List Mgmt. Geelong Premiership, why not? Drafting utilities, that's why.

[catempire]

DE stats are too raw and unrefined to have much meaning on their own. You'd need to have DE in terms of successful education of different passes, sorted by different circumstances (ie DE switching, DE switching under pressure, etc.)

While CD continue to lock up 99.9% of stats away we aren't going to get an answer.

Over the course of 25 games DE has meaning. The noise that could exist within say, a game, will wash out. Higher DE over the course of the season will generally mean a combination of (a) the player being a better user of the ball and (b) the player taking easier possessions. So defenders tend to have higher DEs than midfielders as a lot of their possessions are under less pressure. But you can robustly compare defenders with defenders and inside midfielders with inside midfielders (etc) because they will generally face similar conditions under which they take possessions.

As long as you use it with these things in mind it's no better or worse than any other stat category.

 

[Landgraft]

Over the course of 25 games DE has meaning. The noise that could exist within say, a game, will wash out. Higher DE over the course of the season will generally mean a combination of (a) the player being a better user of the ball and (b) the player taking easier possessions. So defenders tend to have higher DEs than midfielders as a lot of their possessions are under less pressure. But you can robustly compare defenders with defenders and inside midfielders with inside midfielders (etc) because they will generally face similar conditions under which they take possessions.

As long as you use it with these things in mind it's no better or worse than any other stat category.

There's still too much unmasked noise under the hood but that's a fair point.

Issue here is we were wanting to compare not only our defenders to each other but also to other players on the team. So positional comparisons will only get us so far.

 

[catempire]

There's still too much unmasked noise under the hood but that's a fair point.

Issue here is we were wanting to compare not only our defenders to each other but also to other players on the team. So positional comparisons will only get us so far.

On your second point, that's exactly what I was saying: it's essentially meaningless comparing say, Lonergan with Selwood, on a DE% basis. But there's certainly meaning in comparing Lonergan with Henderson and Selwood with Dangerfield.

 

[Spazz Cat]

On your second point, that's exactly what I was saying: it's essentially meaningless comparing say, Lonergan with Selwood, on a DE% basis. But there's certainly meaning in comparing Lonergan with Henderson and Selwood with Dangerfield.

That is certainly fair for sure and the way it needs to be done somehow.
Also in defence you can't really compare a Lonegan type with a Johannisen type.
Half backs like that who can win (or lose) teams on the strength of their kicking kinda need their own DE stats.
Also kicking and hanballing should be seperate.
I dunno, the whole DE% stats thing the way it's done now isn't great to me.

 

[Landgraft]

On your second point, that's exactly what I was saying: it's essentially meaningless comparing say, Lonergan with Selwood, on a DE% basis. But there's certainly meaning in comparing Lonergan with Henderson and Selwood with Dangerfield.

Well, I think there'd be value if it could be sorted by type of disposal. Obviously midfielders and key defenders play different roles but there are still common situations like disposal after marking at half back. It would be good to understand the impact on a disposal chain if one link is Tom Lonergan vs that same link being Joel Selwood.

 

[catempire]

That is certainly fair for sure and the way it needs to be done somehow.
Also in defence you can't really compare a Lonegan type with a Johannisen type.
Half backs like that who can win (or lose) teams on the strength of their kicking kinda need their own DE stats.
Also kicking and hanballing should be seperate.
I dunno, the whole DE% stats thing the way it's done now isn't great to me.

Yep, could be better but for what it is, as long as it is used right, it's a useful metric.

 

[catempire]

Well, I think there'd be value if it could be sorted by type of disposal. Obviously midfielders and key defenders play different roles but there are still common situations like disposal after marking at half back. It would be good to understand the impact on a disposal chain if one link is Tom Lonergan vs that same link being Joel Selwood.

Agree it would be better if broken down that way. There are practical limits on what stats can tell you though. For example, I know from watching a lot of Geelong football that Lonergan is very likely to hit a target with his disposal but that doesn't say much about how well that is contributing to Geelong kicking a goal because Lonergan is typically a player who will kick to a low risk option and take a lot of time to do so. Another player like Mackie tries (and succeeds) in hitting harder targets. It would be hard to construct a stat that would encapsulate these phenomena.

 

[Warhorse]

Some interesting discussions in this thread. We need to fix a lot of things before we can really challenge for a flag.

The op has a point but misses it in a way as well. We actually draft D grade midfield talent and try to turn them into forwards such as mccarthy, gregson, parfitt and cockatoo. I think the reason scott does this is to add to the midfield rotation. This is why ablett is such a good pickup as he is genuinely good at both.

The talk on here is that our midfield is great. Our starting midfield on paper of ablett selwood dangerfield and duncan is amongst the greatest of all time on paper. But.. i cant see dangerfield and ablett playing in the midfield together. They both need to be the man in there to be effective. I do feel they can play in the forwardline together as they play different games there.

I agree with the op about drafting more midfielders as menegola, blicavs should be no where near our midfield.

 

[catempire]

I agree with the op about drafting more midfielders as menegola, blicavs should be no where near our midfield.

I can see Blicavs being pushed out of the midfield but the Menegola call is garbage. Just finished 6th in the Carji in his 2nd season of AFL footy and has played just 30 AFL games. He was also the 5th most improved player in the AFL in 2017 according to official AFL Player Rankings.

There's no reason whatsoever he can't be a key part of the midfield for the next half decade.

 

[Warhorse]

I can see Blicavs being pushed out of the midfield but the Menegola call is garbage. Just finished 6th in the Carji in his 2nd season of AFL footy and has played just 30 AFL games. He was also the 5th most improved player in the AFL in 2017 according to official AFL Player Rankings.

There's no reason whatsoever he can't be a key part of the midfield for the next half decade.

I can see why people like him, as he can rack up the stats. My concerns are his lack of impact in 1st quarters in high intensity games. We can only afford to carry one plodder in the midfield and that is scott selwood who adds a lot of toughness around the ball.

If guthrie plays the way he did at the start of 2016 then he offers so much more then menegola. Problem is he is not likely to get back to that form.

Would you trust him to play a good game if we make the grand final next year?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I can see why people like him, as he can rack up the stats. My concerns are his lack of impact in 1st quarters in high intensity games. We can only afford to carry one plodder in the midfield and that is scott selwood who adds a lot of toughness around the ball.

If guthrie plays the way he did at the start of 2016 then he offers so much more then menegola. Problem is he is not likely to get back to that form.

Would you trust him to play a good game if we make the grand final next year?

Guthrie is a half back or at least should be.

You underrate Menegola's output and improvement. Getting a marginal upgrade on him is the least of our worries.

 

[Landgraft]

The op has a point but misses it in a way as well. We actually draft D grade midfield talent and try to turn them into forwards such as mccarthy, gregson, parfitt and cockatoo. I think the reason scott does this is to add to the midfield rotation.

 

[Warhorse]

Guthrie is a half back or at least should be.

You underrate Menegola's output and improvement. Getting a marginal upgrade on him is the least of our worries.

You overrate menegola output. He is shocking in finals. I dont care how many touches he gets during the season. Much prefer players who stand up where it counts

Do you think the players listed are natutal forwards or midfielders? None of them really played fwd as juniors

 

[Landgraft]

Do you think the players listed are natutal forwards or midfielders? None of them really played fwd as juniors

-> D Grade talent
-> Parfitt/Gregson not natural footballers
-> Ascribing the draft strategy to Scott

Mate if I was looking for cheap bait I'd go down to Woolies.

 

[Nickoo]

We overuse the handball. I've said it time and time again but it doesn't stand up under immense pressure.

Take a look at the stats from the Sydney final where we kicked the ball more and were more direct.

Didn't we 'correct' our problem after the Syd PF with more handball? Then got destroyed in Adel with too much. We overuse the ball no doubt but getting the ball out of defence is really shaky at times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nickoo]

I'd say Scooter, Menegola, Blitz are all average kicks at best. Neither really add much run either.
Neither of them are bad at all there's just f***en 3 of em in the one midfield.
Overall I would actually call Danger a really good kick who has some s**t ones.

Disagree, Scooter is a very good kick. That kick for goal against the dogs hard on the boundary line was sublime. Menegola is also very good and occasionally when he has time to think, very bad. Bics is the only average one I reckon you've listed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Warhorse]

-> D Grade talent
-> Parfitt/Gregson not natural footballers
-> Ascribing the draft strategy to Scott

Mate if I was looking for cheap bait I'd go down to Woolies.

Parfitt is not a natural forward. He is a midfielder. He is currently average.

Gregson has turned into some sort of superstar since his injury. I like his hustle but he is average.

I never mentioned scott and draft strategy. I just mentioned how he uses our players in positions in the forward. I didnt even say whether its good or bad. You only have to look at adelaide in the grand final when they didnt have enough in the midfield rotation. At other times they will look fantastic if the midfield can hold its own such as against geelong. Both have positives and negatives.

 

[Partridge]

You overrate menegola output. He is shocking in finals. I dont care how many touches he gets during the season. Much prefer players who stand up where it counts.

It's a bit like the Menzel conundrum in a different way. Menegola has shown he's a pretty good player at senior level, at least during home and away. Most of the time. However, he's also had three extremely poor finals in the last two years where he's looked like a rabbit in the spotlights. The onus is now on him to correct that.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Disagree, Scooter is a very good kick. That kick for goal against the dogs hard on the boundary line was sublime. Menegola is also very good and occasionally when he has time to think, very bad. Bics is the only average one I reckon you've listed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Menegola has his moments. At times he does some rippers.
When the pressure is really on however both kicking and hand passing skills go down a few notches.
No way I'd call Scooter more than an average kick. Even after that boundary line kick. Blitz kicked a few beauties from the boundary this season (one sweet left foot one) but I'd still call him an average field kick.

 

[dazbroncos]

-> D Grade talent
-> Parfitt/Gregson not natural footballers
-> Ascribing the draft strategy to Scott

Mate if I was looking for cheap bait I'd go down to Woolies.

BC and some of his best work.
It’s a day ending in y.


Go Catters

 

[Armo7]

Our midfield lacks depth, last year it was held together with two stars and a few cameo appearances. Next year we'll have three stars, but that doesn't bridge the gap between us and the sides that comprehensively beat us in finals. I think there are two issues our gameplan, which I think is selfish and one dimensional, and our drafting, which consistently ignores what we actually need. We consistently recruit players who are kind of good at a lot of things but not great at anything. The in 06 we drafted an absolute pure midfielder who is likely to be in our next team of the century.

In 2007 we drafted Harry Taylor with our first pick. The perfect pick for the time, a brilliant key defender who is now potentially in the twilight of his career, but still comfortably the second best KPD in the game. Tick.

2008 we pick Mitch Brown, who was kind of forward, kind of back and ended up being kind of nothing. Cross.

2009 Dan Menzel. Hard to say what he could have been, but looks like a serviceable forward. Tick.

2010 Billie Smedts, another utility type, small forward, wing, running half back, absolute moron. HUGE CROSS.

2011 Joel Hamling. Hard to judge, but an undersized key defender starved of opportunites. Question mark.

2012 Jackson Thurlow. Hampered by injury at times, but another utility not holding down a spot. Question mark.

2013 Jarrad Jansen. Wells drafted a midfielder and it didn't work out. Cross.

2014 Nakia Cockatoo. Controversial, because he could be gun, but he hasn't done much yet. Question mark.

2015 Ryan Gardner. Too early to tell. Question mark.

2016 Brandon Parfitt. Looks like a tick.

I know some of these are later picks because we've traded our higher picks, and we can't access the top ten in the draft because we consistently make finals, but maybe that's also the issue. Maybe we need to stop trading out of the draft for potatoes like Stanley and actually get somebody who will help us win a flag in five years time.

With all the buzz around season 2018 I think we're in for another massive disappointment in September, and I think if you look deep down you know that you are too. So why?

Well, only one out of the 18 teams gets to win it each year, so 17 other teams are headed for massive disappointment as usual. You are not really going out on a limb with that last statement are you, fella. And drafting superstars has its degree of difficulty and can be hit and miss especially when the picks haven't been particularly high! Gee? Stanley might be a potato (your opinion), but what about those beautiful duck fat, crispy French fries such as Danger, Henderson, 2E, and why not throw in Scott Selwood.

 

[Armo7]

-> D Grade talent
-> Parfitt/Gregson not natural footballers
-> Ascribing the draft strategy to Scott

Mate if I was looking for cheap bait I'd go down to Woolies.

Are you really saying Parfitt is not a natural footballer! He has got composure and awareness and great skills. what is not to love from an 18-year-old who did that in his first season?

 

[dazbroncos]

Are you really saying Parfitt is not a natural footballer! He has got composure and awareness and great skills. what is not to love from an 18-year-old who did that in his first season?

no..he's quoting another poster who claimed that.
And its not worth the argument as that is exactly what the OP wants.... argument...

GO Catters

 

[Johnny Cattery]

Why was that do you think?

Why did our forwards not move? Yep, good question. Wish someone would answer it ... structure (confusion)? heavy legs? confusion? spat about who should have brought the half-time refreshments? But: agree, something was wrong.

 

[El Dubya]

no..he's quoting another poster who claimed that.
And its not worth the argument as that is exactly what the OP wants.... argument...

GO Catters

Wrong. I'm frustrated and I wanted to read people's opinion and discussion.