Mega Thread Nick Daicos - Can he be the GTWEB? Part 2

[threenewpadlocks]

Richards was one last year.

... Richards was rank 2, behind Bont rank 1 last year?

AFL Player Statistics

AFL player statistics.

www.wheeloratings.com

WTF are you on about?

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I heard a rumour that nick daicos each morning arrives at Lexus centre and walks on water in the pool before proceeding to training.

 

[sr36]

... Richards was rank 2, behind Bont rank 1 last year?

WTF are you on about?

Well there you go. I clearly don't pay enough attention. It was Richards for most of the year, with Dale in second, but your glorious finish to the season must have had Bont and Darcy both push past them. Seems a legit solid player ranking system with a team missing finals but having 4 of the best players in the comp. Do your other players have all their limbs?

Marcus Bontempelli	#1	Ranked the league's best player for the 3rd time in 4 seasons.
Sam Darcy	#2	Rising star who qualified for the ranking system by a single minute.
Ed Richards	#3	Achieved his career-best season and led the rankings for much of the year.
Bailey Dale	#6	Recognised as the 6th best player in the AFL for his damage across half-back.

 

[Mr Meow]

Working through the 20s so far by position:

Midfielder, Bontempelli: 5x All Australian, 3x League MVP, 3x BnF, 3x League Best Captain, 5x score involvement average* of 7.4+, 141 goals, 134 goal assists, 496 coaches votes.

Mid-forward, Petracca: 4x All Australian, 2x BnF, 4x score involvement average of 8+, 130 goals, 127 goal assists, 470 coaches votes. Moore's knee somewhat ruined a couple of seasons.

KPF, Cameron: 3x AA, 1x BnF in a premiership season, 1x Coleman Medal (as a CHF), 4x club leading goalkicker, 3x 60+ goal seasons, 4x score involement average of 7.5+, 336 goals, 83 goal assists, 280 coaches votes (easily the most among KPFs).

Ruck, Gawn: 5x AA, 1x BnF, 355 coaches votes (easily the most coaches among ruckmen).

*average adjusted in 2020 shortened quarters.

They all had the shortened and low scoring 2020 season as a handicap year for totals as well.

Fair markers for Daicos to go past regarding positional dominance.. For the 2020s, these guys are still kings and are not exactly slowing down.

 

[Mr Meow]

Well there you go. I clearly don't pay enough attention. It was Richards for most of the year, with Dale in second, but your glorious finish to the season must have had Bont and Darcy both push past them. Seems a legit solid player ranking system with a team missing finals but having 4 of the best players in the comp. Do your other players have all their limbs?

Marcus Bontempelli	#1	Ranked the league's best player for the 3rd time in 4 seasons.
Sam Darcy	#2	Rising star who qualified for the ranking system by a single minute.
Ed Richards	#3	Achieved his career-best season and led the rankings for much of the year.
Bailey Dale	#6	Recognised as the 6th best player in the AFL for his damage across half-back.

If your list of midrangers are shallow, lower end players suck and the defence is poor then you can have prime Ablett, Judd, Hodge and Franklin in the same team and still be severely capped in how far your team goes.

If the Dogs improve their position in 2026 it'll come down to the defence holding up better in clutch games and the 19 other regulars below these 4 lifting their performance as a collective.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Well there you go. I clearly don't pay enough attention. It was Richards for most of the year, with Dale in second, but your glorious finish to the season must have had Bont and Darcy both push past them. Seems a legit solid player ranking system with a team missing finals but having 4 of the best players in the comp. Do your other players have all their limbs?

Marcus Bontempelli	#1	Ranked the league's best player for the 3rd time in 4 seasons.
Sam Darcy	#2	Rising star who qualified for the ranking system by a single minute.
Ed Richards	#3	Achieved his career-best season and led the rankings for much of the year.
Bailey Dale	#6	Recognised as the 6th best player in the AFL for his damage across half-back.

Just because Pies fans have had the luxury of a well settled, experienced, elite defensive unit mean that every team does.

When you're cycling between which of Nick Coffield, Jed Busslinger or Liam Jones you should be playing this week, its easy to see how a lack of defenders actually having defensive skill and causing breakdowns causes your team to lose games despite having a bunch of elite offensive players.

I also don't see how Bailey Dale can be supposedly the 6th best player in league (presuming we're applying some sort of position-based adjustment here), because he wasn't even in the top 2-3 ranked general defenders in the league, Jack Sinclair and Nick Blakey were ranked higher, and so was probably Nas for the minutes he played off half back before his late season move to midfield as well, so your listing above is just bizarre and given the table format and the smarmy note is something you've clearly copied from some AI ChatGPT tool that's hallucinated and confused some sort of numbers here (which shows you how stupid presenting your arguments are if you're just feeding them into an AI lol).

 

[Mr Meow]

Just because Pies fans have had the luxury of a well settled, experienced, elite defensive unit mean that every team does.

When you're cycling between which of Nick Coffield, Jed Busslinger or Liam Jones you should be playing this week, its easy to see how a lack of defenders actually having defensive skill and causing breakdowns causes your team to lose games despite having a bunch of elite offensive players.

I also don't see how Bailey Dale can be supposedly the 6th best player in league (presuming we're applying some sort of position-based adjustment here), because he wasn't even in the top 2-3 ranked general defenders in the league, Jack Sinclair and Nick Blakey were ranked higher, and so was probably Nas for the minutes he played off half back before his late season move to midfield as well, so your listing above is just bizarre and given the table format and the smarmy note is something you've clearly copied from some AI ChatGPT tool that's hallucinated and confused some sort of numbers here (which shows you how stupid presenting your arguments are if you're just feeding them into an AI lol).

Dale was the 29th highest ranked player by Player Ratings last year.

There's a reason sr usually immerses himself in back slapping mockery, adhom and deflections (strawmen are a favourite). He isn't particularly good at defending his points with useful things likereasoned arguments, facts or accurate statistics.

 

[sr36]

If the Dogs improve their position in 2026 it'll come down to the defence holding up better in clutch games and the 19 other regulars below these 4 lifting their performance as a collective.

Yep. And their defence will hold up better if they get more numbers back and less forward. And when forward if they position to cut off outlets more rather than just to score, so they don't get cut through as often when they get disrupted.

They'll score a bit less and thus player ratings for their attackers will go down, but they'll concede less to the good teams who are good enough to hold up their scoring and cut through them - it's just how it works.

Dogs win by 10+ goals and lose a lot of their genuine contests. Unless these blokes are just front runners, it's game style.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Yep. And their defence will hold up better if they get more numbers back and less forward. And when forward if they position to cut off outlets more rather than just to score, so they don't get cut through as often when they get disrupted.

They'll score a bit less and thus player ratings for their attackers will go down, but they'll concede less to the good teams who are good enough to hold up their scoring and cut through them - it's just how it works.

Dogs win by 10+ goals and lose a lot of their genuine contests. Unless these blokes are just front runners, it's game style.

You say this, but I had to sit through Jed Busslinger play seven woeful games for us last year (sorry Jed, I still support you, but it's true).

It speaks to the point that he was subbed off for the final game vs Fremantle that we needed to win to play finals. But he was also rightfully selected for that game in the first place, because all of the other players we tried - Coffield, Khamis for a few games (granted, he's clearly improved since then to cement himself back in the place for two rounds), Liam Jones played 5 of the worst key defensive games I have seen, but not worse than Ryan Gardner's one game as a key defender.

You overanalyse system and structure and push aside the fact that the Dogs simply had humungous weaknesses and were forced to play a third or key defensive tall throughout the whole year that arguably wouldn't have even gotten a game at some bottom 4 clubs in the same position.

 

[sr36]

There's a reason sr usually immerses himself in back slapping mockery, adhom and deflections (strawmen are a favourite). He isn't particularly good at defending his points with useful things likereasoned arguments, facts or accurate statistics.

How is your footy discussion going.

When I see your name come up, I never know whether it's going to be you criticising a poster, you sooking about people returning fire, or a bizarre set of parameters carefully crafted to form one of your insipid criticisms of a star player.

 

[Mr Meow]

Yep. And their defence will hold up better if they get more numbers back and less forward. And when forward if they position to cut off outlets more rather than just to score, so they don't get cut through as often when they get disrupted.

They'll score a bit less and thus player ratings for their attackers will go down, but they'll concede less to the good teams who are good enough to hold up their scoring and cut through them - it's just how it works.

Dogs win by 10+ goals and lose a lot of their genuine contests. Unless these blokes are just front runners, it's game style.

Besides the Pies elite defensive unit, there's no doubt that some very savvy veterans help out and would also massively improve the Dogs - players like Pendlebury, Sidebottom and Crisp. Also forwards who track back and pressure manfully like McReery and Schultz.

This is personnel more than instruction though. You can't just reverse uno their list weaknesses as a way to deflect from their elite attackers output.

 

[Mr Meow]

How is your footy discussion going.

When I see your name come up, I never know whether it's going to be you criticising a poster, you sooking about people returning fire, or a bizarre set of parameters carefully crafted to form one of your insipid criticisms of a star player.

More boring adhom from yourself. I'm happy to highlight it to others who appear to be here for adult discussion - and even get their facts + statistics right from time to time. Your AI slop, poor research and terribly flimsy arguments are quickly torn apart - so I'm not surprised you then move to personal stuff and misplaced ridicule.

 

[sr36]

Besides the Pies elite defensive unit, there's no doubt that some very savvy veterans help out and would also massively improve the Dogs - players like Pendlebury, Sidebottom and Crisp. Also forwards who track back and pressure manfully like McReery and Schultz.

This is personnel more than instruction though. You can't just reverse uno their list weaknesses as a way to deflect from their elite attackers output.

I'm not criticising them. I'm just saying the player ratings system inflates the metrics of attacking teams.

In terms of personnel versus instruction, Pies have the slowest midfield unit in the league. Last year, to protect our defence of the ground, we played a boundary line game to lock it into half the ground and help protect them and our defence on rebound. Including deep entries to the boundary line. And our forwards positioned to block outlets. It worked a treat in terms of limiting opposition teams, but clearly not great for scoring and thus not great for individual player cd ratings. It was great for winning games, but got worked out in the end.

 

[Mr Meow]

I'm not criticising them. I'm just saying the player ratings system inflates the metrics of attacking teams.

In terms of personnel versus instruction, Pies have the slowest midfield unit in the league. Last year, to protect our defence of the ground, we played a boundary line game to lock it into half the ground and help protect them and our defence on rebound. Including deep entries to the boundary line. And our forwards positioned to block outlets. It worked a treat in terms of limiting opposition teams, but clearly not great for scoring and thus not great for individual player cd ratings. It got worked out in the end.

Going down that path, with less elite attackers/firepower, Collingwood look to feed Daicos a lot of easy ball. With strong interceptors and rebounders this means a lot of cheap stuff between the arcs, especially in the halfback area of the ground. This effect is amplified since he's the main one demanding handballs that don't clearly open up the play or options further afield. So his disposal rate and therefore anything arising from that (SIs, goals, goal assists, votes etc) are inflated for a different reason.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I'm not criticising them. I'm just saying the player ratings system inflates the metrics of attacking teams.

In terms of personnel versus instruction, Pies have the slowest midfield unit in the league. Last year, to protect our defence of the ground, we played a boundary line game to lock it into half the ground and help protect them and our defence on rebound. Including deep entries to the boundary line. And our forwards positioned to block outlets. It worked a treat in terms of limiting opposition teams, but clearly not great for scoring and thus not great for individual player cd ratings. It was great for winning games, but got worked out in the end.

Everyone agrees with your point here. It's why everyone can recognise that Daicos was far better than the 16th best player in the league last year despite ranking 16th in the player ratings points.

It's just far different to call him (say) the 4th or 5th or 9th or whatever best player in the league, - obviously a ranking far higher than the 16th ranking that ratings points would suggest of Daicos - rather than the literal 1st, best that seems to be a highly popular view among the media, players etc. (that I disagree with).

But in any case, player ratings does highlight how some of the ancillary stuff does matter. It's easy to praise Daicos's ball winning, ball use, goal kicking etc. But maybe the difference between being rank 13 and rank 16, or whatever, is the fact that Daicos ranks incredibly low among midfielders for 1%ers? Or that he doesn't rank in the top 20 for tackles? Etc. These are the margins we're talking about. Player Ratings allows us to understand that there are multiple facets to contributing.

 

[sr36]

Going down that path, with less elite attackers/firepower, Collingwood look to feed Daicos a lot of easy ball. Especially since he's the main one demanding handballs that don't clearly open up the play or options further afield. So his disposal rate and therefore anything arising from that (SIs, goals, goal assists, votes etc) are inflated for a different reason.

I don't think you get where the Pies forward line is at. We can't go in predictably to a tall presenting. We can't bomb it to a predictable spot. Our talls are getting thrashed. It's a case of having to try to manufacture something on the fly to unsettle defences with unpredictable entries and the best option is flicking it someone to run and try to make something happen. We need more doing that and chaining like last year, and it's how we beat the Saints, but Adelaide were too organised for us.

So yeah he gets more stats through doing that, but getting a score involvement or any metric built off a teams scoring - like player ratings - is nowhere near as easy when your forward line sucks.

It's why neither possessions or cd ratings are worthwhile measures between players from different teams.

 

[Mr Meow]

I don't think you get where the Pies forward line is at. We can't go in predictably to a tall presenting. We can't bomb it to a predictable spot. Our talls are getting thrashed. It's a case of having to try to manufacture something on the fly to unsettle defences with unpredictable entries and the best option is flicking it someone to run and try to make something happen. We need more doing that and chaining like last year, and it's how we beat the Saints, but Adelaide were too organised for us.

So yeah he gets more stats through doing that, but getting a score involvement or any metric built off a teams scoring - like player ratings - is nowhere near as easy when your forward line sucks.

It's why neither possessions or cd ratings are worthwhile measures between players from different teams.

Any flaws/caveats of those, well there are others for literally any single voting system or statistic, so then we are back to having nothing to use again.

 

[doppleganger]

Even with Petracca's issues I think it's fair to call those 4 and Andrews the players of the 20s so far. Whether Daicos catches them on 20s output by the end of '29 is up for debate.

Agree with your 4

Defender more tricky, Tom Stewart would give it a shake.

You're right that there is nitpicking with Daicos. Let's focus on a positive: I think there's a very good chance he breaks the record for most handball receives and uncontested possessions in a single season.

Would be a good watch.

He was top 20 ever for inside 50s in a season last year...and his 750 disposals were just outside top 20 ever...can he get 800 disposals??

He has individual game peaks that have seen him top 10 for contested possession, top 20 for clearances.

You should follow through and track his individual game and season records.

 

[sr36]

Everyone agrees with your point here. It's why everyone can recognise that Daicos was far better than the 16th best player in the league last year despite ranking 16th in the player ratings points.

It's just far different to call him (say) the 4th or 5th or 9th or whatever best player in the league, - obviously a ranking far higher than the 16th ranking that ratings points would suggest of Daicos - rather than the literal 1st, best that seems to be a highly popular view among the media, players etc. (that I disagree with).

But in any case, player ratings does highlight how some of the ancillary stuff does matter. It's easy to praise Daicos's ball winning, ball use, goal kicking etc. But maybe the difference between being rank 13 and rank 16, or whatever, is the fact that Daicos ranks incredibly low among midfielders for 1%ers? Or that he doesn't rank in the top 20 for tackles? Etc. These are the margins we're talking about. Player Ratings allows us to understand that there are multiple facets to contributing.

It's going to be interesting to watch. If we get our tall defenders back I'm expecting to see Nick in a different role which results in different metrics. We're getting thrashed around stoppage and Nick isn't playing his first possession role. And with the talks back we'll be able to go back to locking in territory and repeat entries rather than looking to score on rebound, which is what's being attempted at the moment. I think we're going to have to go back to 2024 and make it all about Nick at stoppage again to get territory rather than looking for rebound chains. If that occurs, the metrics you want to see will rise again. With the elite players like Nick and Bont, the metrics are about role as much as anything. I think wed love to use him forward a lot more, but with our mids, we just can't.

 

[doppleganger]

Working through the 20s so far by position:

Midfielder, Bontempelli: 5x All Australian, 3x League MVP, 3x BnF, 3x League Best Captain, 5x score involvement average* of 7.4+, 141 goals, 134 goal assists, 496 coaches votes.

All good stuff.

But only 1 season from 6 where he avg more than 3 intercept possessions per game.

Daicos has already had 3 seasons where he averaged more than 3 intercept possessions.

Mid-forward, Petracca: 4x All Australian, 2x BnF, 4x score involvement average of 8+, 130 goals, 127 goal assists, 470 coaches votes.

Solid stuff, but only 2 seasons where he averaged more than 3 intercept possessions.

Fair markers for Daicos to go past regarding positional dominance.. For the 2020s, these guys are still kings and are not exactly slowing down.

Daicos is already a 3xAA, MVP, AFLCA, 3 x 100 coaches vote seasons, SI +7 x2, has a CP season avg of 13.9 (Bont has gone better once, Trac twice), a clearance season avg of 7.7 (better than Bont or Trac have ever had).

And despite the nit pickers not being happy with Nick he has played a blinder in the SoO, a 10 coach voter against StK and a 33 touch, 2 goal 10 inside 50 game as his "poor" game.

 

[sr36]

Everyone agrees with your point here. It's why everyone can recognise that Daicos was far better than the 16th best player in the league last year despite ranking 16th in the player ratings points.

It's just far different to call him (say) the 4th or 5th or 9th or whatever best player in the league, - obviously a ranking far higher than the 16th ranking that ratings points would suggest of Daicos - rather than the literal 1st, best that seems to be a highly popular view among the media, players etc. (that I disagree with).

But in any case, player ratings does highlight how some of the ancillary stuff does matter. It's easy to praise Daicos's ball winning, ball use, goal kicking etc. But maybe the difference between being rank 13 and rank 16, or whatever, is the fact that Daicos ranks incredibly low among midfielders for 1%ers? Or that he doesn't rank in the top 20 for tackles? Etc. These are the margins we're talking about. Player Ratings allows us to understand that there are multiple facets to contributing.

Champion data is good to describe team metrics. It just doesn't work for individual player comparisons.

 

[sr36]

Any flaws/caveats of those, well there are others for literally any single voting system or statistic, so then we are back to having nothing to use again.

Data analysis has revolutionised a lot of things, but unless the variables and their impacts are known causality in variance of data is a guess. Possessions doesn't show who is the best. Nor do Champion data player ratings. By looking at the data, it's easy to see who got the most, but just by looking at the data, you can't see why they got the most. Was it because they are better, the team they play for, a bit more luck, etc... Does my head in at work when people claim a data point shows causality. Causality is incredibly complex if the thing being looked at is as complex as a game of AFL - with so many factors impacting stats.

So no, we can't easily see who is the best by awards or any other data sets - too many variables outside the individual player impact them. It's always going to be a subjective judgement.

And frankly in this thread none of the attempts have been objective, they're all pretty clearly biased systems created to try to push a subjective opinion. Which is how data is often misused. Selective and subjective use of data to try to persuade - rather than using it objectively to assess.

 

[Mr Meow]

Data analysis has revolutionised a lot of things, but unless the variables and their impacts are known causality in variance of data is a guess. Possessions doesn't show who is the best. Nor do Champion data player ratings. By looking at the data, it's easy to see who got the most, but just by looking at the data, you can't see why they got the most. Was it because they are better, the team they play for, a bit more luck, etc... Does my head in at work when people claim a data point shows causality. Causality is incredibly complex if the thing being looked at is as complex as a game of AFL - with so many factors impacting stats.

So no, we can't easily see who is the best by awards or any other data sets - too many variables outside the individual player impact them. It's always going to be a subjective judgement.

And frankly in this thread none of the attempts have been objective, they're all pretty clearly biased systems created to try to push a subjective opinion. Which is how data is often misused. Selective and subjective use of data to try to persuade - rather than using it objectively to assess.

Yep, and by removing them we are back to "he kick ball good", 40 pint deep level justification. Which actually isn't too far removed from what you get with most supporters holding their best players up against others.

When that's the case, the discussion simply fits better in the Collingwood forum, dark alleyways or some other appropriate setting.

 

[sr36]

Yep, and by removing them we are back to "he kick ball good", 40 pint deep level justification. Which actually isn't too far removed from what you get with most supporters holding their best players up against others.

Yes. Isn't that what big footy is? It applies to your posts on Nick, Bont, Gaz Jr as much as the rest of us.

You're kidding yourself if you think you're in here to find or objectively test the truth. Your posts are pushing your 40 pint perception of who plays footy the best as much as anyone else's. Except for Adam and Shane H who are about 120 pints in.

 

[Mr Meow]

Yes. Isn't that what big footy is? It applies to your posts on Nick, Bont, Gaz Jr as much as the rest of us.

You're kidding yourself if you think you're in here to find or objectively test the truth. Your posts are pushing your 40 pint perception of who plays footy the best as much as anyone else's. Except for Adam and Shane H who are about 120 pints in.

Discussion forums can be anything, yes. Arguments can be constructed in several ways.

There is nothing wrong with using any kind of metric to support your opinion (including a wide variety of different types, that may support or contradict the others), while acknowledging there are flaws/caveats/limitations the same way there are with any scientific or investigative method.

There is no singular "objective truth" on subjects such as these, but there is valid discussion and everything discussed has it's place. You're the one trying to shut it down so you can just go back to yelling "Daicos the unprecedented!" with wishy washy subjective descriptions that better fit into fan fiction or softcore pr0n.