MVP The 2019 BigFooty's Port Adelaide Forum's B&F Award

[Forzaport]

Broadbent 7th best Port player according to AFL Player Rankings.

 

[Forzaport]

I thought Broady played well but I wouldn't have put him in my top 5 and I was surprised to see him in the coaches' votes. Only 1 madman could have viewed Broady as 4th best on field that day.

 

[Janus]

Lol, the player rankings have Jonas the fourth best Port player.

Don’t ever post them again.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Yeah, but do you care what Clarkson thinks? That’s the real question.

Clarkson thinks Chad Wingard is a star who was worth giving up pick 15, pick 35 and Ryan Burton for. Thoughts?

 

[ozph1870]

Clarkson thinks Chad Wingard is a star who was worth giving up pick 15, pick 35 and Ryan Burton for. Thoughts?

Chad's the sort of player that would be ok, a bit inconsistent, but then if they make it to the gf get 20 and 4 and have a norm smith around his neck. They'll say it's worth it

 

[Janus]

When people say he wasn’t in the top five players, who was?

28 disposals, 12 contested possessions, 10 intercepts, 10 pressure acts, 1 tackle, 4 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 inside 50s, 3 rebound 50s, 458 meters gained.

Must have ******* won the game if there were five better players than that.

 

[Janus]

Clarkson thinks Chad Wingard is a star who was worth giving up pick 15, pick 35 and Ryan Burton for. Thoughts?

I think it’s about right for what Wingard’s potential is and the fact that he’s been AA twice. It was a fair trade at the time.

Would he do it now? * no.

 

[Forzaport]

Lol, the player rankings have Jonas the fourth best Port player.

Don’t ever post them again.

If that is the standard by which you wish to operate, then literally everything you have ever posted should be disregarded in its entirety.

 

[Waspy79]

Boak will win this award, and the real one, in a canter. Shocked to be writing that.

 

[Janus]

If that is the standard by which you wish to operate, then literally everything you have ever posted should be disregarded in its entirety.

You think Jonas was fourth best on ground for us do you?

 

[Forzaport]

You think Jonas was fourth best on ground for us do you?

I think outright rejecting the AFL Player Ratings model based on a single unexpected result is a mistake. I would try to understand why Jonas was rated as having the 4th greatest impact for us on the weekend. My initial thought is that his comments about being gassed at the end of the first quarter was probably hyperbole as it's inconsistent with the stats. Even though I personally didn't rate Jonas's game in our top 5, he wasn't our worst player by a long shot.

 

[Janus]

I think outright rejecting the AFL Player Ratings model based on a single unexpected result is a mistake. I would try to understand why Jonas was rated as having the 4th greatest impact for us on the weekend. My initial thought is that his comments about being gassed at the end of the first quarter was probably hyperbole as it's inconsistent with the stats. Even though I personally didn't rate Jonas's game in our top 5, he wasn't our worst player by a long shot.

The problem is that it was used to prove that Broadbent wasn't in the top 5 rated Port players, yet Jonas was rated in the top 5. I don't mind it as a subjective analysis tool, but since we don't know the formula of how they rate players, you've got to take it with a grain of salt.

Now, I don't think Broadbent was best on ground, but I do think he was our best defender because not only did he push forward the way that Byrne-Jones did, he also defended pretty well.

According to Stats Pro, these are the categories in which Broadbent is elite as a general defender after three games:

Disposals
Contested Possessions
Intercept Possessions
Ground Ball Gets
Clearances
Score Launches

These categories he's above average:

Inside 50s
Effective Disposals
Meters Gained
Uncontested Possessions

People don't want to rate him because they don't want to admit they were wrong to write him off when he was selected.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

We can’t trust any stat you present Janus

 

[Janus]

We can’t trust any stat you present Janus

Look it up if you like...it's true.

Actually, looking at our defence, pretty much all our general defenders play well compared to the rest of the league. It's the key defenders (Howard, Clurey, Jonas) that let us down. The only player who is elite in any category is Howard with goals and inside 50s.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

According to Stats Pro

Elite
Kick to Handball Ratio
Contested Marks
Intercept Marks

Above Average
Inside 50s
Intercept Possessions
Contested Possession Rate

Who is this gun???? Intercept marks, Inside 50s, Contested Possession Rate, Contested Marks!!!! All above average or higher!!!

Joel Garner, 1 game, dropped

When you measure every stat against Generic AFL Performance, then Elite in any category largely means Specialised and/or Limited Data (say 3 games or fewer)

You wouldn’t want to know that, you’d rather bullshit, presuming despite constant evidence that you won’t get caught out. Then it happens. Again and again, twice in this thread even.

Mind numbing.

 

[Waspy79]

According to Stats Pro

Elite
Kick to Handball Ratio
Contested Marks
Intercept Marks

Above Average
Inside 50s
Intercept Possessions
Contested Possession Rate

Who is this gun???? Intercept marks, Inside 50s, Contested Possession Rate, Contested Marks!!!! All above average or higher!!!

Joel Garner, 1 game, dropped

When you measure every stat against Generic AFL Performance, then Elite in any category largely means Specialised and/or Limited Data (say 3 games or fewer)

You wouldn’t want to know that, you’d rather ********, presuming despite constant evidence that its trivial to catch you out.

Mind numbing.

If you are wanting to compare Broadbent and Garner using statistics, then Broadbent's game on the weekend justifies his inclusion ahead of Garner.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

If you are wanting to compare Broadbent and Garner using statistics, then Broadbent's game on the weekend justifies his inclusion ahead of Garner.

Yeah for sure, I mean Garner didnt pick up a single possession against Hawthorn.

 

[Waspy79]

Yeah for sure, I mean Garner didnt pick up a single possession against Hawthorn.

Gold, it really is you.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

Waspy79 Its not my fault you can’t understand whats being discussed here.

Janus pulled out a dubious qualitative measure for players and was presented with similar qualitative results for a first gamer who was dropped. Stats pro ‘elite’ in a category is weak when all you do is pick out a single player in the world and provide zero context.

 

[Schulzenfest]

If you are wanting to compare Broadbent and Garner using statistics, then Broadbent's game on the weekend justifies his inclusion ahead of Garner.

This doesn't make any sense. Broadbent's game on the weekend hadn't happened when he was included ahead of Garner.

If we brought back Jake Neade this week and he kicked 6 goals, that wouldn't retroactively make the decision justified based on the information that was at hand at the time the decision was made.

 

[ozph1870]

When people say he wasn’t in the top five players, who was?

28 disposals, 12 contested possessions, 10 intercepts, 10 pressure acts, 1 tackle, 4 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 inside 50s, 3 rebound 50s, 458 meters gained.

Must have ******* won the game if there were five better players than that.

Impact on game > stats...
I thought he was really good in the first half. Probably our best to half time.

 

[ozph1870]

Still would 100% play Garner ahead, crazy to drop him after the first game he played..

 

[Waspy79]

This doesn't make any sense. Broadbent's game on the weekend hadn't happened when he was included ahead of Garner.

If we brought back Jake Neade this week and he kicked 6 goals, that wouldn't retroactively make the decision justified based on the information that was at hand at the time the decision was made.

New word?

It's impossible to compare the two, but looking back on all available evidence at this point in time, the decision appears justified. I rarely agree with Janus (or read what he posts in recent times) but I will back him on this one.

For a similar reason it was baffling that we played a first gamer in Ladhams in the wet and wind in Tassie when we had a perfectly good and known prospect in Ryder in the 22, with able support from Frampton and Westhoff to combat the might of Ceglar and Pittonet.

 

[Janus]

According to Stats Pro

Elite
Kick to Handball Ratio (who cares?)
Contested Marks
Intercept Marks

Above Average
Inside 50s
Intercept Possessions
Contested Possession Rate

Who is this gun???? Intercept marks, Inside 50s, Contested Possession Rate, Contested Marks!!!! All above average or higher!!!

Joel Garner, 1 game, dropped

When you measure every stat against Generic AFL Performance, then Elite in any category largely means Specialised and/or Limited Data (say 3 games or fewer)

You wouldn’t want to know that, you’d rather ********, presuming despite constant evidence that you won’t get caught out. Then it happens. Again and again, twice in this thread even.

Mind numbing.

Oh don't worry, I looked up Garner's stats too. I'll measure him against Broadbent if you like

Where Broadbent is better:

Disposals - 24 (elite) to 13 (below average)
Kicks - 16.7 (above average) to 11 (average)
Handballs - 7.3 (above average) to 2 (below average) (this is why he had such an elite kick to handball ratio)
Effective kicks - 10.7 (above average) to 8 (average)
Effective disposals - 16.3 (above average) to 10 (below average)
Meters gained - 363 (above average) to 139.5 (below average)
Contested possessions - 8 (elite) to 4 (below average)
Uncontested possessions - 14.7 (above average) to 7 (below average)
Intercept possessions - 8.3 (elite) to 6 (above average)
Ground ball gets - 6.3 (elite) to 3 (below average)
Centre clearances - 0.7 (elite) to 0 (average)
Stoppage clearances - 1.7 (elite) to 0 (below average)
Marks - 5.3 (average) to 5 (average)
Score launches - 1.7 (elite) to 1 (average)
Pressure acts - 8.3 (below average) to 7 (below average)
Defensive half pressure acts - 5.7 to 2

Where they are the same

Inside 50s - 2 (above average)
Rebound 50s - 3 (average)
One percenters - 2 (below average)

Where Garner is better:

Kick to Handball Ratio - 5.5 (elite) to 2.3 (above average)
Disposal efficiency - 76.9% (average) to 68.1% (below average)
Contested possession rate - 36.4% to Garner, 35.3% to Broadbent
Contested marks - 1 (elite) to 0.3 (below average)
Intercept marks - 3 (elite) to 1.3 (average)
Tackles - 2 (average) to 0.7 (below average)
Spoils - 2 (average) to 0.3 (below average)

Garner has a bright future, there's no doubt about it. But there's a reason why Broadbent is ahead of him at the moment. Those stats include two games when everyone was calling for him to be dropped. He's not a spud, and his selection is justified.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

Way to miss the ******* point, Janus

I’ve already pointed out in a previous thread how you seem to love raw stats (that you ultimately repeat in substats that add no additional meaning, as above - we get it, Broady plays loose on no opponent and picks up cheap disposals a lot,) but ignore proportional qualitative ones like Disposal Efficiency.

You count Effective Kicks because it allows you to ignore ineffective kicks and clangers. You absolutely love to count them in addition to Kicks, Disposals, allowing a multiple count of the same disposal, without ever drawing attention to the obvious missing factor in all of this. The *ups, and how often they are *ups.

Broadbent’s ratio of disposals:effective disposals clearly drops while Garner’s clearly improves, but ******* you counts it as a double ‘better’ to Broadbent. You’re a fraud or an amateur, and you’ve been around too long to justify amateur.

You are the dodgy real estate agent of stats. Owning you three times in one thread is superfluous. Don’t at me, you hack.