?
CD data is not about predicting or projecting into the future.
They simply produce descriptive Summary data designed to try and quantifying what happened.
OP quotes they have taken individual midfielder's performances over the last two years to come up with their ratings. They add Wells to our rankings, do they then lower the stats for a guy like Sidney or Crisp who may not spend as much time in the middle now?
There is plenty of upside, but people need to actually understand the CD data before using it to back-up their opinion.
You have misinterpreted the data.
If you're talking about Sidders you're wrong IMO, very good player but he's probably our 5th most important mid now we have Wells, as I said earlier the man is a natural crumbing fwd who also happens to be a pretty good mid.Lol I have thatsgold on ignore for a reason. Is an A grade mid simple as that.
You know, your posts would probably be better received if you didn't post in caps and make it look like you're yelling at people.The CD rankings are meaningful as they quantify the potential upside of the group once they start OPERATING AS A GROUP.
I think people here see this upside potential when feeling confident about our midfield group, and that's hard to argue against given this CD data.
He was talking about Wells, who TG described as a C grader.If you're talking about Sidders you're wrong IMO, very good player but he's probably our 5th most important mid now we have Wells, as I said earlier the man is a natural crumbing fwd who also happens to be a pretty good mid.
Lol, kden.He was talking about Wells, who TG described as a C grader.
You talk about CD stats quantifying the potential upside of the midfield group. They don't do anything of the sort.Please read my post again - I have made no misinterpretation of the data.
Was talking about WellsIf you're talking about Sidders you're wrong IMO, very good player but he's probably our 5th most important mid now we have Wells, as I said earlier the man is a natural crumbing fwd who also happens to be a pretty good mid.
Dude has issues man.Was talking about Wells
Chemistry is all that matters, given most teams are within 10& of each other, a good coach is worth more than a good coach though. Just IMO.We have a better midfield than the dogs on paper as a whole, but there are clear weaknesses in our midfield cohort. One of them being that the majority of our midfielders don't win their own ball and often rely on others for the hard work.
A grade
Pendlebury, Treloar, Wells
B+
Sidebottom
B
Adams
Compared to
A grade
Bontempelli
B+
Macrae, Dahlhaus, Hunter, Libba
The problem is still contested football, first touch in contests and clearances. Pendlebury, Treloar and Wells are all excellent midfielders but mainly due to their balance between inside/outside. Sidebottom plays exclusively away from contests nowadays. Adams has always been more of an accumulator like Dane Swan in his later days than a clearance specialist like JPK/Parker/Bontempelli/Crisp/Barlow (yes, barlow).
Apart from Treloar, I'm not confident in anyone from our senior list to dive into contests and win the hardball get. Pendlebury, Wells , Sidebottom soft. Adams is made out of plastic (not quite paper yet). And even Treloar I'd rather have him as the release player instead of bashing into contests which compromises his longevity as a player. Treloar imo is our most valuable player, and giving 2 1st rounders for him really is a make or break decision.
This is exactly why i would've loved someone like Tom Mitchell, Michael Barlow or Tom Rockliff from the trade period. Although obviously the traders' hands were tied due to the Treloar deal. However it was still achievable considering the quality and quantity of players we traded away. If we turned all of our losses in deals into even deals then Mitchell, Rockliff(Yeah yeah I know he's free next year) were both possible, at the very least we should've grabbed someone like Barlow. The fact that we didn't go for any of these options probably indicates that De Goey will feature heavily in our midfield rotations as that big bodied clearance focused inside midfielder. At least I hope so...