Jordan lewis or marc murphy?

[Leather Poisoning]

Refer poll results

Popular opinion? Is that all you've got?

Your A grade midfielder has C grade disposal - HOW IS THAT A GOOD THING?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Yeah i just realised Murphy is a dud, Maybe we could trade him at seasons end. You idiot, You cannot sit there and seriously say Murphy is shocking. Marc Murphy along with Gibbs are going to be superstars i have no doubt. Lewis i have my doubts about, he is a dime a dozen midfielder woh gets cheap possies and jumps in for the ball. Lewis will be a solid player, Murphy will be a Great player.

I didn't say Murphy is a dud- I said 68% effciency is shocking - which it is. If your whole team had efficiency of that you'd lose every week.

 

[Hodgepodge]

And you keep fighting losing battles!! lol your stuck.

Hawks fans you have asked the questions

Hodge v Judd - Judd wins Poll
Ellis vs Gibbs - Gibbs dominates Poll
Murphy vs Lewis - Murphy winning Poll

Seriously no more. It just looks bad for you guys.

I have never ever had a problem witht he Hawks, My Brother and Stepdad both go for them and i have watched a lot of Hawks games over the years. This is a great GROUP of players but there are onloy 2 Superstars in the team IMO, Mitchell and Franklin, then alot of really good players and NO bad players thats there strength.

Hawthorn>>>Carlton ATM no one is arguing that, i just find it so funny that you guys are 3rd and still worry about wether some of your players can match it with ours.

I will guarantee that if Clarkson could have Judd, Gibbs, Murphy vs Hodge, Lewis and Ellis he would take the blues group.

And you say that Lewis is better than Murphy because of his ''hardness'' over the ball then you struggle with the concept of what footy is about. If there was ONE skill that was recognised as the most dominant skill in the game dont you think everyone would always practice that skill all the time, Football is about putting your head over the ball, if everyone did that no one would be on the outside to get the baal, kick the goals, deliver to the forwards and creat space.

No i say that lewis is better because murphy's efficiency is in the 60% range . . . lewis is in the 70s . . .

I will guarantee that he wouldn't pick those three, i know how much you rate gibbs, but i still can't see it, i watched a whole carlton game on the weekend, he got 21 easy stats and coughed it up heaps in the final quarter, what a gun.

 

[Big Red is back]

Popular opinion? Is that all you've got?

Your A grade midfielder has C grade disposal - HOW IS THAT A GOOD THING?

Refer Luke Hodge vs Geelong board

LOL!!!

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Refer Luke Hodge vs Geelong board

LOL!!!

You've actually reinforced my point.

Hodge disposed of it horribly that night and we lost. We all thought it was unacceptable but because he's so good so often we'll move on with life.

Carlton has a bloke who doesn't just do that for one game, he's done it across the ENTIRE SEASON. And he's supposed to be a GUN?

LAUGH OUT LOUD!!!!

 

[Hodgepodge]

Refer Luke Hodge vs Geelong board

LOL!!!

Refer marc murphy vs AFL board.

 

[Big Red is back]

Boys it has been fun I will mark this down as another win to the blue boys.... see you next crazy poll u start up

Note:

Garbage bin >>>>>>>> Ellis

 

[Faz 2000]

He gets SLIGHTLY more contested possessions with a DRAMATIC difference in accuracy. We've got blokes like Tuck and Kennedy that can come in a get 23 possessions, 7 contested with a 68% effeciency, but they get dropped in favour of blokes like Lewis who are hard at it AND skilful.

By the way, here's what Pro Stats has on these two guys:

Getting the pill:
Kicks: 15.6 to 9.8 (Murphy about 6 more per game)
HBs: 8 to 14.6 (Lewis 6 and a bit more per game)
Upshot: Disposals are basically very close, marginal edge to Lewis for total touches, Murphy for the kick to handball ratio.

Tactical stats:
Long kicks: Murphy 4.8 to Lewis 2.8
F50s: Murphy 5.8 to Lewis 3.6
D50s: Murphy 1.7 to Lewis 1.0
Upshot: probably due to kicking more, this is all Murphy.

Marks: Murphy 6.3 to Lewis 5.5.
Upshot: these guys both get some cheapies out wide. Lewis a couple of contested marks but it's negligible and not what makes these guys good.

Hard stuff:
Tackles: Murphy 3.2 to Lewis 2.1
Clearances: 3.0 to 3.2
Contested possessions: 2.4 to 2.5
Upshot: pretty close, these guys both rotate through the middle and get their hands on the pill in close, but not as much as Mitchell/Hodge or Judd/Stevens at their respective clubs. Murph lays an extra tackle per game. Pace maybe? Lewis with a slight edge in getting hands on the ball first, perhaps due to being 12kg heavier. Handy in packs.

Miscellanous other things:
Goals: Murph 0.7 per game to Lewis 0.1 (pretty important, scoring, don't you think?)
Bounces: Murph 2.6 to Lewis 0.8 (combined with his kicking advantage, Murphy dominates Lewis in "metreage")
Errors: Murph 5.5 to Lewis 6.9 (whoops, this stat provider has Murphy as cleaner than Lewis :-O)
1%ers: Murph 2.9 to Lewis 1.8 (Murphy does an extra "little thing" per game over your so-called "hard nut")
Free kick ratio: Murph +0.6 per game, Lewis -0.6 per game (well, even the Hawks fans had conceded this one)
Upshot: hmm, this section is pretty one-sided. I thought this was supposed to be Lewis' section. Hang on... are any of these Lewis' section?

Lewis is a good player. Any team would have him. Murphy, I think, is ahead right now... and the future looks like that gap may widen.

 

[Hodgepodge]

No mention of disposal efficiency i see . . . why would you, when you're trying to make a case for murphy?

 

[Faz 2000]

No mention of disposal efficiency i see . . . why would you, when you're trying to make a case for murphy?

They record "errors" as opposed to disposal efficiency.

But include it, by all means.

Does that change the general direction of the overall comparison? I don't think so.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Sure it does. Jordan Lewis more disposals, more efficiency

 

[FRUMPY]

Disposal efficieny isnt all its cracked up to be. If you kick a ball to advantage for a player to run onto, it is counted as an inefficent kick yet if you handball it someone under pressure and they get cuaght for holding the ball, it is counted as an efficient handball.

As for Lewis v Murphy, i rate both. As a carlton supporter i rate Murphy although his kicking does need improving, seems to want to drill passes all the time when he doesnt have to. Still think he will end up a 200+ game star for us, which is all you can ask for.

Lewis is a good player who has that hard edge which everyone would want. Just looks shit in Hawthorn's dreadful colours, then again who doesnt?

 

[Hodgepodge]

efficiency is overrated, that's a new one

if judd was leading the comp in efficiency and not contested possessions, carlton supporters wouldn't go on about his efficiency then? lol

Efficiency just shows what a poor disposal you are, and when you're down in the 60s, then it's rhys palmer esque.

 

[Jimthegreat]

I don't care. I'm happy with Murphy.

I'd be happy with Lewis too but as long as Murphy's doing well that's all that concerns me.

 

[Faz 2000]

Other players who suck according to HodgePodge:

Dane Swan - 68%
Brent Stanton - 69%
Ryan O'Keefe - 63%
Brad Johnson - 64%
Steve Johnson - 62%
Matthew Pavlich - 63%
Simon Black - 64%
Luke Ball - 68%
Nathan Jones - 67%
Dean Cox - 69%
Adam Goodes - 67%

Ya know, you could make a seriously good team out of players who don't do so well in the almighty stat of "disposal efficiency".

Note many of these guys have a high kick-to-handball ratio like... ummm... well Marc Murphy.

Sure, it's a stat. There's no denying that. And Murph's disposal could improve. But if you're going to use that as the deciding vote in why Lewis is better than Murphy when Murph has him in just about everyother stat, you're just flat-out wrong.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Other players who suck according to HodgePodge:

Dane Swan - 68%
Brent Stanton - 69%
Ryan O'Keefe - 63%
Brad Johnson - 64%
Steve Johnson - 62%
Matthew Pavlich - 63%
Simon Black - 64%
Luke Ball - 68%
Nathan Jones - 67%
Dean Cox - 69%
Adam Goodes - 67%

Ya know, you could make a seriously good team out of players who don't do so well in the almighty stat of "disposal efficiency".

Note many of these guys have a high kick-to-handball ratio like... ummm... well Marc Murphy.

Sure, it's a stat. There's no denying that. And Murph's disposal could improve. But if you're going to use that as the deciding vote in why Lewis is better than Murphy when Murph has him in just about everyother stat, you're just flat-out wrong.

So Faz - you seem to be a clear-thinking stats man.

Can you explain something for the rest of us?

How is efficiency measured?

and

Hos is an ineffective disposal different to a prostats error? (I assume these errors would include frees against, a blatant turnover.)

Basically you want midfielders that can get the ball AND use it. Now I've always seen effeciency as the measure of this, but your prostats info flies in the face of it.

Also, don't over-rate the kick to handball ratio - Sam Mitchell normally gets about twice as many handballs as kicks but there all in the thick of the action and he's awesome at setting up a playing running wide.

 

[Big Red is back]

Refer poll results

 

[pidge]

How about this stat:

2008 games played
Murphy 18
Lewis 13.

No wonder he has higher possession stats.
Average contested possessions
Murphy 7.6
Lewis 6.7

Okay, that's a win for murphy but if you look at the efficiency:
Murphy: 7.6 x 68.38% = 5.2 effective contested possies
Lewis: 6.7 x 87% = 5.8 effective contested possies per game.

No use getting the ball Murph if you're just gonna waste it !!!!!

The stats speak for themselves. Also, Lewis gets more possessions per game.

Also, 68% eff compared to 87% eff is a HUGE difference. Absolutely MASSIVE.

u can at least get the % right the hawthorn website has him at 73.81% eff now do ur maths
murphy: 7.6 x 68.38% = 5.2
lewis : 6.7 x 73.81% = 4.9
similar but murphy is slightly ahead

 

[pidge]

Sure it does. Jordan Lewis more disposals, more efficiency

like i stated befor he doesnt get more disposals and his efficiecy is only 5% better neck up until u get ur facts straight

 

[Faz 2000]

So Faz - you seem to be a clear-thinking stats man..

I play fantasy football pretty seriously, so I need to be! I'm just looking at the statistical argument presented for why Lewis is better than Murphy and I don't think it's very strong.

Can you explain something for the rest of us?

How is efficiency measured?

In short, not exactly. Efficiency and errors and all these things are a bit of a black art.

I believe an ineffective possession is one that results in anything other than an uncontested possession for the player's own team. I think there is some delineation between short and long kicks, so a short kick to a contest is definitely ineffective, but a long kick to a contest might not be.

Kicks are FAR more likely to register as "ineffective" than handballs. Most AFL players don't handball to a contest very often, they are pretty likely to hit a teammate with a handball, whereas kicks to a pack, even if they're long, or inside 50, or whatever, can be classed as ineffective. Guys like ROK, Didak, Murphy and most forwards, who all have a very high kick-to-handball ratio, tend to have low efficiency.

I believe a set shot for goal that scores a behind is also ineffective... perhaps all behinds are. So guys who have lots of shots, particularly those who miss a fair bit, have low efficiency. (Buddy has like 54% efficiency probably for this reason alone! )

A CLANGER is something that results in an uncontested possession for the opposition. Ie. a direct turnover, or a free kick against.

Hos is an ineffective disposal different to a prostats error? (I assume these errors would include frees against, a blatant turnover.)

Yes, I believe Pro-Stats errors include various bone-headed plays, as well as clangers. I don't think it uses AFL.com's definition of efficiency.

Basically you want midfielders that can get the ball AND use it. Now I've always seen effeciency as the measure of this, but your prostats info flies in the face of it.

Yes, you do want guys who get it AND can use it. But the disposal efficiency is often a crap measure of it. Nobody would suggest Ryan O'Keefe is anything other than an A-grade footballer, but he always has lousy "disposal effectiveness". It is vastly tilted against those who kick more than handball, and tends to be tilted against those who get lots of contested possessions. If a player grabs the ball in a pack of 20 guys and slams it on his boot but it ends up with the opposition, that's ineffective. Sometimes you would look at that and think he hasn't actually made a mistake at all, in fact he's done very well to GET the ball in the first place... so it can be misleading.

Also, it depends where players get the ball. Those that get their possessions at half back usually have good efficiency because they are kicking to their own players on their own for uncontested marks. Players who put the ball inside 50 a lot, ie. towards lots of opposition players, often have poor efficiency. A kick to a forward that's punched away by a defender can be ineffective.

For evidence, take a look at the season stats on the AFL website. Sort it by disposal efficency, and you'll find it PACKED with players who are defenders. Sort it by F50s (a pretty damn important stat in AFL footy, note, Marc Murphy leads the league) and the disposal efficiency of those players is mostly in the 60s and 70s. You look at the names high on that list: M Murphy, R Murphy, L Montagna, N Stevens, Pavlich, Corey, Griffen, Harvey, Ablett... these are TOP AFL players. But they mostly don't have particularly great efficency, because of where they're putting the ball.

Also, don't over-rate the kick to handball ratio - Sam Mitchell normally gets about twice as many handballs as kicks but there all in the thick of the action and he's awesome at setting up a playing running wide.

Every team needs players of various kinds. Handball-heavy clearance midfielders are great. Plenty of them have some of the best "efficiency" stats going around, because many of their possessions for the game are link up handballs, which are 90+% effective.

 

[Silvagnis]

Popular opinion? Is that all you've got?

Your A grade midfielder has C grade disposal - HOW IS THAT A GOOD THING?

Robert Harvey was a poor kick when he started, but he improved his kicking and is an out and out champion footballer. No one would pick a better kick ahead of the better footballer based on their disposal efficiency and not their talent. That would be like overlooking the better footballer and picking Goddard ahead of Judd since you rate players who are good kicks. Even before you look at the stats, it's obvious that Murphy's disposal efficiency isn't as "good" as Lewis because he kicks more than he handballs.

It's the same with Sam Mitchell who isn't a great kick and handballs more than he kicks.

Mitchell and Lewis average more possessions than Murphy in 2008, yet Murphy has had more inside 50s than both of the Hawthorn players. And Murphy isn't far behind Mitchell for contested possessions after covering Lewis in that category.

Lets pump up Lewis a bit more when he is the player who turned it over by handballing straight to Murphy in a game.

The ball sailed straight over the goal umpire's head for a goal after Murphy intercepted the handball and kicked it from 50 off one step.

 

[Hodgepodge]

hodge has a very high kick to handball ratio , and he's still hitting at 80% efficiency, so just because you kick a lot, doesn't mean your efficiency should be low

 

[Philhawk]

Both are good young mids.

Once Murphy improves his disposal, he'll be amongst the best mids in the competition.

As for Lewis, all he needs to do is be a little more disciplined and he'll similarly be in that group.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Marc Murphy, just.

 

[BABYBOMBERS2007]

Lewis is easily better. Murphy is only average.