Three Things I've Learned - Round 13 Edition

[Eastdog]

Once the Round 13 match against Collingwood is completed, let us know the three things you learned after watching the match.

Be constructive but be honest.

[bulldogtragic]

3, three.

[bornadog]

* We won when I expected to lose

* We have some Young Guns in thge nidfield who stood up when Cooney, Boyd and Griffen were either not playing, subbed out or injured.

* I still love beating the filth it gives me so much pleasure.

[bulldogtragic]

Libba just keeps smashing the ceilings the outside world puts on him. His game today was bloody incredible.

Dahl, Libba, Jack and Bonts getting 40 touches in the premiership quarter is better than Viagra.

Stringer, Smith, Hunter, Talia all would think of themselves as best 22. If that's true then the team who played today can rise another rung.

[comrade]

- There are 2 sets of rules going on at times. Once again we were on the end of some rough decisions. The non push call on Gia late was terrible.

- Bonti has some of the best hands I've seen. Just sticks it every time if it's in his vicinity. Will be a jet.

- When they closed within a point in the last, I had given up hope and thought we lacked the winning gene. Glad I was proven wrong.

[LostDoggy]

1. Bontempelli and Macrae will be giving opposition coaches nightmares for the next decade.

2. The biggest sporting club in Australia can be beaten by a completely irrelevant one.

3. Gia should start on the ground more often than not.

[LostDoggy]

2. The biggest sporting club in Australia can be beaten by a completely irrelevant one.


Love it.

[F'scary]

1. What a difference a week can make.
2. Higgins - how wrong about you I have been. I had you worked out for a namby-pamby, fairyfloss, forward of the ball, front running, doesn't-want-to-mess-up-his-hairstyle player. But you played deep a lot today and took a lot of heat. Keep it up
3. Bontempelli not only has incredible hands, but is also a very long kick of the ball. Weapon!

[westdog54]

1. Bontempelli and Macrae will be giving opposition coaches nightmares for the next decade.

2. The biggest sporting club in Australia can be beaten by a completely irrelevant one.

3. Gia should start on the ground more often than not.

Love number 2.

1. Dermie is a genius. He said pre season that we'd see signs that our midfield would become the most powerful in the competition and we saw it today. Albeit a week late.

2. Bontempelli will be a ludicrously good footballer. Was immense in the second half.

3. Speaking of insanely good, Libba's potential may be limitless.

[Go_Dogs]

1. While he was very good last year, Liberatore has now become one of the truly elite midfielders. After a slower start to the year and copping a bit more attention, he has quickly gotten back to his best and today is one of his best yet.

2. Quick ball movement and suddenly we look great again (like we did late last year). Not sure if this is something we've just started to focus on or not but I hope we can keep it up for the balance of the season.

3. Liam Jones, that is now your bench mark for work rate and defensive efforts. If you can match that intensity each week, the results will come and you'll fast become a very consistent player - demonstrated his worth to us today. Super important.

[bornadog]

1. While he was very good last year, Liberatore has now become one of the truly elite midfielders. After a slower start to the year and copping a bit more attention, he has quickly gotten back to his best and today is one of his best yet.

Love the Tweet from Hayden Ballantyne.

Libba Gun.

[wimberga]

Love the Tweet from Hayden Ballantyne.

Libba Gun.

Whats his handle?

[firstdogonthemoon]

2. The biggest sporting club in Australia can be beaten by a completely irrelevant one.


Ok I think this will have to go in this weeks cartoon

[azabob]

Whats his handle?

@hayden_ballas

[boydogs]

1. Having Jones, Grant & Crameri in the team together makes a massive difference to the functioning of our forward line

2. Bontempelli, Grant, Macrae, Libba & Dahlhaus stood up in the 2nd half when we needed them. We won't lack for match winners in this crop like we did in the last

3. Tutt may play like a deer in the headlights at times, but he can perform under pressure

[LostDoggy]

Ok I think this will have to go in this weeks cartoon

:cool:

[GVGjr]

1. Having Jones, Grant & Crameri in the team together makes a massive difference to the functioning of our forward line

2. Bontempelli, Grant, Macrae, Libba & Dahlhaus stood up in the 2nd half when we needed them. We won't lack for match winners in this crop like we did in the last

3. Tutt may play like a deer in the headlights at times, but he can perform under pressure

Terrific analysis. Thanks

[Ozza]

1. We can bring fanatical attack on the man and ball for 4 full quarters.

2. The skipper will do anything to help us win (you'd think he'll struggle to get up for next week, 6 day break).

3. Macrae and Bontempelli are going to win us some games as a duo the next 10 years. Both lifted when the level of the match lifted today, and looked even more comfortable and in control when the heat was on. Gee whiz!

[wimberga]

1. We can bring fanatical attack on the man and ball for 4 full quarters.

2. The skipper will do anything to help us win (you'd think he'll struggle to get up for next week, 6 day break).

3. Macrae and Bontempelli are going to win us some games as a duo the next 10 years. Both lifted when the level of the match lifted today, and looked even more comfortable and in control when the heat was on. Gee whiz!

Really look like forming a strong duo moving forward, almost as if they were looking for each other on the field ala Gia and Murphy.

I would add that I thought Wallis did a good job of running off Pendlebury and trying to make him accountable. got a fair bit of ball himself.

[LostDoggy]

1.You can yell and scream but you won't get thrown out of the Palm Cove pub
2. the live music man doesn't know the words to Sons Of The West
3. predictions of a bulldog win on my partners 40th do come true

[whythelongface]

1. Our forward line can look good with the likes of Grant, Crameri, Jones, Stringer and Stevens - throw in another KPF (whether that is Cordy Campbell or a trade/ draft pick), and some of our smalls - Dahlhaus, Honeychurch, Hrovrat, Smith and Tutt and we have the makings of a good forward line.

2. As others have mentioned - Bontempelli and MaCrae wow these kids are something special - 250 plus gamers for the club.

3. Roughead's reading of the play and his general composure in the backline are improving weekly. He really is an outstanding player.

[boydogs]

I would add that I thought Wallis did a good job of running off Pendlebury and trying to make him accountable. got a fair bit of ball himself.

Wallis isn't a good enough kick to do any damage though, especially when he is running flat out as he needs to be to avoid getting tackled. I was disappointed with his game as he couldn't seem to contain Pendlebury without giving away a free

[Scorlibo]

Wallis isn't a good enough kick to do any damage though, especially when he is running flat out as he needs to be to avoid getting tackled. I was disappointed with his game as he couldn't seem to contain Pendlebury without giving away a free

I thought Wallis played well. Was clean with the ball, and disagree that he doesn't do damage, the handball to set up Tutt was a ripper. I have faith that he will become a very reliable defensive midfielder (not tagger) ala Cameron Ling. Pendlebury is the hardest player to stop in the AFL.

[Ozza]

I tend to agree with you on this Scorlibo.

Pendelbury gets a Wallis equivalent week in week out and he just performs. Apart from Ablett, he is the 2nd best player in the comp, and he has some pretty unique tricks that are virtually impossible to stop. Wallis was definitely beaten, but really just due to Pendles' sheer brilliance. And Wally was mostly good with the ball with 21 possessions, including a goal and goal assist to Tutt. Reckon Wal might get Boak or Hartlett this week.

[wimberga]

I thought Wallis played well. Was clean with the ball, and disagree that he doesn't do damage, the handball to set up Tutt was a ripper. I have faith that he will become a very reliable defensive midfielder (not tagger) ala Cameron Ling. Pendlebury is the hardest player to stop in the AFL.

Ditto this - and I'm not saying that Wallis getting the ball 30 times is goign to carve anyone up. I'm just saying that he made Pendlebury have to think about his defensive game and got to some good spots when needed.

[LostDoggy]

Wallis also did a nice little dinky kick to the advantage of Crameri? i think, early on but he missed the goal.

Looking like he is starting to play knowing his limitations which is exactly what we need. I was happy enough with his efforts on Pendles also.

[GVGjr]

1) The game plan has been fine this season but the execution by the playing group hasn't been great
2) When Jones plays to his ability we are a vastly better side
3) We will see some benefits from having our own VFL side, we just need to be patient.

[Remi Moses]

1) what a difference a week makes
2) no lapses this week
3) Dermie is also big on players being comfortable in their own skin after 70 games.
We had 14 on Sunday ( good signs)

[boydogs]

The handball to set up Tutt was a ripper.

I thought it was too far out in front of him. Tutt really had to overstretch for it and did well to keep his footing.

Not being picky, I just think that using Mitch as an offensive weapon is the wrong approach and isn't going to worry the elite mids of the league off their game. Mitch needs to be keeping them to 20 touches and limited impact yet Pendlebury was BOG for Collingwood next to Cloke despite being tagged

[Scorlibo]

I thought it was too far out in front of him. Tutt really had to overstretch for it and did well to keep his footing.

Not being picky, I just think that using Mitch as an offensive weapon is the wrong approach and isn't going to worry the elite mids of the league off their game. Mitch needs to be keeping them to 20 touches and limited impact yet Pendlebury was BOG for Collingwood next to Cloke despite being tagged

So you think his long term future is as a tagger? I see a lot of Daniel Cross in Mitch - desperate, good hands in close, decision making mostly very good, skills are limited but fine so long as he plays within them, not quick but with good endurance and can find a lot of the football. If we'd chosen to use Crossy as a tagger from the start of his career he probably would have succeeded in that role, yet we would have missed out on having an elite midfielder in our side for 4-5 years (and Crossy was elite despite his shortcomings).

Pendlebury gets tagged every week, and does what he did against us every week. For Wally to tag him and get 21 touches of his own I thought was a win.

Re: Tutt handball, I just can't agree. Maybe you're underestimating how difficult it is to make truly offensive handballs. That one cut through the traffic and just released Tutt into space beautifully.

[always right]

So you think his long term future is as a tagger? I see a lot of Daniel Cross in Mitch - desperate, good hands in close, decision making mostly very good, skills are limited but fine so long as he plays within them, not quick but with good endurance and can find a lot of the football. If we'd chosen to use Crossy as a tagger from the start of his career he probably would have succeeded in that role, yet we would have missed out on having an elite midfielder in our side for 4-5 years (and Crossy was elite despite his shortcomings).

Pendlebury gets tagged every week, and does what he did against us every week. For Wally to tag him and get 21 touches of his own I thought was a win.

Re: Tutt handball, I just can't agree. Maybe you're underestimating how difficult it is to make truly offensive handballs. That one cut through the traffic and just released Tutt into space beautifully.

Could not agree more.

[whythelongface]

Could not agree more.

I second that. It was a magic handball by Wallis. Great vision that lead to an important goal.

[boydogs]

So you think his long term future is as a tagger? I see a lot of Daniel Cross in Mitch - desperate, good hands in close, decision making mostly very good, skills are limited but fine so long as he plays within them, not quick but with good endurance and can find a lot of the football.

Good comparison. Fair to say Daniel had to work harder than most for his career as he had limited skills and pace, the same is true of Mitch. I hope he becomes a similar player. You wouldn't use Daniel Cross as a tagger that makes his man think defensively with his attack which is the point I was making about Mitch


Re: Tutt handball, I just can't agree. Maybe you're underestimating how difficult it is to make truly offensive handballs. That one cut through the traffic and just released Tutt into space beautifully.

Found a replay of it, 0:24 in. Tutt gets his fingertips to it and juggles the ball, it was just a bit too far in front of him

http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/06/15/collingwood-magpies-vs-western-bulldogs-afl-live-scores-blog/

[whythelongface]

Good comparison. Fair to say Daniel had to work harder than most for his career as he had limited skills and pace, the same is true of Mitch. I hope he becomes a similar player. You wouldn't use Daniel Cross as a tagger that makes his man think defensively with his attack which is the point I was making about Mitch



Found a replay of it, 0:24 in. Tutt gets his fingertips to it and juggles the ball, it was just a bit too far in front of him

http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/06/15/collingwood-magpies-vs-western-bulldogs-afl-live-scores-blog/

Gee you are a harsh judge. Pretty near perfect for a 10m handball - he put it front of him so that Tutt could use his pace to run on to it and get away from the opposition player. Any closer to him and it may have stopped Tutt's momentum.

[bornadog]

Gee you are a harsh judge. Pretty near perfect for a 10m handball - he put it front of him so that Tutt could use his pace to run on to it and get away from the opposition player. Any closer to him and it may have stopped Tutt's momentum.

Brilliant handball, I was afraid Tutt would get run down but he was too fast for the Collingwood player and slotted it just inside 50.

[boydogs]

Gee you are a harsh judge. Pretty near perfect for a 10m handball - he put it front of him so that Tutt could use his pace to run on to it and get away from the opposition player. Any closer to him and it may have stopped Tutt's momentum.

Not a lot of room for error but it could have been better. As I said before though, I'm not saying this to be picky just making a more general point about his disposal. There were a number of his kicks through the game that turned the ball over, his disposal is not his strength and I don't think we're winning if Wallis gets 20 touches trying to hurt the bloke he's tagging if his man still gets 30

[Scorlibo]

I don't think we're winning if Wallis gets 20 touches trying to hurt the bloke he's tagging if his man still gets 30

You're presuming that Wallis getting more of the ball means that he isn't putting the same defensive effort in. You're also presuming that Pendles getting 30 touches is par for the course, when really it's only par for the course whilst getting tagged (because he's tagged every week). Without Wallis, maybe he gets 40 and kicks 3. Maybe instead of registering 1 inside fifty, he has 8.

[jeemak]

Mitch's handball was perfectly timed and weighted and carried a very high degree of difficulty. What you don't see from the clip above is the judgement in holding before he fired it off.

I agree Mitch has some issues with foot and hand skills, but I don't think I could pick a worse example to demonstrate that.

[jeemak]

You're presuming that Wallis getting more of the ball means that he isn't putting the same defensive effort in. You're also presuming that Pendles getting 30 touches is par for the course, when really it's only par for the course whilst getting tagged (because he's tagged every week). Without Wallis, maybe he gets 40 and kicks 3. Maybe instead of registering 1 inside fifty, he has 8.

This was a point I wanted to make earlier. Pendlebury got 30 touches, many of which were under pressure and I can assure you they would have been much more effective without the tag.

Mitch struggled to not give away free kicks, but he did manage to curtail his influence. The good thing about his game is he managed to do more than most taggers do on this particular player and also hit the scoreboard and score assist himself.

[boydogs]

You're presuming that Wallis getting more of the ball means that he isn't putting the same defensive effort in. You're also presuming that Pendles getting 30 touches is par for the course, when really it's only par for the course whilst getting tagged (because he's tagged every week). Without Wallis, maybe he gets 40 and kicks 3. Maybe instead of registering 1 inside fifty, he has 8.

Or if Picken was on him, he gets 20 touches and 0 goals.

Wallis struggled all game to maintain touch with him, he's too slow against anyone with a hint of pace and has been exposed several times this year against outside opponents. Trying to corral someone you can't keep up with is when you start to give away frees, which is what happened.

If he's a tagger he's an inside tagger, a tackling beast with quick hands around the clearances. You raised the comparison with Daniel Cross, would you have played Cross on Pendlebury?

[LostDoggy]

Not a lot of room for error but it could have been better. As I said before though, I'm not saying this to be picky just making a more general point about his disposal. There were a number of his kicks through the game that turned the ball over, his disposal is not his strength and I don't think we're winning if Wallis gets 20 touches trying to hurt the bloke he's tagging if his man still gets 30
Wrong. We did win.

You're presuming that Wallis getting more of the ball means that he isn't putting the same defensive effort in. You're also presuming that Pendles getting 30 touches is par for the course, when really it's only par for the course whilst getting tagged (because he's tagged every week). Without Wallis, maybe he gets 40 and kicks 3. Maybe instead of registering 1 inside fifty, he has 8.
8 inside 50s?? I think you're being a bit harsh on young Pendlebury, mate, he's no Bontempelli.

[jeemak]

I don't see Wallis as a tagger long term anyway.

Once he gets stronger and fitter his disposal and decision making will be better, and he'll become an accumulator much in the same vein Boyd and Cross were/are.

The point of playing him on the best mids in the comp now is about making sure he develops his defensive game to become an even minded footballer that values defence as much as attack.

Not everyone is going to play like an elite mid at the age of 22 - like Libba and Selwood managed to do. Most take time to get strong, fit and more rounded as footballers.

[bulldogtragic]

I love these threads each week. We all start with just saying our 3 things, and we wait and build up and then someone jumps in with a question or point and you can never tell where these 3 things threads will end up. Good especially if you haven't read them for a day or so.

[Scorlibo]

I don't see Wallis as a tagger long term anyway.

Once he gets stronger and fitter his disposal and decision making will be better, and he'll become an accumulator much in the same vein Boyd and Cross were/are.

The point of playing him on the best mids in the comp now is about making sure he develops his defensive game to become an even minded footballer that values defence as much as attack.

Not everyone is going to play like an elite mid at the age of 22 - like Libba and Selwood managed to do. Most take time to get strong, fit and more rounded as footballers.

Agree with all that. It's both a shame and a blessing that Wally had to come in the same package as Libba. They would have pushed each other to get where they are, and each owes something to the other in that respect, but because Libba is so bloody good we judge Wallis a little harshly.


I love these threads each week. We all start with just saying our 3 things, and we wait and build up and then someone jumps in with a question or point and you can never tell where these 3 things threads will end up. Good especially if you haven't read them for a day or so.

Glad you said that BT. Sometimes I feel I'm a culprit of taking these threads off track a bit, but like you it's usually just one or two interesting points that prick my ears (or catch my eye) as topics for discussion. Good fodder for late-week discussion... and it's only Tuesday!!

[boydogs]

Wrong. We did win.

I meant winning the matchup. Mitch isn't damaging with his disposal so I don't think he should aim to be the sort of tagger that makes his opponent chase the other way, if he's going to tag he should focus on negating

In terms of SC points, Pendlebury was 25 ahead of the next best Collingwood player. As a tagger you don't want your man to be the opposition's best player by such a margin, I'm sure Mitch would agree

[LostDoggy]

I meant winning the matchup. Mitch isn't damaging with his disposal so I don't think he should aim to be the sort of tagger that makes his opponent chase the other way, if he's going to tag he should focus on negating

In terms of SC points, Pendlebury was 25 ahead of the next best Collingwood player. As a tagger you don't want your man to be the opposition's best player by such a margin, I'm sure Mitch would agree
We get that Wallis didn't beat him, but he is rarely beaten by anybody. It says more about Pendles than Wally.

[wimberga]

We get that Wallis didn't beat him, but he is rarely beaten by anybody. It says more about Pendles than Wally.

Well put

[Bulldog Joe]

I meant winning the matchup. Mitch isn't damaging with his disposal so I don't think he should aim to be the sort of tagger that makes his opponent chase the other way, if he's going to tag he should focus on negating

In terms of SC points, Pendlebury was 25 ahead of the next best Collingwood player. As a tagger you don't want your man to be the opposition's best player by such a margin, I'm sure Mitch would agree

When we resort to fantasy scores to prove a point I think the argument is lost.

As an example, it was universally noted by all on here AND media that Minson had a poor game against Brisbane, but was an important player against Collingwood.

By fantasy scores his performance in those games was about equal. Only fantasy scores could have interpreted that his game against Collingwood was not vastly superior to the previous week.

[always right]

When we resort to fantasy scores to prove a point I think the argument is lost.

As an example, it was universally noted by all on here AND media that Minson had a poor game against Brisbane, but was an important player against Collingwood.

By fantasy scores his performance in those games was about equal. Only fantasy scores could have interpreted that his game against Collingwood was not vastly superior to the previous week.

Excellent point BJ

[Scorlibo]

When we resort to fantasy scores to prove a point I think the argument is lost.

As an example, it was universally noted by all on here AND media that Minson had a poor game against Brisbane, but was an important player against Collingwood.

By fantasy scores his performance in those games was about equal. Only fantasy scores could have interpreted that his game against Collingwood was not vastly superior to the previous week.

Supercoach scores are the best single number one can provide to justify a player's performance, I've no doubt about that. Why on earth would you object to someone using fantasy scores and not to someone using disposals to justify their claim?

[wimberga]

Supercoach scores are the best single number one can provide to justify a player's performance, I've no doubt about that. Why on earth would you object to someone using fantasy scores and not to someone using disposals to justify their claim?

I think the point is that Minson had extremely similar supercoach scores across two weeks, but his two performances were regarded by a lot of parties as completely different, including the club

as an aside, I know you are a strong believe in the value of those score Scorlibo - do you, or anyone else for that matter, know if clubs use those when assessing player performance?

[Scorlibo]

I think the point is that Minson had extremely similar supercoach scores across two weeks, but his two performances were regarded by a lot of parties as completely different, including the club

as an aside, I know you are a strong believe in the value of those score Scorlibo - do you, or anyone else for that matter, know if clubs use those when assessing player performance?

I understand where BJ is coming from with the Minson example - but perhaps it's simply evidence of Minno's change in impact being overstated? He broke even with Stefan Martin last week, and was criticised because, well, it's Stefan Martin. This week his opponents were even less reputable - Jarrod Witts and Brodie Grundy. He won the hitout count by around 10, improved his disposal efficiency enormously, had 1 less possession, 5 less contested possessions, 1 less clearance and 5 less tackles. On those basic stats his unchanged supercoach score is justified. One might argue that what isn't measured is his bustling and making space around the stoppages for other players - fine, but no stat can measure that.

In regards to clubs using supercoach scores - I doubt it, if only to appear more professional. They have access to so many stats that the public doesn't and probably formulate their own KPIs. However, what supercoach scores do is put all of the KPIs into one number, according to how important they are to winning - which is really all the coaches are doing.

Champion Data's new ranking system has even more merit again, but has not received much fanfare and, maybe because of this, scores are not released week to week (except probably to clubs). See here: http://www.afl.com.au/stats/player-ratings/overall-standings

Those numbers are real scoreboard impact over the last 40 games that the player has played within the last 2 seasons. Libba has been climbing the ratings this season and is now number 17. Griff is number 6.

[Bulldog Joe]

Supercoach scores are the best single number one can provide to justify a player's performance, I've no doubt about that. Why on earth would you object to someone using fantasy scores and not to someone using disposals to justify their claim?

I object to either as a measure of a players worth. On the pure fantasy score and on disposals defenders have a lot of very poor games, but often have a strong influence on the outcome of matches.

[Greystache]

I object to either as a measure of a players worth. On the pure fantasy score and on disposals defenders have a lot of very poor games, but often have a strong influence on the outcome of matches.

And that is the crux of the issue for why fantasy footy is good for pub banter but nothing more serious. It doesn't have any way to measure accountability to an opponent. A loose HBF could rack up 28 cheap touches out of defence and be his team's highest SC scorer, meanwhile his direct opponent could kick 10 on him.

Langdon was Collingwood's 6th highest SC performer on the weekend, meanwhile Jones had a field day against him.

[LostDoggy]

Until artificial intelligence (scoring correct decision making, awareness, '1%'ers') is built into fantasy scores they're of zero use within the boundaries of the club.

I don't see how anyone can claim that they would be of use. Imagine the lads sitting down with King, Grant, Monty et al and defending a critique of their performance by flicking to page 82 of the Herald Sun.

[jeemak]

I can see where this is going. I suppose we have to have at least three of these arguments a year.

[Scorlibo]

I object to either as a measure of a players worth. On the pure fantasy score and on disposals defenders have a lot of very poor games, but often have a strong influence on the outcome of matches.

Defenders typically score very similar numbers to forwards. Midfielders have the most influence on the play, so it only makes sense that they get the highest scores. But if you compare key defenders to key defenders, key forwards to key forwards etc. then there's not much wrong with supercoach as a measure (inclusive, remember, of spoils, tackles, pressure acts, 1%ers, tap ons etc.)


And that is the crux of the issue for why fantasy footy is good for pub banter but nothing more serious. It doesn't have any way to measure accountability to an opponent. A loose HBF could rack up 28 cheap touches out of defence and be his team's highest SC scorer, meanwhile his direct opponent could kick 10 on him.

Langdon was Collingwood's 6th highest SC performer on the weekend, meanwhile Jones had a field day against him.

Langdon's offensive work isn't undone because he wasn't able to spoil Jones on a couple of occasions. Measuring a defender by their opponent's work is getting closer and closer to irrelevant. Champion Data has one more piece to put into the jigsaw puzzle in their rankings before any argument referring to a defender's opponent is void.


Until artificial intelligence (scoring correct decision making, awareness, '1%'ers') is built into fantasy scores they're of zero use within the boundaries of the club.

I don't see how anyone can claim that they would be of use. Imagine the lads sitting down with King, Grant, Monty et al and defending a critique of their performance by flicking to page 82 of the Herald Sun.

I guarantee you that the club uses stats to evaluate performance. SC scoring incorporate most stats available, therefore there seems nothing all that strange to me about clubs using SC scores for a general indicator, to be used in conjunction with game vision, in assessing a players performance. However, as is demonstrated in this thread, there is a stigma associated with fantasy scores that would leave clubs looking unprofessional if they used SC scores.


I can see where this is going. I suppose we have to have at least three of these arguments a year.

Sorry jeemak, I just can't let it go. My favourite topic!

[Greystache]

Langdon's offensive work isn't undone because he wasn't able to spoil Jones on a couple of occasions. Measuring a defender by their opponent's work is getting closer and closer to irrelevant. Champion Data has one more piece to put into the jigsaw puzzle in their rankings before any argument referring to a defender's opponent is void.

To who? Fantasy footy fanatics perhaps.

Defensive accountability is more relevant than it's ever been, to say otherwise is ridiculous. A player who can't play an accountable role and defend an opponent will have a very short life in today's game. Buckley himself commented that several of his defender's inability to restrict their opponent was exposed on the day and needs to be rectified. Clearly Buckley considers his minimal offensive work undone by his defensive failures, whether or not fantasy footy can comprehend it.

[Scorlibo]

To who? Fantasy footy fanatics perhaps.

Defensive accountability is more relevant than it's ever been, to say otherwise is ridiculous. A player who can't play an accountable role and defend an opponent will have a very short life in today's game. Buckley himself commented that several of his defender's inability to restrict their opponent was exposed on the day and needs to be rectified. Clearly Buckley considers his minimal offensive work undone by his defensive failures, whether or not fantasy footy can comprehend it.

I can't disagree with that. I simply mean to say that defensive accountability is getting better at being measured without looking at direct opponents' output. Eg. Roughy makes 7 spoils, 2 smothers, 2 knocks to advantage, lays 4 tackles, makes 5 pressure acts and all of this data is used to assess his defensive work instead of looking at how Travis Cloke kicked 3 goals in the time that Roughy was on him.

[boydogs]

When we resort to fantasy scores to prove a point I think the argument is lost.

How else do you propose I demonstrate that Pendlebury was their best player by some margin?

[always right]

I can't disagree with that. I simply mean to say that defensive accountability is getting better at being measured without looking at direct opponents' output. Eg. Roughy makes 7 spoils, 2 smothers, 2 knocks to advantage, lays 4 tackles, makes 5 pressure acts and all of this data is used to assess his defensive work instead of looking at how Travis Cloke kicked 3 goals in the time that Roughy was on him.

What Roughy's or Morris's stats don't reveal is how many times Cloke was able to mark the ball almost uncontested because of Roughy's poor positioning or failure to go with Cloke on the lead. That's not to pot Roughy but surely you can't just measure someones performance on what they did and not take into account what they didn't do.

Stats are an indicator of performance...albeit a significant one on most occasions.

[jeemak]

How else do you propose I demonstrate that Pendlebury was their best player by some margin?

Round 13 AFLCA Votes - Collingwood v Western Bulldogs
10 Liberatore (WB)
7 Cloke (Coll)
6 Griffen (WB)
3 Elliott (Coll)
3 Jones (WB)
1 Dahlhaus (WB)

Interestingly the coaches didn't have him in their top players.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/news/2014-06-17/libba-breaks-into-aflca-top-ten

I thought he was pretty good, but not as dominant as I've seen him in other 30 touch, 1 goal games.

[always right]

Round 13 AFLCA Votes - Collingwood v Western Bulldogs
10 Liberatore (WB)
7 Cloke (Coll)
6 Griffen (WB)
3 Elliott (Coll)
3 Jones (WB)
1 Dahlhaus (WB)

Interestingly the coaches didn't have him in their top players.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/news/2014-06-17/libba-breaks-into-aflca-top-ten

I thought he was pretty good, but not as dominant as I've seen him in other 30 touch, 1 goal games.

Snap

[Happy Days]

Fantasy footy scores hey?

Ricky Pettard Vs Dale Morris

WHO YA GOT?!?!

If any of you backing SC scores as anything but useful for Supercoach took Morris then you're a HYPOCRITE and a LIAR.

[Greystache]

Round 13 AFLCA Votes - Collingwood v Western Bulldogs
10 Liberatore (WB)
7 Cloke (Coll)
6 Griffen (WB)
3 Elliott (Coll)
3 Jones (WB)
1 Dahlhaus (WB)

Interestingly the coaches didn't have him in their top players.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/news/2014-06-17/libba-breaks-into-aflca-top-ten

I thought he was pretty good, but not as dominant as I've seen him in other 30 touch, 1 goal games.

Staggering. I can see a case for everyone of those players named, but I would still have had Pendlebury in the top 6 players on the field. He missed a relatively simple set shot late to give him a second goal which may have made a difference.

[Bulldog Joe]

How else do you propose I demonstrate that Pendlebury was their best player by some margin?

Super coach points don't do it.

For what its worth I considered Cloke and Elliott their most influential players on the day.

Although the umpires were up there as well.

[Greystache]

For what its worth I considered Cloke and Elliott their most influential players on the day.

Although the umpires were up there as well.

I saw a stat on the internet (so take it with a grain of salt) that Razor Ray awarded 9 free kicks for the game- Collingwood 9- Bulldogs 0

Some of his free kicks were contrary to what happened in the contest and actually went the other way based on a technicality only he could see. He should have been investigated for match fixing on the weekend.

[Bulldog Joe]

I saw a stat on the internet (so take it with a grain of salt) that Razor Ray awarded 9 free kicks for the game- Collingwood 9- Bulldogs 0

Some of his free kicks were contrary to what happened in the contest and actually went the other way based on a technicality only he could see. He should have been investigated for match fixing on the weekend.

I know this is probably not the right place, but was it Ray who calmly watched Dane Swan apply a shepherd to the throat of Mitch Wallis (and called play on) about 40 metres out from our goal in the 2nd qtr. Quite similar to the one paid against Cooney in (I think) the Carlton game.

[jeemak]

Staggering. I can see a case for everyone of those players named, but I would still have had Pendlebury in the top 6 players on the field. He missed a relatively simple set shot late to give him a second goal which may have made a difference.

Yeah, I'd have thought he had a bit more of an impact than Dahlhaus. I thought Cloke was their most influential player though.

[Greystache]

Yeah, I'd have thought he had a bit more of an impact than Dahlhaus. I thought Cloke was their most influential player though.

So did I, and I thought he and Elliot were on about par. Elliot didn't get a lot of it but did some damage on the scoreboard.

[Scorlibo]

What Roughy's or Morris's stats don't reveal is how many times Cloke was able to mark the ball almost uncontested because of Roughy's poor positioning or failure to go with Cloke on the lead. That's not to pot Roughy but surely you can't just measure someones performance on what they did and not take into account what they didn't do.

Stats are an indicator of performance...albeit a significant one on most occasions.

You've hit the nail on the head there AR. You can't measure 'nothing'.

I exchanged a few private messages with Karl Jackson from Champion Data on BigFooty following the release of their player ratings last year. The one flaw I saw in their system was that it only addressed situational changes around the ball, and not around the ground. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the ratings, but as an example, a player with uncontested possession of the football on the fifty and with 5 opponents between he and the goal is treated as the same situation as when there are no opponents between he and the goal. Karl responded by saying that to put GPS monitors on all the players would require the cooperation of all the clubs and of course the AFL, it is something they are not currently capable of doing. This is the last piece in the jigsaw puzzle I was referring to. Once in place and once data is collected, we will be able to see what the real effect of Roughead not being able to go with Cloke is, or what kind of effect the loose man has. We'll be able to measure how important it is for Jack Macrae to run hard the other way and get behind the ball, etc.

If this happens, it will revolutionise not only how we measure the game but the game itself. When relayed onto coaches, they will be able to implement very precise strategies for particular game situations.

In the meantime though, supercoach scores are the best single measure. Better still is using a combination of game vision, stats and expert (ie. coaches) opinion.

[whythelongface]

Isn't this old ground that we have covered over and over on other threads - isn't there a specific thread for all this.

[always right]

In the meantime though, supercoach scores are the best single measure. Better still is using a combination of game vision, stats and expert (ie. woof posters) opinion.

Edited for accuracy