Opinion Top 50 2012

[eaglespremiers]

Okay, okay, Pendlebury is 2nd.
But I'm keeping Stanton 3rd. My rankings have him a clear 2nd behind Thompson.
1. Thompson
2. Pendlebury
3. Stanton
4. Kennedy
5. Deledio
6. Watson
7. Selwood
8. Sidebottom
9. Hayes
10. Ablett
11. Dangerfield
12. Cotchin
13. Sloane

Would probably have Hendo as our highest ranked player now, tbh. Has been brilliant in defence all season. Went forward in the second half and looked likely, even if he finished the game on the bench with a sore groin.

Henderson is easily your highest ranked player 25-30. Judd somewhere around there too. Robinson and Simpson fringe. Murphy still in the 50 for now.

The top 50 will be up in the next day or two.

 

[lamaros]

Good effort. Agree with you about Stanton - clearly up the top. He's not a clear second in the coaches votes for nothing.

 

[Ambrosia]

Not sure Sloane is the 14th best performed player in the league. He is the third best midfielder in his own side and his disposal can be a bit wayward. Would have him at 20-25.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Here is round 8.
As always, let me know what you think.

 

[Dandy_GO]

He's missed a game, but surely Walker should be at least around where Crameri is. He's still leading the Coleman.

Sloane is having a great year, but I don't think he's the 12th best player in the competition. Glad you rate him, though.

Andrew Swallow should be a bit higher I reckon. Callan Ward, too.

On the whole, really good stuff.

 

[Slattery_20]

Yeah I wouldn't have Crameri in the top 20.
Cox (for eg) shits on him - as well as Sammy & Boyd

Don't think Brian Lake should be 'unlucky' even. Despite how good he's been this last month, he's had 2-3 average weeks + a week out.

 

[StringyDog]

Don't think Brian Lake should be 'unlucky' even. Despite how good he's been this last month, he's had 2-3 average weeks + a week out.

He has only had 1 bad game in round 1, every other week he has beaten his opponent and in last month has been as good as he was in 2010, , compare that to say the last person on list Hawkins who has been good for 4 games a couple of average and a couple of crap , he is definately in the unluckies just outside and would move inside should he beat Hawkins tonight.

 

[100action]

Some how I get the feeling if Richmond truly have 5 players in the top 50 of the comp and 2 unluckies they would be much higher on the ladder. I mean the Saints had 6 top 50 players imo in 2009-2010 (the rest were trash) and they were dominating. That much quality would surely improve the teams performances dramatically.

But I digress, it is your opinion and it is a pretty good effort

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Some how I get the feeling if Richmond truly have 5 players in the top 50 of the comp and 2 unluckies they would be much higher on the ladder. I mean the Saints had 6 top 50 players imo in 2009-2010 (the rest were trash) and they were dominating. That much quality would surely improve the teams performances dramatically.

But I digress, it is your opinion and it is a pretty good effort

Don't forget the honourable losses.

 

[Barnzy]

Some how I get the feeling if Richmond truly have 5 players in the top 50 of the comp and 2 unluckies they would be much higher on the ladder. I mean the Saints had 6 top 50 players imo in 2009-2010 (the rest were trash) and they were dominating. That much quality would surely improve the teams performances dramatically.

But I digress, it is your opinion and it is a pretty good effort

Go on then, which players shouldn't be in? List them and the reasons why.

Only one I'd disagree with is Foley as Grigg has been better.

 

[Ambrosia]

From an Essendon perspective I think Crameri is too high. I also would look to move Hooker into the unluckies at least, as he is yet to be beaten.

 

[Necromancer Beth]

From an Essendon perspective I think Crameri is too high. I also would look to move Hooker into the unluckies at least, as he is yet to be beaten.

Yes on both accounts.

Regarding the op having Crameri one spot ahead of Franklin, Franklin leads Crameri in every single key indicator this year.

Goals

Franklin 2.5
Crameri 2.5

Disposals

Franklin 19.4
Crameri 16.6

Marks

Franklin 5.5
Crameri 5.4

Contested marks

Franklin 2.0
Crameri 1.6

Marks Inside 50

Franklin 3.1
Crameri 2.9

Tackles

Franklin 3.9
Crameri 2.5

Scoring shots per game

Franklin 6.6
Crameri 4.6

Goal assists

Franklin 1.4
Crameri 1.1

I know stats at evertything, but those stats tell a pretty clear tale. Both are having very good years, but Franklin should be ahead in this list IMO.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Yes on both accounts.

Regarding the op having Crameri one spot ahead of Franklin, Franklin leads Crameri in every single key indicator this year.

Goals

Franklin 2.5
Crameri 2.5

Disposals

Franklin 19.4
Crameri 16.6

Marks

Franklin 5.5
Crameri 5.4

Contested marks

Franklin 2.0
Crameri 1.6

Marks Inside 50

Franklin 3.1
Crameri 2.9

Tackles

Franklin 3.9
Crameri 2.5

Scoring shots per game

Franklin 6.6
Crameri 4.6

Goal assists

Franklin 1.4
Crameri 1.1

I know stats at evertything, but those stats tell a pretty clear tale. Both are having very good years, but Franklin should be ahead in this list IMO.

As there is a consensus I will readjust for next weeks 50.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Yeah I wouldn't have Crameri in the top 20.
Cox (for eg) shits on him - as well as Sammy & Boyd

I disagree on the Cox front.
Mitchell and Boyd possibly better but so far this year Crameri has been better than Cox.
Mind you Cox's last three games have been pretty big so he is catching him.

 

[eaglespremiers]

He's missed a game, but surely Walker should be at least around where Crameri is. He's still leading the Coleman.

Sloane is having a great year, but I don't think he's the 12th best player in the competition. Glad you rate him, though.

Andrew Swallow should be a bit higher I reckon. Callan Ward, too.

On the whole, really good stuff.

I thought considerably about Walker.
Falls out but will be back in once he starts playing again (assuming he keeps up his form).

Sloane gets 12th in the competition because of his consistency.
I actually have him 1 point ahead of Dangerfield.
Out of ten I've given him:
Round 1 - 8
Round 2 - 7
Round 3 - 5
Round 4 - 8
Round 5 - 8
Round 6 - 8
Round 7 - 8
Round 8 - 9
Total = 61/80
Have I mistakenly given him a high score somewhere?
If I haven't he falls behind a group of players on 63/64:
Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Deledio, Watson, Selwood.

Ergo, my reasoning for putting him in the teens.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Some how I get the feeling if Richmond truly have 5 players in the top 50 of the comp and 2 unluckies they would be much higher on the ladder. I mean the Saints had 6 top 50 players imo in 2009-2010 (the rest were trash) and they were dominating. That much quality would surely improve the teams performances dramatically.

Richmond's top end are impressive and obviously it is my opinion that they deserve to have 5 in there (though two are on the fringe).
Their key weakness (which keeps them lower on the ladder) is that their depth is not particularly great (one cannot compare Richmond's depth to StKilda's in '09-'10).
Looking at the particular players, who would you argue is not top 50 so far?
Deledio, Cotchin and Rance are surely in.
Maric is arguably in but more likely than not.
Foley is borderline, but then so is Grigg.

 

[MR]

Richmond's top end are impressive and obviously it is my opinion that they deserve to have 5 in there (though two are on the fringe).
Their key weakness (which keeps them lower on the ladder) is that their depth is not particularly great (one cannot compare Richmond's depth to StKilda's in '09-'10).
Looking at the particular players, who would you argue is not top 50 so far?
Deledio, Cotchin and Rance are surely in.
Maric is arguably in but more likely than not.
Foley is borderline, but then so is Grigg.

Nail on the head. It's our worst 6-7 players which don't get us over the line.

Maric's form over the past 3-4 weeks has been just as good or even the best out of any ruckman in the competition.

Grigg and Foley are the fringe players at the moment and I would imagine that they would remain in that <40 group for the rest of the year. ( And no, I'm not saying both should be in, I'm saying some weeks one or even both may be in, some weeks neither could be.)

 

[eaglespremiers]

My rankings for the Hawthorn v Richmond game:
10 - Maric
9 - Cotchin, Tuck, Martin
8 - Deledio, Foley, Rance
7 - Whitecross, Grigg
6 - Mitchell, Roughead
5 - Lewis
4 - Franklin, Sewell, Rioli
Note: These are only the players in top 50 contention.
What are people's thoughts?
Do you concur or see a players game differently?

 

[AG]

Bit too generous for the top rankers imo. I think I only gave out 10ish 10/10 performances per year. I tried to compare it to every performance in the comp, rather than the individual game. So Ablett against Essendon early in the year was a 10/10. Maric today is the equal of that? Not imo. 8/10 at best.

You might be using the rankings differently, so ignore me if that's the case.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Bit too generous for the top rankers imo. I think I only gave out 10ish 10/10 performances per year. I tried to compare it to every performance in the comp, rather than the individual game. So Ablett against Essendon early in the year was a 10/10. Maric today is the equal of that? Not imo. 8/10 at best.

You might be using the rankings differently, so ignore me if that's the case.

I only give out one 10 per game.
I could do it The Age way by only giving the ten or so a year (like you suggest).
However, I think it balances out if I give a 10 for an outright BOG (which doesn't happen every game but usually half of all games). I also balance a players game against their Champion Data ranking, so if I think they are BOG and their score is approx. 150ish then I will seriously consider giving them the 10.
Like I said, even if my scoring is different than yours it should balance out.
I take your point regarding Maric. Perhaps he deserves a 9 instead of 10/10 and no-one get the full points for the game.
Besides my rankings don't determine exactly where I put players, just so I can keep track of a player over the year.

 

[eaglespremiers]

So Ablett against Essendon early in the year was a 10/10.

Perhaps for the crazy games I might add an extra point (only used 10 times or less a year).
So Ablett (Rd 3), Stanton (Rd 1) and Swan (Anzac Day) would qualify for an extra point.
I think that would be the most accurate way to score them.

 

[LordJimmy]

Surely Hayes would get an extra point for Round 3...

Is Armitage in the 50 yet? He'd be close after today.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Surely Hayes would get an extra point for Round 3...

Is Armitage in the 50 yet? He'd be close after today.

Certainly open to suggestions as to what games deserve extra.
Armitage is close after his game today.
Will have to go through his rankings for the year.
If you've seen all St Kilda games this year why don't you rank his games and I'll balance them against what I've seen of him this year (which is not enough).

 

[AG]

lol, LJ will give Hayes 10/10 for every game.

 

[Rustin Cohle]

Dayne Beams, come on down.