Stephen Hill

[clogged]

Nice to see some credit from Clay who I believe once called me a mediocrity accepting sycophant for suggesting Hill might need a bit of time to mature.

You said he was the best Fremantle player you'd ever seen. Which, even given how good he is going now, is completely ridiculous.

 

[clogged]

The thing is when teams don't start with a hard tag on Fyfe he takes the game away from you in the first quarter.
Like Ross said, you choose your poison.

I agree with this to an extent but, Hill was the one who won it for Freo in the second half after West Coast had control of the game in the first.

 

[E Shed]

You said he was the best Fremantle player you'd ever seen. Which, even given how good he is going now, is completely ridiculous.

I guess we remember it differently and I'm not going to dig through old threads.
The point I remember trying to make when you were vilifying Hill was that he was still quite immature and lacking in confidence and that his confidence had been beaten out of him by a succession of hard mature players smashing him from pillar to post when he wasn't sufficiently developed to deal with that. I hoped that time would allow him to realise his potential.
Anyway good for him, good for you for starting the thread. I think we can all agree its great to see him playing the way he is.

 

[E Shed]

I agree with this to an extent but, Hill was the one who won it for Freo in the second half after West Coast had control of the game in the first.

No doubt. But I think it was the first Derby when Fyfe started free and racked up about 12 touches in the 10 minutes. Even the commentators were saying, WC have to do something about Fyfe.

 

[strobe00]

Have crunched the numbers. Healy was right.

In Hilly's 121 games he's gotten 25 touches or more 17 times. Of those games we won 16/17 (94%). Of the games where he didn't get 25 or more we lost 53/104 (49%).

They didn't pick 25 by accident. That's the number that gives the biggest impact, out of all the ones they could have chosen (except for 31 touches, which he's only done twice). A graph for those that're interested.

 

[Puregold]

The way he is going about things at the moment screams leadership to me. I reckon in the players and football departments minds he is fast become an option to succeed Pav.

 

[clogged]

Have crunched the numbers. Healy was right.

In Hilly's 121 games he's gotten 25 touches or more 17 times. Of those games we won 16/17 (94%). Of the games where he didn't get 25 or more we lost 53/104 (49%).

I think those stats are a bit meaningless, especially since they take into account the early years of his career when the side was not playing well and he was still young (2009 & 2011).

Would be more interesting if it was confined his performances in the Ross Lyon era.

 

[Taylor]

I think coaches have decided that Fyfe running ten metres out of the circle and bombing it inside fifty eight to ten times a quarter is more damaging than Hill getting a handball receive at half back a couple of times a quarter. Regardless of the quality of the inside fifty, letting us run set plays out of the centre circle is only going to result in scoreboard pressure.

 

[Bender571]

Have crunched the numbers. Healy was right.

In Hilly's 121 games he's gotten 25 touches or more 17 times. Of those games we won 16/17 (94%). Of the games where he didn't get 25 or more we lost 53/104 (49%).

They didn't pick 25 by accident. That's the number that gives the biggest impact, out of all the ones they could have chosen (except for 31 touches, which he's only done twice). A graph for those that're interested.

View attachment 65619

Nice work, could you do one for kicks? I reckon that's the important stat for Hill. Just had a quick look and if he gets 10 or more kicks Freo wins 75% of the time and since Lyon has taken over it's up to 84% of games.

 

[free at last]

That kick to Mzungu on the weekend...

The one to suban v Richmond a few weeks back was better.

 

[leeloo]

Can't wait to see how Roos deals with Hilly on the weekend. Will he let him go or will he try to shut him down? If there was a coach who knew how to deal with Hill it would be Roos. May be struggling for the cattle to implement a tactic but will be fascinating none the less.

 

[clogged]

I think coaches have decided that Fyfe running ten metres out of the circle and bombing it inside fifty eight to ten times a quarter is more damaging than Hill getting a handball receive at half back a couple of times a quarter. Regardless of the quality of the inside fifty, letting us run set plays out of the centre circle is only going to result in scoreboard pressure.

Fyfe's well down the list for inside 50s. I don't think that's his weapon.

Hill's extremely accurate kicking, whether from half back or half forward, opens up the ground.

In the following stats:

Kicks - second most at the club, behind David Mundy
Inside 50s - second most at the club, behind D Pearce
Disposals - third most at the club, behind Mundy and Fyfe
Contested possessions - third most at the club, behind Fyfe and Mundy
Clearances - third most at the club, behind Fyfe and Mundy
Goals - third most at the club, behind Pavlich and Ballantyne

 

[Taylor]

Fyfe's well down the list for inside 50s. I don't think that's his weapon.

Hill's extremely accurate kicking, whether from half back or half forward, opens up the ground.

I don't disagree with the numbers but when I see Fyfe walk it out of the middle eleven times in a quarter before the tag goes to him and it stops those direct inside fifties it made me think that is far more dangerous, half the opposition is behind him.

 

[clogged]

I don't disagree with the numbers but when I see Fyfe walk it out of the middle eleven times in a quarter before the tag goes to him and it stops those direct inside fifties it made me think that is far more dangerous, half the opposition is behind him.

If you're talking about the first derby, Hill wasn't even playing. So that was the best midfielder tagged and the third best out of the game. There is little wonder the inside 50s dried up.

 

[strobe00]

I think those stats are a bit meaningless, especially since they take into account the early years of his career when the side was not playing well and he was still young (2009 & 2011).

Would be more interesting if it was confined his performances in the Ross Lyon era.

Agreed. They are a bit meaningless. All stats can be misinterpreted or misunderstood... especially by people who don't know how they work, what they mean or what they're actually good for.

It's easy to look at the numbers and think that if we get Hilly 25 possessions each game we'll win virtually every game. But that'd be wrong. The team's performance doesn't hinge on how many touches one of our players gets, regardless of the attractive trend it presents.

Mind you, I'd rather Hilly get 25+ touches every game from now on.

As for your last sentence... here goes:
- 54 games played 2012-2014
- 11 games Hilly got 25 or more touches. Of those we won 11/11 (100%)
- 43 games he got less than 25. Of those we won 27/43 (63%)

 

[strobe00]

These two statements are incompatible.

No they're not. You declared your opinion to be truth. I didn't. That's the difference, and that's my issue with the way you stated your case. Hence the Coulda comparison.

I can have an insight into his belief in his own football ability based on the manner in which he plays.

I'm sure you can, and it's quite obvious that's where your opinion came from. The way you stated it was the issue I had with it.

What makes you surmise that all AFL coaches have collectively forgotten how talented he is?

Dear god Clay, stick to the argument without setting up a straw man. When did I say that all AFL coaches have collectively forgotten how talented he is? I didn't. There have been a few recently that don't appear to be picking him as their default taggee as they often have in the recent past.

They can't tag everyone. As had been said, they pick their poison. I can't understand why they'd choose to leave Hill to run free. I'm glad they did (for obvious reasons). Maybe they think that shutting Fyfe down will help them minimise quick and damaging clearances, and give them a better chance of controlling field position. Maybe they think it'll prevent him kicking goals up forward or taking critical marks midfield. Who knows?

Some of them have chosen to tag Fyfe in the hope that'll let them win the game, and have let Hill run mostly free. From memory, most of those coaches have lost the game. I'm sure they haven't forgotten Hill's talent. But they may have forgotten how badly he can hurt them as it had been a fair while since they've seen him run around without a minder. I'd be surprised if the Dogs and the Toast leave him without a tagger next time we play them.

 

[clogged]

No they're not. You declared your opinion to be truth. I didn't. That's the difference, and that's my issue with the way you stated your case.

Lolwut. How does prefacing a statement with 'I reckon ...' declare an opinion to be truth?

 

[strobe00]

Nice work, could you do one for kicks? I reckon that's the important stat for Hill. Just had a quick look and if he gets 10 or more kicks Freo wins 75% of the time and since Lyon has taken over it's up to 84% of games.

Righto. Here goes.



It's debatable how useful this stuff is. It's probably only useful if similar analysis was run on every player in the team rather than one bloke, as the stats are only useful in context.

Common sense and watching enough of our games is enough to suggest that we'll stand a better chance of winning if Hilly is getting a lot of the ball, and getting a lot of kicks... rather than having him shut out of it.

 

[clogged]

Dear god Clay, stick to the argument without setting up a straw man. When did I say that all AFL coaches have collectively forgotten how talented he is? I didn't. There have been a few recently that don't appear to be picking him as their default taggee as they often have in the recent past.

You said:

I can only assume he's not getting tagged because teams have forgotten how damaging he can be

How does that stand to reason?

I think its far more likely that Hill has improved to the point where he is difficult to tag rather than teams forgetting that he was any good in the first place.

 

[strobe00]

Lolwut. How does prefacing a statement with 'I reckon ...' declare an opinion to be truth?

Nice try. This is sentence I objected to.

The rest of his poor performances were from lack of belief in his own ability rather than strictly being shutdown.

Not the one that you started with "I reckon". There's no "I reckon" or "possibly" or any other allowance for alternative possibilities in the bolded post above. That's my issue with the post.

Make sense now?

 

[strobe00]

My point was that I hadn't surmised that all AFL coaches had collectively forgotten how talented he is. That looked like setting up a straw man to me.

I think its far more likely that Hill has improved to the point where he is difficult to tag

As for this... it's definitely possible. I personally don't think Hill is so good yet that there's no point in tagging him.

I'd assume the oppo coaches thought that tagging Fyfe would give them a better chance of winning the game than by tagging Hill. Of the two, I'd expect that Fyfe is the more difficult to tag... as he wins more of his possessions contested, is taller, stronger and is a much better overhead mark. If they're going to bother tagging Fyfe, I can't see why they'd be that worried about being able to slow Hill down.

I'd guess the oppo coaches wanted control of the clearances to avoid being pegged in their back half, and they thought tagging Fyfe would give them a better shot at it... and they were prepared to gamble that Hill wouldn't get enough of it in dangerous positions to burn them.

rather than teams forgetting that he was any good in the first place.

Why, FFS, do you insist on overstating the case?

I had to split the two halves of that sentence to be able to argue the point sensibly.

 

[clogged]

Nice try. This is sentence I objected to.



Not the one that you started with "I reckon". There's no "I reckon" or "possibly" or any other allowance for alternative possibilities in the bolded post above. That's my issue with the post.

Make sense now?

I reckon I can't start every sentence with an "I reckon" IMO.

 

[salim malik]

The thing is when teams don't start with a hard tag on Fyfe he takes the game away from you in the first quarter.
Like Ross said, you choose your poison.

I for one couldn't be prouder of what the once shy young S Hill is achieving and I too have no doubt the sibling rivalry is what has finally put things into perspective for him. His pissant little brother showing him up. You can see in the interviews with Brad he's a cheeky little so and so and he jokes about Stephen always being better but he reckons he's catching up. Perspective. If my little brother can kick ass in the AFL then I bloody well can too.
That and the gun mids we have now spreading the attention of the opposition.

Nice to see some credit from Clay who I believe once called me a mediocrity accepting sycophant for suggesting Hill might need a bit of time to mature.




Mediocre accepting sycophant ,Its got a Ray Davies ring to it E .You should put it to music

 

[strobe00]

I reckon I can't start every sentence with an "I reckon" IMO.

I reckon you're probably right.

Will let it go. Play on.

 

[strobe00]

The way he is going about things at the moment screams leadership to me. I reckon in the players and football departments minds he is fast become an option to succeed Pav.

Humphrey? Nah.

I suspect he'd be happier just playing his role for the team and letting others hold the reins.