Shane Tuck

[Invigoration]

Well of course not. He's worth much more than a 5th rounder though, what a terrible trade that would be. Also to suggest he's a downgraded O'Bree is laughable, he shits all over him in every possible way. I'm not Tuck fan but that was hilarious.

You are right, it was an insult to O'Bree.

O'Bree is a consistent player in a top four team, Shane Tuck is playing in the reserves for a side that has been bottom 8 for about 35 years now.
Super special player that Shane Tuck.... plod plod plod.

6th rounder, my final offer, take it or leave it. I snap it up while you have the chance, at least it is better than delisting him.

 

[smiddaz123]

Must take a pretty big spud to be leading the contested possession count in the whole AFL before round 17 until he was infamously dropped for unknown reasons. Jobe Watson and Brett Kirk must be massive spuds too, both can get the ball and win clearances at will but they can't kick!

Genuine lulz.

 

[Old Spice]

I have no idea how you've reached this conclusion. That Port is no.1 is nothing more than a curiousity. Lots of rubbish teams perform very well in one category or another. Of course they also perform poorly in a lot of others..

We're talking a player here, Tuck, not a midfiled in general, i.e. a whole brigade - hence my original question. That's where the problem is in your analysis: we're talking Tuck, not Richmond in general or 'clearance differentials'.

You'd struggle to find a cleaner statistic; it's addressing precisely how well we perform in the clearances as a team. There's nothing else you could use unless you want to go super-advanced.

Again, team. But still, it's not clear in the least, even as a team stat. I'll see your super-advanced because to me it sounds like waffle.

It puts him slightly outside the top 2, and most teams don't carry 2 specialist clearance players (which was basically his role at Richmond). For example, if you adjust for Time On Ground, Pendlebury averages just as many effective clearances, and does a shitload more with them. Ditto for Didak and O'Bree.

I don't imagine Tuck as competing with Pendles but with O'Bree. What are the comparative stats there?

Saints have 2, Dogs 3, Geelong 4. In fact, of the Top 30, only 15 come from clubs playing finals.

And where do we stack up here? I think effective clearances are important, but maybe i'm old fashioned.

Basically, clearances in and of themselves say very little. They're completely dependent on how many ball-ups/throw-ins your team is involved in per game, for example. And this varies widely - which is why Saints only have 2 players in the top 30 and Geelong have 4, despite Saints being a better clearance team. The top teams also tend to rotate a lot more, which is certainly the case with us.

So is the lesson that (effective) clearances are not important? I'll take effective midfield clearance winners in a team with no strong bodied ruck division.

 

[mdc]

We're talking a player here, Tuck, not a midfiled in general, i.e. a whole brigade - hence my original question. That's where the problem is in your analysis: we're talking Tuck, not Richmond in general or 'clearance differentials'.

This bit was addressing our need for another clearance specialist rather than Tuck himself. Thus talking team rather than individual. I was just showing that rumours of our suckiness in the clearance department are greatly overstated.

Here's the best way I can put it across simply. Suppose you're in a fight. Does the total number of punches you land really matter? Or is the main thing that you land more punches than the other guy?

Clearances is the same thing. 100 clearances might be impressive, but if the other team gets 200 it's all a bit pointless. Given different teams average a different number of contests, all that matter is Do we get more clearances than our opponents? And the answer in Collingwood's case, is yes, we do.

I don't imagine Tuck as competing with Pendles but with O'Bree. What are the comparative stats there?

Adjusting for Time On Ground, their clearance stats are very similar.

And where do we stack up here? I think effective clearances are important, but maybe i'm old fashioned.

7th, according to ProStats.

So is the lesson that (effective) clearances are not important? I'll take effective midfield clearance winners in a team with no strong bodied ruck division.

The lesson is to understand that statistics need to be applied in context. Of course getting more effective clearances than the opposition is important.

 

[Old Spice]

This bit was addressing our need for another clearance specialist rather than Tuck himself. Thus talking team rather than individual. I was just showing that rumours of our suckiness in the clearance department are greatly overstated.

Here's the best way I can put it across simply. Suppose you're in a fight. Does the total number of punches you land really matter? Or is the main thing that you land more punches than the other guy?

Clearances is the same thing. 100 clearances might be impressive, but if the other team gets 200 it's all a bit pointless. Given different teams average a different number of contests, all that matter is Do we get more clearances than our opponents? And the answer in Collingwood's case, is yes, we do.

My point was and is still about Tuck himself and what he might add to the whole midfield brigade at Collingwood. I'm wanting to break it down by its constituent parts because too much is hidden behind broad stats. I understand we dont suck, but I want to suck the least.

The lesson is to understand that statistics need to be applied in context. Of course getting more effective clearances than the opposition is important.

Again, we return not to the broad stats but to individuals and what they might add to team. How does Tuck stack up against apples, not a fruit orchard?

 

[mdc]

As per my above post, in terms of effective clearances, he's not dissimilar to Pendles, O'Bree and Didak, and behind Swan.

 

[Old Spice]

I don't know where you're getting the 'effective clearance' stats from - can you send the link - but heres some stats from footywire for 2009.

I've only included disposals but you can view the total with the links

O'Bree: Disposals avg: 21.6 http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-collingwood-magpies--shane-o-bree

Pendlebury: Disposals avg:25.8 http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-collingwood-magpies--scott-pendlebury

Swan: Disposals avg: 31.5 http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-collingwood-magpies--dane-swan

Tuck: Disposals avg: 27.5 http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-richmond-tigers--shane-tuck

Now, I don't know about you, but if Tuck is an inside player and averages 6 more disposals a game than O'Bree, thats good work.

Comparing apples, what do you say?

 

[mdc]

With all due respect, wtf have disposals have to do with it? We were talking clearances.

You can find those numbers on the pro-stats website. Make sure to adjust for time-on-ground and team style if you actually want to compare apples with apples.

 

[smiddaz123]

Without being petty, never trust prostats. Most inaccurate statistics website you can find imo.

 

[Old Spice]

With all due respect, wtf have disposals have to do with it? We were talking clearances.

You can find those numbers on the pro-stats website. Make sure to adjust for time-on-ground and team style if you actually want to compare apples with apples.

Went to your site to compare apples and here's what I found:

O’Bree: 2009 Avg

Uncontested possessions: 21.3
Contested: 2.1
Clearances: 4.1
1 %’s: 5.1
Errors: 2
Misc: 18th in 1st possessions, 20th tackles per game

Tuck: 2009 avg

Uncontested possessions: 24.2
Contested: 5.5
Clearances: 4.5
1 %’s: 3.9
Errors: 1.8
Misc: 12th in 1st possessions, 12th disposals per game, 7th 1st possessions per game, 11th contested possessions per game.

How about those apples. Link http://www.pro-stats.com.au/

 

[DoubleO7]

Tuck, Shane Tuck? This is a case where statistics inflate a players footballing ability. Put stats aside for a moment and actually observe him play. A spud if I have ever seen one. And no, I wouldn't entertain the idea of a trade involving Tuck.

 

[smiddaz123]

Went to your site to compare apples and here's what I found:

O’Bree: 2009 Avg

Uncontested possessions: 21.3
Contested: 2.1
Clearances: 4.1
1 %’s: 5.1
Errors: 2
Misc: 18th in 1st possessions, 20th tackles per game

Tuck: 2009 avg

Uncontested possessions: 24.2
Contested: 5.5
Clearances: 4.5
1 %’s: 3.9
Errors: 1.8
Misc: 12th in 1st possessions, 12th disposals per game, 7th 1st possessions per game, 11th contested possessions per game.

How about those apples. Link http://www.pro-stats.com.au/

As MDC mentioned, you'd have to factor in the TOG. Or if you want to be totally accurate in what you guys are measuring (purely from a clearance POV), number of stoppages contested compared to the total amount of stoppages in the game.

 

[Old Spice]

By all means, give me the time on ground and stopages contested if you can find it - and the link.

It's all very well to say stats don't count for all, and they don't, but it's another thing to say they count for naught.

Another non-stat factor is playing for a shite team with shite rucks and a shite future.

 

[TimeFor11]

Just checked TOG funnily enough both have had 73% of TOG according to the Herald Sun site. Tuck also has the ability to go forward @ 189cm 90kgs and actually take a mark infuriating he doesnt do it more often.

 

[Damon_3388]

This particular comparison between Tuck and O'Bree is a decent one IMO, and contains the relevant measures for which they should be judged against each other.

 

[Quicky]

Agree O'Bree is too old now and ever since Burns left the clearance department has gone down quite a bit.
But don't get me wrong I think the Pie have the best list in the league.

A 2nd rounder perhaps or a straight swap with maybe Ben Reid?

Are you f-arking mental???

You don't trade you're future CHB for an average AFL standard 27yo - especially when the weakness on the list is KPP.

I put that comment down to ignorance of our list but please be realistic.

You just don't trade very promising young KPP's for 27yo okish mids.

 

[kbutcher24]

flashbacks of carl steinfort all over again

no thanks!

 

[forwardflanker]

 

[spartan-magpie]

ok.. id take tuck for a second rounder.. maybe id throw in cox and swap our third rounders... tuck would do well at pie land being supported by a very good midfield brigade... ive already said something similar earlier...

what is bothering me though is that that richmond supporters, now that it is almost certain he'll be going, expext either a reid or goldsack for a player that cant get a game in a team as shit as richmond... tirger people why would we give you a promising player such as reid (who will be a gun and you all know thisa) or goldsack (who after a full pre season will be a in our starting 18) for someone who has 3 season left in him at best??


REID OR GOLDSACK FOR TUCK


HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

 

[astro_toby]

personally i think tuck would be a great pick up for a club like Collingwood or the Swans. Both teams "workman" like attitude would suit him down to a t. the bloke gives 100% each week playing i a team full of pussy's and wimps - if he played in a team that had the same work ethic as him, the bloke will shine IMO.

Don't think the piea would trade Reid though - if we wanted Reid we shouldn't have given them that pick for Polak

think a deal elsewhere will more likely get done. Collingwoods 2nd rounder would not be enough to get the deal done (as it is somewhere in the 30's ). Could only see a deal with the pies getting done if they are prepared to trade their first rounder and 5 rounder for tuck and 3rd rounder - doubt the pies would want to part with their 1st rounder though

Tigs should look at the swans for a trade IMO

 

[spartan-magpie]

personally i think tuck would be a great pick up for a club like Collingwood or the Swans. Both teams "workman" like attitude would suit him down to a t. the bloke gives 100% each week playing i a team full of pussy's and wimps - if he played in a team that had the same work ethic as him, the bloke will shine IMO.

Don't think the piea would trade Reid though - if we wanted Reid we shouldn't have given them that pick for Polak

think a deal elsewhere will more likely get done. Collingwoods 2nd rounder would not be enough to get the deal done (as it is somewhere in the 30's ). Could only see a deal with the pies getting done if they are prepared to trade their first rounder and 5 rounder for tuck and 3rd rounder - doubt the pies would want to part with their 1st rounder though

Tigs should look at the swans for a trade IMO

no way, tuck is no where near worth a first rounder first rounders are set aside for guns like burgoyne or kerr..... however, i agree he would be a good pick up for us, but definitely not for a first rounder.. second rounder plus a fringe player would be as good as richmond will get out of this - and i have a feeling u may end up with a upgrading ur 3rd to a second rounder.. if he were any good you guys would be keeping him.. and dont give me the young list reason or cuz would be following suit..

swans will offer 3rd or 4th... they are smart lot and will only make an offer when ther realise they can get him for cheap.. much like they did with rhyce shaw.. got him for nothing and turned out to be one of their best..

 

[Spluff]

I think he'll probably look a lot better in a better team, he's one of our best players, but has been copping shit this season because he wins the hard ball - was number one in clearances and contested posessions in the competition until Rawlings dropped him and then started playing him as a tagger or on the wing (????) - but then he just throws it on the boot either because of a lack of options or because it's ingrained in him. Who knows.

 

[Old Spice]

Sydney are the masters at topping-up and turning around, but I'm pretty sure they were after some midfield kids this year that are quick. I think they might hang onto their top 2 picks.

Given Tuck is nearer the end of his career he won't be nabbed by any bottom end teams obviously and of the top teams I can't see much space being opened up. Also since the Tigers are going to offload him anyway, the asking price can't be high.

 

[4#Didak#4]

Definitely consider for a second round pick.

Is hard at it, lacks skills but his purpose would be to free up our clean skilled players much like O'Bree does. Would be a good fit. In the Jobe Watson mould - big body, yes slow, but gets his hands on the ball first.

 

[Invigoration]

personally i think tuck would be a great pick up for a club like Collingwood or the Swans. Both teams "workman" like attitude would suit him down to a t. the bloke gives 100% each week playing i a team full of pussy's and wimps - if he played in a team that had the same work ethic as him, the bloke will shine IMO.

Don't think the piea would trade Reid though - if we wanted Reid we shouldn't have given them that pick for Polak

think a deal elsewhere will more likely get done. Collingwoods 2nd rounder would not be enough to get the deal done (as it is somewhere in the 30's ). Could only see a deal with the pies getting done if they are prepared to trade their first rounder and 5 rounder for tuck and 3rd rounder - doubt the pies would want to part with their 1st rounder though

Tigs should look at the swans for a trade IMO

First rounder...?

Seriously lock this ****ing thread, this is ridiculous. Since when did old, slow and a poor kick = first rounder?
You only have to look on the Tigers board to see they can't get rid of him fast enough.

FWIW; Rhyce Shaw >>>> Shane Tuck and look what Rhyce fetched.