What exactly makes other ruckmen better than Nicnat?

[masai]

Slightly bizarre.

OK, show me the numbers.

Slightly bizarre ?, keeping the mind out of the gutter ( double meanings !! ), I was just showing that Nic is good, but mega miles from being thought amongst the pantheon of great ruckman.

It is an interesting question, if ruckman XX gets more taps, but ruckman YY gets more pressure pack marks & kicks 2 goals. Who has the most influence on the game / won the ruckman battle ?.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Slightly bizarre ?, keeping the mind out of the gutter ( double meanings !! ), I was just showing that Nic is good, but mega miles from being thought amongst the pantheon of great ruckman.

Apropos of nothing?

It is an interesting question, if ruckman XX gets more taps, but ruckman YY gets more pressure pack marks & kicks 2 goals. Who has the most influence on the game / won the ruckman battle ?.

Oh, I thought you had some relevant numbers?

 

[The 747]

Nah it was in the year we won the flag. The most recent one, not one of the two where we beat Geelong in the GF.

Oh that's nice, three years ago.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Oh that's nice, three years ago.

And 1992 and 1994 are even longer ago than that.

 

[masai]

Apropos of nothing?

Oh, I thought you had some relevant numbers?

Numbers are numbers, I use my eye’s.

The second paragraph was an honest question as to how do we rate what is most important for ruckman in propelling their team. Tap outs v contested marks v goals kicked / defended ?. There are a lot of things required in a ruckmans armoury.

I’ve regularly seen a ruckman be out tapped by his opponent, but they kick 2 goals (whilst rucking) & take oodles of “pressure situation” contested marks. Overall I’d give the points to the second option.

 

[Rob]

The reason this argument gains so much traction is because there's never been a player like Nicnat in history. He's almost unquestionably the best pure tap ruckman in the league. But he's almost unquestionably one of the worst around the ground ruckmen in the league. I can't remember a player quite like it. How do you measure that? Well I guess it depends what narrative you want to spin. If you want to show his greatness, talk about clearances and taps to advantage. If you want to show how ordinary he is, talk about how his opponent gets off the leash and how he couldn't run out of sight on a dark night.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Numbers are numbers, I use my eye’s.

I thought you were bringing a metric to the table. But sure, if we're all just "using our eyes", everyone can just say what they think and not offer any evidence.

The second paragraph was an honest question as to how do we rate what is most important for ruckman in propelling their team. Tap outs v contested marks v goals kicked / defended ?. There are a lot of things required in a ruckmans armoury.

I’ve regularly seen a ruckman be out tapped by his opponent, but they kick 2 goals (whilst rucking) & take oodles of “pressure situation” contested marks. Overall I’d give the points to the second option.

And presumably there are numbers that describe this output?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The reason this argument gains so much traction is because there's never been a player like Nicnat in history. He's almost unquestionably the best pure tap ruckman in the league. But he's almost unquestionably one of the worst around the ground ruckmen in the league. I can't remember a player quite like it. How do you measure that? Well I guess it depends what narrative you want to spin. If you want to show his greatness, talk about clearances and taps to advantage. If you want to show how ordinary he is, talk about how his opponent gets off the leash and how he couldn't run out of sight on a dark night.

It's not a "narrative" to say that his impact at stoppages is unmatched. This is simply what the numbers indicate.

If folks think that there is some other part of the game more important than that for ruckmen, they should go ahead and make that case. As we've seen in this thread, though, NicNat's detractors have struggled to do that.

NicNat is the standout tap ruckman and also far and away the best clearance player among rucks. It makes him unmatched for impact at stoppages.

But if folks want to argue that impact at stoppages isn't the be-all and end-all for ruckmen, go ahead. If folks want to argue that intercept possessions are actually the golden KPI, go ahead. By all means, tell everyone how Reilly O'Brien is the best ruckman in the comp.

For some reason, folks aren't willing to commit to that.

So I hold the line, with my very straightforward and uncontroversial claim that impact on stoppages is the main KPI for ruckmen. And in that regard, NicNat is unmatched. And so far, none of the seagulls have been able to steal a chip from my picnic.

 

[Rob]

It's not a "narrative" to say that his impact at stoppages is unmatched. This is simply what the numbers indicate.

If folks think that there is some other part of the game more important than that for ruckmen, they should go ahead and make that case. As we've seen in this thread, though, NicNat's detractors have struggled to do that.

NicNat is the standout tap ruckman and also far and away the best clearance player among rucks. It makes him unmatched for impact at stoppages.

But if folks want to argue that impact at stoppages isn't the be-all and end-all for ruckmen, go ahead. If folks want to argue that intercept possessions are actually the golden KPI, go ahead. By all means, tell everyone how Reilly O'Brien is the best ruckman in the comp.

For some reason, folks aren't willing to commit to that.

So I hold the line, with my very straightforward and uncontroversial claim that impact on stoppages is the main KPI for ruckmen. And in that regard, NicNat is unmatched. And so far, none of the seagulls have been able to take a chip out of that.

I actually agree with you, but his lack of workrate and that he can only spend 2/3rds of the game on the ground is a pretty big liability. Irrespective of how good he is at stoppages, the rest of his game detracts from the overall player that he is. You can't ignore all the bad parts of a player's game simply by narrowing a football player's performance down to 1 or 2 statistical categories.

Would I have him in my team? * yes.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I actually agree with you, but his lack of workrate and that he can only spend 2/3rds of the game on the ground is a pretty big liability. Irrespective of how good he is at stoppages, the rest of his game detracts from the overall player that he is. You can't ignore all the bad parts of a player's game simply by narrowing a football player's performance down to 1 or 2 statistical categories.

Would I have him in my team? fu** yes.

We're comparing him to the other ruckmen in the competition, not some idealised version of himself where every facet of his game is improved indefinitely.

Again, I simply ask, what is the most important KPI for a ruckman? If it's impact on stoppages, NicNat is unmatched there. If it's something else, I'm all ears.

 

[00Stinger]

It's not a "narrative" to say that his impact at stoppages is unmatched. This is simply what the numbers indicate.

If folks think that there is some other part of the game more important than that for ruckmen, they should go ahead and make that case. As we've seen in this thread, though, NicNat's detractors have struggled to do that.

NicNat is the standout tap ruckman and also far and away the best clearance player among rucks. It makes him unmatched for impact at stoppages.

But if folks want to argue that impact at stoppages isn't the be-all and end-all for ruckmen, go ahead. If folks want to argue that intercept possessions are actually the golden KPI, go ahead. By all means, tell everyone how Reilly O'Brien is the best ruckman in the comp.

For some reason, folks aren't willing to commit to that.

So I hold the line, with my very straightforward and uncontroversial claim that impact on stoppages is the main KPI for ruckmen. And in that regard, NicNat is unmatched. And so far, none of the seagulls have been able to steal a chip from my picnic.

I really cant be ****ed about getting into another debate about who is better NN or Gawn but I will tell you what Dermie had to say today in regards to the best ruck in the league. Make of it what you will.

He said NN is an absolute monster at ruck contests and his second efforts after the ruck duel are unparalleled. But other than that he has no other tricks. Whereas Gawn is extremely good at ruck contests even if that isn't as good as NN, but Gawn is a play disrupter. He gets in the right positions around the ground which confuses teams and makes teams play and kick to different spots as they want top keep the ball away from him. So a lot of Gawns key work isn't recognized statistically as teams try to keep the ball away from him.

Now Jimmy Bartel said the same thing towards Gawn early in the year when Melbourne beat Geelong, he actually said that you cant appreciate how good and how influential Gawn is until you watch the game live and see how he disrupts and stuffs up teams game plans. This is pretty much because he is such a good contested mark, but unlike the other top contested marks in the league that are either defenders or forwards Gawn does this all over the ground, making his opposition gameplans go astray because they try to keep the ball away from him

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I really cant be f’ed about getting into another debate about who is better NN or Gawn

OK cool. I've spared you by not reading the rest of your post. You're welcome.

 

[mfcrox]

I really cant be f’ed about getting into another debate about who is better NN or Gawn but I will tell you what Dermie had to say today in regards to the best ruck in the league. Make of it what you will.

He said NN is an absolute monster at ruck contests and his second efforts after the ruck duel are unparalleled. But other than that he has no other tricks. Whereas Gawn is extremely good at ruck contests even if that isn't as good as NN, but Gawn is a play disrupter. He gets in the right positions around the ground which confuses teams and makes teams play and kick to different spots as they want top keep the ball away from him. So a lot of Gawns key work isn't recognized statistically as teams try to keep the ball away from him.

Now Jimmy Bartel said the same thing towards Gawn early in the year when Melbourne beat Geelong, he actually said that you cant appreciate how good and how influential Gawn is until you watch the game live and see how he disrupts and stuffs up teams game plans. This is pretty much because he is such a good contested mark, but unlike the other top contested marks in the league that are either defenders or forwards Gawn does this all over the ground, making his opposition gameplans go astray because they try to keep the ball away from him

You're wasting your time mate. He is just a delusional narcissist. You're using the words of some all time greats who have actually played league footy, but he won't even acknowledge them because it doesn't suit his narrative. He knows his arguments don't hold water against the comments of a Brereton or Bartel.

Quite possible the biggest flog I've seen on this website.

 

[wcesam]

NicNat would seem to have a very high percentage of fast twitch muscle fibres, meaning he is an explosive beast with relatively poor endurance.

This means he can’t spend as long in the ruck as other rucks, and he gets fewer possessions and takes less marks than you might expect, because he can’t endlessly run from contest to contest.

On the other hand, due to this explosiveness he does some extraordinary things, and smashes in and wins clearances that no other player in the comp could. While relatively few in number, some of this sort of work is game changing.

Haven’t followed him too closely this year, but I would have thought that like Cripps he would be better suited to the old rules, where there was more congestion. I’ve always thought he impacted game results more than other rucks, since winning taps all game doesn’t influence results that much, whereas the stuff NN does changes games

Good assessment. But he is racking up the touches this year actually. Because he’s the only one in our midfield that can win a contested ball.

 

[Noidnadroj]

This is waffle.

What is the most important metric for a ruckman?

Your response is "nah dunno"?

He's the standout tap ruckman and also far away away the best clearance player among rucks.

I guess Tony Lockett was only good at one area as well. All he could do was take marks and kick goals.

Is kicking goals an important part of winning games of football? Yes. Is winning the clearance battle an important part of winning games of modern football? No.

If the facts tell us clearances and hit outs don’t correlate to winning games, then why do you regard those things as being the most important metric to measure a ruckman? Doesn’t make sense to me.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

Almost as good as Richmond hey?

BTW when was the last time they lost to Fremantle?

Yeah, it’s a depressing era for us Tiger supporters. It’s alright, I know it’s infuriating that the Eagles supporters think they have a better list this era but it’s 3 flags to 1. Hurts I know.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Noidnadroj]

Please, don't kid yourself. You're not close to achieving this.

As for "my narrative", I assume you're talking about my straightforward and uncontroversial claim that impact on stoppages is the main KPI for ruckmen?

You're yet to explain why that's incorrect.

Because winning stoppages doesn’t correlate closely to winning games. So why would anyone logically think it’s the most important KPI?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Obeanie1]

Yeah, it’s a depressing era for us Tiger supporters. It’s alright, I know it’s infuriating that the Eagles supporters think they have a better list this era but it’s 3 flags to 1. Hurts I know.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Lol.

We dont btw. We just know that Tigers supporters think their team is the GOAT but the reality is they arent even close. Tigers folded as soon as they had to travel and play us in the West and when Dusty went down its game over. A one man team LOL.

Not even half as good as Hawthorn were, now THAT was a dynasty team.

But alas we all move on, Hawks into their rebuild, Tigers and Eagles starting theirs.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Is kicking goals an important part of winning games of football? Yes. Is winning the clearance battle an important part of winning games of modern football? No.

If the facts tell us clearances and hit outs don’t correlate to winning games, then why do you regard those things as being the most important metric to measure a ruckman? Doesn’t make sense to me.

Still unable to address the most straightforward parts of my argument. It says it all.

Because winning stoppages doesn’t correlate closely to winning games. So why would anyone logically think it’s the most important KPI?

So if impact at stoppages is not the most important KPI for a ruckman, what is? Intercept marks and intercept possessions?

So Reilly O'Brien is your man?

Are you going to commit to this argument or try to tap dance around it?

If Jake Lever was a ruckman he'd be the best in the comp? Look at all the intercepting!

 

[Sweet Jesus]

You're wasting your time mate. He is just a delusional narcissist. You're using the words of some all time greats who have actually played league footy, but he won't even acknowledge them because it doesn't suit his narrative. He knows his arguments don't hold water against the comments of a Brereton or Bartel.

Quite possible the biggest flog I've seen on this website.

OMG how dare he disregard the words of the great Dermott Brereton!? You used their magic words but the spell didn't work! Outrageous!

 

[Engimal v3]

But if folks want to argue that impact at stoppages isn't the be-all and end-all for ruckmen, go ahead.

They do, and have done throughout this thread. Did you seriously not see those posts?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

They do, and have done throughout this thread. Did you seriously not see those posts?

I did. And the alternative suggestions about the KPI for ruckmen were laughable.

That point is included in the post you quoted.

 

[Engimal v3]

I did. And the alternative suggestions about the KPI for ruckmen were laughable.

That point is included in the post you quoted.

Certainly wouldn't want the KPI to be based on skin folds, on account of Nic Nat being a fat plodder

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Certainly wouldn't want the KPI to be based on skin folds, on account of Nic Nat being a fat plodder

Yeah I'm sure you've got him covered for athleticism.

 

[Engimal v3]

Yeah I'm sure you've got him covered for athleticism.

What makes you so sure?