Preview R2: Changes v Port

[GROTTO]

Hartigan can play the Cheney role on tall forwards better.

Cheney can play the vb role better.

Surely hartigan for Vb is a no brainer. We don't become an slower - just taller. Vb needs to find touch & agility in the Sanfl.

If knight is ready, he needs to come in. For either milera or mackay, depending on team balance... Which probably means the former.

McGovern must stay in until at least cc is ready, as his tackling is the real deal forward pressure that no one else provides consistently.

+1

If the Club has issued a press release praising 400kay, they are not going to drop him unfortunately. So its likely to be Milera, which I think is wrong for a kid in his first game.

I do like Hartigan for VB, with Cheney moved to the VB role and Hartigan to replace Cheney's role. Seems to be a double win there imo.

 

[dogs105]

Well, I guess what I'm suggesting is that, in order for this to be a meaningful stat, the pressure act has to result in some benefit to your team. If we're measuring 'laying a hand on the opposition ball carrier' or laying a tackle where there is no benefit, then I think the value is dubious. For instance, I would rate a shepherd to protect the ball-carrier as a pressure act with clear benefit, but a tackle which takes a player to ground but still allows them to get off an effective handball is probably not. Similarly, 'hurriedly disposing of the ball' means diddly squat if they hurriedly dispose of it lace-out to a leading forward.

You should tell this to Champion Data. Would save them some time.

 

[Vader]

One thing that is clear is that pressure acts rank a distant third behind actually having the ball and tackles. A pressure act is what you get when you either can't get to a player quick enough or can't hold the player once there. A pressure act doesn't have to affect the opponents disposal to be recorded. But it is evidence that a player is working to contests and remaining in them. But I'm sure the coaches would prefer them to have the ball or execute an actual tackle.

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

 

[MRB37]

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

Great, now he just has to do it every week.

 

[Godallblighty]

You should tell this to Champion Data. Would save them some time.

No, you're absolutely right. There shouldn't be any opinions on here that aren't from Champion Data or someone who has actually played AFL football. What was I thinking?

 

[1970crow]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

I know the bar is set low for Mackay, so I'll just smile and agree. He was excellent based on his standards.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

I agree Mackay did sufficiently to justify remaining in the side for another week.

But to clarify, when you say "good" are you saying it was a "good" game by Mackay's standards or by a general AFL footballer standard. If the former I agree, if the latter then I disagree. There are only 3 or 4 of our guys who had good games (by the latter definition) on the weekend and Mackay wasn't one of them.

 

[Elite Crow]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

How can you possibly put him ahead of Sloane?

 

[1970crow]

How can you possibly put him ahead of Sloane?

Very, very little is expected of Mackay and he tends to deliver it every week.

 

[Tex200]

Most of the BF luvvies were ordinary, it's an inconvenient truth. How the hell we got so close is a mystery

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Most of the BF luvvies were ordinary, it's an inconvenient truth. How the hell we got so close is a mystery

Now this I think we can all agree with!

 

[Bovo]

Very, very little is expected of Mackay and he tends to deliver it every week.

No, not every week. Some weeks he spuds it and needs a trip in the magoos. Last week he did enough. One week at a time with a new coach.

 

[Scorpus]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

Mackay had a barely passable game and needs to lift (like most of the team) or he'll be on the chopping block.

I suspect most players will lift. I'm not sure Mackay is capable of it

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

You've seen that posters are so biased that they can't judge a players game, without bringing in historical performances .......some real, and as we've seen regarding the rating of Mackay's game on Saturday ....some perceived poor performances.

I've stated that Mackay and VB are no automatic selections this year ........but because iam not a blind hater of Mackay, then i must be a supporter .......what you can't judge a player on their actual game contribution?

 

[Paladin]

I think VB <--> Knight is likely to be the only change. No pressing need for Hartigan and his last couple of games haven't exactly demanded AFL selection (MMC game vs Gold Coast, SANFL game vs West Adelaide). Most accounts suggest that Cameron isn't quite there yet, so they don't have to make a tough decision on Milera just yet.

Hartigans game against West Adelaide was very good.

 

[lunacy]

Outs: Milera

Ins: Knight

Mackay had an ok game so he stays.

VB stays because whatever he brings to the side must be incredibly important to offset everything bad he does, and if what he brings is that important, then surely we can't win without it.

What a slap in the face that would be. 200 gamer has only 2 more possessions than the 1st gamer (whose possessions were a lot more valuable), yet the 1st gamer gets dropped.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

Also stated that Mackay can't tackle ......again a biased view based accurately on historical output in 2014 ......but give the guy credit, he laid 3 genuine tough tackles that the North Player couldn't break ....great effort

 

[Scorpus]

Also stated that Mackay can't tackle ......again a biased view based accurately on historical output in 2014 ......but give the guy credit, he laid 3 genuine tough tackles that the North Player couldn't break ....great effort

A view isn't really biased if it's based on performances from 2 AFL games ago

 

[WaynesWorld19]

What a slap in the face that would be. 200 gamer has only 2 more possessions than the 1st gamer (whose possessions were a lot more valuable), yet the 1st gamer gets dropped.

And Seedsman who had even fewer possessions also stay's .......so are we going to select sides purely on stats ? ......don't need match committee in that case

 

[Scorpus]

And Seedsman who had even fewer possessions also stay's .......so are we going to select sides purely on stats ? ......don't need match committee in that case

Seedsman did not have fewer possessions than VB or our debutants

 

[WaynesWorld19]

A view isn't really biased if it's based on performances from 2 AFL games ago

Fine, hold a grudge ...i thought the Hawthorn game was horrid as well ......but be realistic to acknowledge a good game without the bias affecting your view of performance

 

[Paladin]

Mackay had 4 tackles for the game. Only 3 Adelaide players had more (Brad Crouch, Betts, Sloane). So, he's done very well according to 2 of the 3 stats...

The last 5 pages of this thread have been hilarious to read. Adelaide publishes a stat that favours Mackay, indicating that he played a good game (which he did). The haters respond with "that stat is meaningless rubbish" (which it patently is not). Mackay supporters say "6 coaches have selected him now". The haters respond with the borderline demented response of "5 of those coaches were proven failures, so their opinion is irrelevant". The fact is that those 5 coaches have all forgotten more about football than the posters in question will ever know, and by attacking them the posters just make themselves look like complete idiots.

The simple fact is that Mackay had a good game on the weekend. Better than a whole host of more favoured players, including Sloane, Brad Crouch, Seedsman, Betts and Milera (to name just a few). Haters, it's time to get over it...

I just don't understand the thinking that because a player was ok or not the worst player he doesn't deserve to get dropped.

This is elite sport not a participation event! Say Sloane and Crouch were actually worse on the weekend, so what? We pick the team on who is most likely to get the job done against Port not who was best last weekend! Crouch lacking conditioning or not is much more likely to get the job done so he will be picked before Mackay. What about Cameron? Much more likely to help the team than Mackay so he will be picked accordingly. If its line ball say Milera v Mackay we pick the player who will most likely help the team over the next 50-100 games and develop into a premiership player - so pick Milera.

We preach Elite standards lets start having them at the selection table and pick a side that can perform to an elite level! This oh Mackay was ok he deserves another game to plod along at a mediocre level is rubbish. I'm confident Don will pull the trigger, get the real talent and high performers into the side and the proven average players out.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Vader I don't know how you could call it a good game by mackay, it was average at best. If Matt Crouch had a 13 possession game, I can imagine you would be fairly harsh oh his performance (and rightfully so) but when it comes to Mackay you try to justify it. And before you suggest that Crouch needs more of the ball because he is less damaging per disposal, very few of Mackay's disposals had a heavy influence on the game.

 

[Tex200]

I can just about stomach DMacs game - didn't do anything really stupid that costs goals which puts him ahead of a few others.

VB though, geez where do you start. The most ineffective player on the ground, contributed nothing, which we have come to expect - but here's the rub - we all hear about his amazing leadership qualities, so where the hell were they when we were imploding with stupidity in the third?

Surely this was his moment, what he's there for, calm the fiery young troops, keep everyone focused?

Nope... we were totally bereft of leadership in the third quarter.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Seedsman did not have fewer possessions than VB or our debutants

The discussion is on Mackay