It's time to talk about Lachie...(Deadly from the pockets, Sprays it from everywhere else edition)

[ScragCity]

Its a misconception that Hunter is a bad set shot. Most of his shots are actually from tight on the boundary and are extremely high degree of difficulty shots. He kicks more of those than probably 75% of players in the comp would.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Its a misconception that Hunter is a bad set shot. Most of his shots are actually from tight on the boundary and are extremely high degree of difficulty shots. He kicks more of those than probably 75% of players in the comp would.

Do you have any actual data to back this up Scrag? Because anecdotaly like an intrained house cat he seems to spray it everywhere. In fact his goal kicking has for me gotten to the point where I just assume that he is going to do just that or drop the ball short.

 

[ScragCity]

Do you have any actual data to back this up Scrag? Because anecdotaly like an intrained house cat he seems to spray it everywhere. In fact his goal kicking has for me gotten to the point where I just assume that he is going to do just that or drop the ball short.

In Bigfooty style I have no data whatsoever to back that up. Just my subjective and highly unreliable memory of his set shots this season.

 

[King Harold]

Its a misconception that Hunter is a bad set shot. Most of his shots are actually from tight on the boundary and are extremely high degree of difficulty shots. He kicks more of those than probably 75% of players in the comp would.

No . he's totally unreliable , no matter where he shoots from.
Your not smoking your breakfast are you ?

 

[BrisDog]

Can someone change the thread title? It sounds like Lachie has been a naughty boy when he has actually been kicking date.

 

[ScragCity]

I'll concede that he doesn't have much penetration on his kicking; if he's kicking from 40+ out he's probably not gonna make the distance. However, if he's on a tight angle in the pocket from about 30 out I'd back him in over almost anyone else at the club. For mine our worst set shot at the club is Dahlhaus, Roughead then daylight.

 

[Dazb86]

I'll concede that he doesn't have much penetration on his kicking; if he's kicking from 40+ out he's probably not gonna make the distance. However, if he's on a tight angle in the pocket from about 30 out I'd back him in over almost anyone else at the club. For mine our worst set shot at the club is Dahlhaus, Roughead then daylight.

Hunter, Dahl and Roughy are the worst culprits of missing gettable shots IMO. Not neccessarily in that order though.

 

[dogwatch]

In Bigfooty style I have no data whatsoever to back that up. Just my subjective and highly unreliable memory of his set shots this season.

Refreshing candour.

 

[King Harold]

Can someone change the thread title? It sounds like Lachie has been a naughty boy when he has actually been kicking date.

Hunter is massively underrated on here , but his kicking for goal is horrible ,
so he fits in well

 

[Yojimbo]

Lachlan Hunter (19 Games) Top 100 Rankings:

Kicks- Rank 13 (16.21)
Handballs- Rank 28 (13.61)
Disposals- Rank 11 (29.37)
Marks- Rank 88 (5.32)
Goals- (Not Top 100)
Behinds- (Not Top 100)
Tackles- (Not Top 100)
Frees For- Rank 84 (1.37)
Frees Against- (Not Top 100)
Hit Outs- (Not Top 100)
Inside 50's- Rank 74 (3.63)
Goal Assists- (Not Top 100)

Contested Possessions- Rank 97 (8.53)
Uncontested Possessions- Rank 7 (19.84)
Effective Disposals- Rank 13 (21.26)
Disposal Efficiency- (Not Top 100)
Clangers- (Not Top 100)
Contested Marks- (Not Top 100)
Marks Inside 50- Rank 96 (0.84)
Clearances- (Not Top 100)
Rebound 50's- Rank 88 (2.89)
One Percenters- (Not Top 100)
Bounces- Rank 13 (1.42)
Metres Gained- Rank 39 (391.84)
Score Involvements- (Not Top 100)
Turnovers- Rank 28 (5.00)
Intercepts- Rank 83 (5.37)
Tackles Inside 50- (Not Top 100)
Time On Ground %- Rank 39 (90.37 %)

There it is the sexy mans guide to Lachlan Hunter from the sexy man.
If you have my read between the lines intelligence you just get it.

 

[WallyStringhaus]

Wow, third for M50s? I think that's actually really good!

I'm serious. We now just need to work out why that's not showing up on the scoreboard. Is he kicking heaps of them OOTF? Is he trying dinky little passes? (And how many of those are effective?)
We might yet argue ourselves into unlikely agreement on this one.

And I know this may be nitpicking and even tenuous, but ... with the 27 shots to 17 thing:

That's 27 scoring shots from 22 games or just under 1.23 per game.
The 17 shots is from 19 games or 0.89 per game.

Now I think there's a case to argue that because we were more productive as a team in 2017 we should adjust our expectations of the players who do the scoring (or provide GAs) accordingly. You might not agree with my logic but let's see how it affects things.

In 2017 we had 557 scoring shots in 22 games (avge 25.3) compared to 414 shots so far in 20 games this year (avge 20.7). So I suggest we downgrade his 1.23/game by the same ratio. That comes out at 1.00/game. That's not so very different to his 2018 scoring shots (0.89), especially if you take into account the time he played up forward in early 2017. Given our 2018 form I expect most other players are well down on 2016 & 2017 numbers as well, and many of them by more than Lachie, so I see no need for a special focus on him.

Bottom line for me: he's going OK. And yes, I'm happy to disagree with you on this one.

There's another metric I use to gauge a players effectiveness going Inside 50 and again it doesn't paint a pretty picture for Lachie. All it entails is dividing the number of Goal Assists against the total number of Inside 50's generated. Eg: Player x has 60 Inside 50s and converted them into 10 Goal Assists = a score of 6 (One in Six entries leads to a Goal Assist).

I find it effective as you can use it in a team sense (all Dogs mids players are kicking to the same forwards after all!) and as a broader picture league wide. Season to season you will find that most players don't fluctuate too much and it doesn't seem to matter which forwards are available, the best mids will hit a target in a goal scoring position regardless of who they are kicking to.

Dogs Players:

Bontempelli;
2016: 5.6
2017: 5.26
2018: 7

Macrae (The Metronome);
2016: 6.8
2017: 6.8
2018: 6.9

McLean;
2016: 8.66
2017: 7.66
2018: 7

Wallis;
2016: 7.22
2017: 5.25
2018: 4

Liber;
2016: 4.56
2017: 11 (Partied a bit hard Lib!)
2018: N/A

Dahlhaus;
2016: 10.37
2017: 7.22
2018: 8.6

The Best 5 (IMO) Outside Mids in the Game:

Josh Kelly;
2016: 5.66
2017: 8.06
2018: 5.66 (No Patton, Cameron or Greene for large portions)

Isaac Smith;
2016: 9.18
2017: 7.69
2018: 6.58

Zach Merrett;
2016: 9
2017: 6.69
2018: 6.33

Mitch Duncan;
2016: 4.76
2017: 7.76
2018: 5.46

Andrew Gaff;
2016: 7.54
2017: 5.4
2018: 6.72 (No Kennedy, Darling for large portions)

The Best (IMO) Mid in the Game:

Dustin Martin;
2016: 7 (Team finished 13th)
2017: 5.17
2018: 6.05

Lachie Hunter;
2016: 6.06
2017: 10.66
2018: 17.25 (Has had more Inside 50's in 19 games this year then he did in 22 games last year)

Either the last two years have been a statistical anomaly or he is trending downwards significantly.

Like I have said throughout the thread, I admire many, many aspects of his game but the outside mid role is just so pivotal towards scoring and when I think about our team in 2-3 years time I find it hard to fit him in (especially when you consider how well both Richards (5.28) and Lipinski (7.33) have started their careers)

 

[ScragCity]

Love the new thread title hahaha

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Find the criticism of Lachie similar to what Macrae copped in 2015.

I think he’s a very good winger who sets a team standard with defensive running. Goes when it’s his turn too.

Just needs to hit the scoreboard more.

 

[blagodellago]

I'm always impressed by his one-on-one efforts against bigger bodies. He is just so smart in how he uses his body to create space to operate in. Stronger through the core than he looks.

 

[hatescaptcha]

Guess it’s time to talk about the 2018 Charles Sutton medalist..

Congratulations Lachie - Gun!




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Sentinel]

 

[ossie_21]

Hopefully this can now take him up another gear, but looking back a few posts it’s pretty horrid reading he can get so much of the ball as a wingman & not even be in the top 100 for score involvements

 

[hatescaptcha]

Bevo mentioned the work off the ball to support teammates and the defensive running aspect, is something Lachie did really well which most people wouldn’t be able to see. Would say it’s a big reason why he won.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Congratulations Lachie, you're my favourite flailing drunken octopus.

 

[WallyStringhaus]

Below is a table of all players in the AFL who;

*Average 20+ Possessions a game
*Have an Uncontested Possession rate of 65% or more
*Have had 15+ Inside 50s

 

[Dazb86]

Not surprising. Needs to be kicking goals or giving them off. Our wingmen in general need to become better with the ball. They should be dangerous types but we seem to go with accumulators on both sides of the ground.

 

[Yojimbo]

McCluggage. H: 5 x Rebound 50's, 70.6% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Henderson. R: 8 x Rebound 50's, 77.2% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Polec. J: 8 x Rebound 50's, 70.9% Efficiency, 16 x Clangers.
Treloar. A: 6 x Rebound 50's, 76.1% Efficiency, 24 x Clangers.
Jones. N: 6 x Rebound 50's, 74.3% Efficiency, 17 x Clangers.
Billings. J: 18 x Rebound 50's, 73.3% Efficiency, 19 x Clangers.
Murphy. M: 12 x Rebound 50's, 67.9% Efficiency, 11 x Clangers.
Berry. J: 5 x Rebound 50's, 78.4% Efficiency, 12 x Clangers.
Beams. D: 7 x Rebound 50's, 75.7% Efficiency, 10 x Clangers.
Phillips. T: 12 x Rebound 50's, 66.9% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Higgins. S: 11 x Rebound 50's, 74.4% Efficiency, 22 x Clangers.
Wallis. M: 6 x Rebound 50's, 80.5% Efficiency, 16 x Clangers.
Hill. B: 12 x Rebound 50's, 70.4% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Atkins. R: 19 x Rebound 50's, 73% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Florent. O: 12 x Rebound 50's, 70.5% Efficiency, 9 x Clangers.
Pendlebury. S: 3 x Rebound 50's, 82.2% Efficiency, 9 x Clangers.
Rich. D: 28 x Rebound 50's, 80.5% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Jones. Z: 14 x Rebound 50's, 65.4% Efficiency, 24 x Clangers.
Sidebottom. S: 11 x Rebound 50's, 78% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Ross. S: 14 x Rebound 50's, 73% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Whitfield. L: 23 x Rebound 50's, 77.6% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Adams. T: 5 x Rebound 50's, 65.8% Efficiency, 10 x Clangers.
Byrne-Jones. D: 5 x Rebound 50's, 68% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Langdon. E: 23 x Rebound 50's, 74.8% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Hunter. L: 11 x Rebound 50's, 79.7% Efficiency, 7 x Clangers.
Crisp. J: 17 x Rebound 50's, 77.1% Efficiency, 17 x Clangers.

Not as pretty as your lovely, organised statistics Waldo, but adds clarity to the overall roles
played by your chosen few.

 

[WallyStringhaus]

McCluggage. H: 5 x Rebound 50's, 70.6% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Henderson. R: 8 x Rebound 50's, 77.2% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Polec. J: 8 x Rebound 50's, 70.9% Efficiency, 16 x Clangers.
Treloar. A: 6 x Rebound 50's, 76.1% Efficiency, 24 x Clangers.
Jones. N: 6 x Rebound 50's, 74.3% Efficiency, 17 x Clangers.
Billings. J: 18 x Rebound 50's, 73.3% Efficiency, 19 x Clangers.
Murphy. M: 12 x Rebound 50's, 67.9% Efficiency, 11 x Clangers.
Berry. J: 5 x Rebound 50's, 78.4% Efficiency, 12 x Clangers.
Beams. D: 7 x Rebound 50's, 75.7% Efficiency, 10 x Clangers.
Phillips. T: 12 x Rebound 50's, 66.9% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Higgins. S: 11 x Rebound 50's, 74.4% Efficiency, 22 x Clangers.
Wallis. M: 6 x Rebound 50's, 80.5% Efficiency, 16 x Clangers.
Hill. B: 12 x Rebound 50's, 70.4% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Atkins. R: 19 x Rebound 50's, 73% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Florent. O: 12 x Rebound 50's, 70.5% Efficiency, 9 x Clangers.
Pendlebury. S: 3 x Rebound 50's, 82.2% Efficiency, 9 x Clangers.
Rich. D: 28 x Rebound 50's, 80.5% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Jones. Z: 14 x Rebound 50's, 65.4% Efficiency, 24 x Clangers.
Sidebottom. S: 11 x Rebound 50's, 78% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Ross. S: 14 x Rebound 50's, 73% Efficiency, 14 x Clangers.
Whitfield. L: 23 x Rebound 50's, 77.6% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Adams. T: 5 x Rebound 50's, 65.8% Efficiency, 10 x Clangers.
Byrne-Jones. D: 5 x Rebound 50's, 68% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Langdon. E: 23 x Rebound 50's, 74.8% Efficiency, 13 x Clangers.
Hunter. L: 11 x Rebound 50's, 79.7% Efficiency, 7 x Clangers.
Crisp. J: 17 x Rebound 50's, 77.1% Efficiency, 17 x Clangers.

Not as pretty as your lovely, organised statistics Waldo, but adds clarity to the overall roles
played by your chosen few.

What constitutes a Clanger Yojimbo?

I looked on the official AFL app and I only looked up one comparison but it had Hunter as having 21 turnovers for the season and Henderson as having 25.

 

[Yojimbo]

What constitutes a Clanger Yojimbo?

Clanger: A blatant, unforced error. This can be conceding a free kick, or kicking or
handpassing the ball directly to an opponent or dropping an uncontested mark.

From the glossary of AFL terms old boy, I am not that smart.

 

[ScragCity]

Take him out the back and shoot him like they did with Old Yeller.