Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Post Match. Pies beat Lions - All comments please

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Match
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mooretreloar 



Joined: 21 Sep 2016


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 11:09 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Adam Treloar 3 Votes wrote:
^ I would assume that Moore Treloar was suggesting that in every club there would be some players that would have a frosty relationship with the coach. It can happen for a number of reasons, be it for a clash of personalities or the coach not really rating the player etc.

Not that other AFL coaches do not like Buckley.


Spot on.

AT3V, just put this poster on ignore, as I have done. He is not worth your time to engage with.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thompsoc 



Joined: 21 Sep 2009


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 11:22 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

mooretreloar wrote:
Adam Treloar 3 Votes wrote:
^ I would assume that Moore Treloar was suggesting that in every club there would be some players that would have a frosty relationship with the coach. It can happen for a number of reasons, be it for a clash of personalities or the coach not really rating the player etc.

Not that other AFL coaches do not like Buckley.


Spot on.

AT3V, just put this poster on ignore, as I have done. He is not worth your time to engage with.

When you read it literally it means exactly what 5 on debut said.
Mooretreloar always claims to carefully write things down.
Well, 5 on debut was just pointing out the stupidity of this claim.

_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
5 from the wing on debut 



Joined: 27 May 2016


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 12:16 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

thompsoc wrote:
mooretreloar wrote:
Adam Treloar 3 Votes wrote:
^ I would assume that Moore Treloar was suggesting that in every club there would be some players that would have a frosty relationship with the coach. It can happen for a number of reasons, be it for a clash of personalities or the coach not really rating the player etc.

Not that other AFL coaches do not like Buckley.


Spot on.

AT3V, just put this poster on ignore, as I have done. He is not worth your time to engage with.

When you read it literally it means exactly what 5 on debut said.
Mooretreloar always claims to carefully write things down.
Well, 5 on debut was just pointing out the stupidity of this claim.


Mooretreloar has set very high standards and been quite disrespectful to those that have expressed opinions that he does not agree with. At the same time, he posts a significant amount of opinion as the gospel truth and then throws a hissy fit when the flaws in what he has said are pointed out to him.

This board is premised upon an exchange of opinions. I take it as a compliment that he has blocked me. It means he has no answers.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thompsoc 



Joined: 21 Sep 2009


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 12:23 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I always say if you don't like me or any other poster's opinion then you can always put them on ignore.
From my point of view it means I can post in peace without getting into futile arguments.
It also means I can comment on your post and you cannot comment on mine ...now that is perfection.

_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
qldmagpie67 



Joined: 18 Dec 2008


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 12:40 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Reading through posts and being part of the match day thread there seems to be a huge divide on opinions of Sidey.
It's no secret he isn't my favourite player but contrary to popular belief I don't hate the guy I am just so overly frustrated by him.
Let me breakdown the divide for you
In our own voting this week 9 posters gave him votes 18 didn't (at the time of posting this) so 1/3rd thought he played well enough to get votes while 2/3rds didn't. I know some people vote on stats like how many touches I don't I vote on how I see there overall performance. Like yesterday I don't give votes to Sidey as I thought he was poor but I also didn't give votes to Treloar as I thought he didn't impact the game often enough in a positive manner. I may be wrong on 1 or both but that's how I saw it.
I did give votes to both Dunn and Goldie who I thought absolutely gave everything they could for the side.
Voting is a personal thing and I'm happy for everyone to vote how they please.
Secondly there have been a few posters saying the experts in commentary all say he's elite. Well not exactly true some do some don't. But think about it people these are the same commentators who are paid to make outlandish comments to get headlines. Depending on how you view elite he may or may not make a list. He doesn't make mine and I know by reading comments here and match day he doesn't make many others lists either. But there is posters who grade him as elite which is there right as it is mine not to.
I've said it for years now he's absolute best is sublime its super it's genius use any adjective you like it's all of them. But we don't see it anywhere near enough. For all the brilliance he shows in glimpses it's easily overshadowed by dinky kicks turnovers handballs to the feet of team mates or a team mate withn3 players on him. Often his turnovers lead to opposition scores or at least forward 50 entries from which sooner or later another error is made and a score conceded. Yes he isn't the only player making mistakes Treloar can be equally as bad and I've bagged him as well.
Go back to the start in 2008 when we drafted him. Pick 11. Many on here scratched there heads at the time some where happy some not but that's the case with any draft pick.
In th next 2 seasons whilst eligible for a rising star nomination he didn't receive one. Yes some will say that's because he plays at Collingwood. Well over those 2yrs Beams, Jaxson Barnham, Brad Dick and Ben Reid all received nominations. So it's not overly biased against Collingwood it would appear.
Discounting top 10 draft picks those 2yrs (as they were drafted in front of him) players such as Gary Moss, Jarryn, Geary, Aaron Joseph, Tatye Pears, Chris Masten, Nick Suban, Jesse White, Daniel Hannabury, Ryan Basticnac, Todd Banfield, Jordan Gysberts, Jarred Grant & Sam Wright all received nominations.
Point being the judges never thought he played a game good enough to earn a nomination let alone win it. (to confirm those 2yrs were won by Patrick Dangerfield & Daniel Rich)
Like any new player he didn't set the world on fire his first few games but he did show promise. Along with Beams I like many thought we had picked up 2 gems.
2010 he plays in a winning grand final cementing his place in our history. He plays well in the big game some say close to our best (I didn't but I did have him in our best 6-Cool he earns accolades from th masses rightly so. His main contemporary in our team Beams played probably his worse game for the club on the biggest stage. Many point this out but heck even the greatest of all time can't play well every week. This is a fact Beams has to live with until (if ever) he gets a chance to prove his better than he showed.
I consider both Sidey & Beams lucky they came into a side that was a very good team and they didn't have the heat applied to them in 2009/10/11 when we had the likes of Swan Ball Pendles Thomas etc running riot through the competition. Made there jobs a lot easier.
2009 Beams won the best first year player award voted by the club. He played 18 games to Sidey's 11 he earned 28 Copeland votes to Sidey's 13
From 2012 on when we lost many premiership players and he passed the 50-75 game barrier many believe it takes to get used to AFL football he has always showed patches of brilliance but never on a truly consistent basis.
Some people when I've posed these questions before have made excuses as to why he hasn't won a Copeland or been a all Australian (even a nominee for all Australian honours) say oh you don't win Copeland trophies when Swan and Pendles are in the team well Beams did. They say this is the era of so many elite midfielders you can't make it well Swan did Pendles did Beams did.
Again these are selected by experienced football people who have never considered him worthy of the honour of even being nominated for all Australian honours. Some of these selectors are also media commentators who rabbit on he's elite. Well he can't be that elite when he's not considered to even receive a nomination.
Brownlow votes have never fallen his way either. His best return in a season is 9 votes.
Some say this isn't a fair way to judge players but for mine the best players always figure in the voting (we may not agree with the winners but generally the top 10-15 vote earners are generally the top 10-15 players in the game) other than Pendles right now I can't think of a player out there who hasn't won a Brownlow that possible should have. Yes Beams hasn't won a Brownlow either but here's the thing I don't consider him to be elite either.
In our team our only elite player is Pendles full stop. Treloar and Sidey aren't and both have a long way to go and massive improvements to make to be mentioned in the same breathe as the skipper.
When discussing elite players or those in high demand by clubs his name is never mentioned. Search the Internet for a single article or any story were it's even a line says club X has expressed a interest in Sidebottom when his off contract. I have there isn't a single story I can find. Now before the supporters say oh they know he's to loyal to leave that's absolute rubbish. Any manager worth is salt if he had a even mild inquiry from a club as to if his player would entertain a change of club would leak the story to the media to drive his clients earning potential up. If he didn't the manager should be sacked. When elite players or even those top tier A graders come on the market there is always speculation even those who seem very unlikely to leave there clubs. There news stories. Look at every time Beams contract was coming up for renewal there's dozens of stories starting in 2010 when the suns made it clear they would like him. Sidey has never attracted interest for another club so maybe other clubs don't rate him as highly as the commentators or some here (maybe like the 10 clubs who didn't draft him before we did)
Finally the biggest knock I have on him as a player with 170 odd games is how inconsistent his performances are quarter to quarter week to week. Getting 30 odd sounds great but when you have 5 Clangers (3 of which lead straight to opposition goals) and 4 other handballs to team mates which either hit there feet or as the ball arrives they are swamped makes the stats look ordinary.
He also is a serial offender of stop prop look sideways or backwards as his first option. Yes he isn't the only guilty party but he with his experience should be more experienced in being able to take the game on.
I personally believe he's played out of position but that's just a personal opinion.
We can all have an opinion
Mine is he's a good player who can do brilliant things but can also bring you to screaming point the next possession.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
mooretreloar 



Joined: 21 Sep 2016


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:04 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

The official Champion Data ranking points (these are not just the points accumulation of kicks, handballs, marks etc, but measure a player's impact on a game taking into account things like disposal efficiency, 1%'s, where the player got their disposal, did the player impact the game when it was on the line, goal assists, changers etc) for the game against Brisbane were as follows:
- Treloar 141
- Pendles 130
- Grundy 120
- Adams 109
- Sidey 109
- Goldy 107
- Elliott 99
- Crisp 96
- Smith 94
- Maynard 87
- Fasolo 87
- Dunn 83
- Wells 79
- Moore 76
- Greenwood 75
- De Goey 71
- Howe 66
- Scharenberg 65
- Blair 65
- WHE 64
- Broomy 60
- Phillips 58

There is only a finite number of points allocated per game amongst the 2 teams, 3301 in total.

In the accumulation of kicks, handballs, etc, Sidey had 139 points, 30 more than his official ranking points for the game because his disposal efficiency was not great and he had a number of clangers. The difference between the two was greater at half time because his disposal efficiency was below 50% at half time, but he tidied his disposal up after half time.

In comparison, Treloar had 109 points in the accumulation stats, but 141 in the official ranking points. Pendles was 125 v 130. Adams was 97 v 110. Goldy 50 v 107. Treloar and Adams usually have more in the accumulation than the official, but both used the ball very well yesterday. Pendles usually has more in the official v the accumulation.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Piesnchess 



Joined: 09 Jun 2008


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:09 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

thompsoc wrote:
I always say if you don't like me or any other poster's opinion then you can always put them on ignore.
From my point of view it means I can post in peace without getting into futile arguments.
It also means I can comment on your post and you cannot comment on mine ...now that is perfection.


Aha, now one might say, one might draw the conclusion, that that is the cowards way out Thommo ol son, you can comment on their drivel, but they cant comment on your drivel, of course, perish the thought that you would stoop so low. Razz

_________________
Chess is the touchstone of the intellect-Goethe.

Some people see things and say why, I see things, and say, why not. ! - Robert Kennedy
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
mooretreloar 



Joined: 21 Sep 2016


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:15 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^^
Thompsoc is on ignore too, as he has only one purpose for being on this site, which is to upset genuine Collingwood supporters.

The ignore button is very good, it can make your experience on this site much more pleasant than dealing with people that just don't get it.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
qldmagpie67 



Joined: 18 Dec 2008


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:19 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

mooretreloar wrote:
The official Champion Data ranking points (these are not just the points accumulation of kicks, handballs, marks etc, but measure a player's impact on a game taking into account things like disposal efficiency, 1%'s, where the player got their disposal, did the player impact the game when it was on the line, goal assists, changers etc) for the game against Brisbane were as follows:
- Treloar 141
- Pendles 130
- Grundy 120
- Adams 109
- Sidey 109
- Goldy 107
- Elliott 99
- Crisp 96
- Smith 94
- Maynard 87
- Fasolo 87
- Dunn 83
- Wells 79
- Moore 76
- Greenwood 75
- De Goey 71
- Howe 66
- Scharenberg 65
- Blair 65
- WHE 64
- Broomy 60
- Phillips 58

There is only a finite number of points allocated per game amongst the 2 teams, 3301 in total.

In the accumulation of kicks, handballs, etc, Sidey had 139 points, 30 more than his official ranking points for the game because his disposal efficiency was not great and he had a number of clangers. The difference between the two was greater at half time because his disposal efficiency was below 50% at half time, but he tidied his disposal up after half time.

In comparison, Treloar had 109 points in the accumulation stats, but 141 in the official ranking points. Pendles was 125 v 130. Adams was 97 v 110. Goldy 50 v 107. Treloar and Adams usually have more in the accumulation than the official, but both used the ball very well yesterday. Pendles usually has more in the official v the accumulation.


Interesting MT I'm not a big fan of these or super coach stuff not my cup of tea I generally base my opinion on what my eyes see (admittedly they are getting older)
See i didn't give Treloar or Sidey any votes yesterday whilst they got a fair bit of it I didn't think it was obvious to me that what they did with it was really beneficial to the teams win but again that's a personal opinion. I did give votes to both Goldie and Dunn though
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
melliot 



Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It was good to have back to back wins for a change. Seems to have been a long while!

But I seem to be still frustrated. We should have smashed them. ~70v35 inside 50s. The stats reflected a 100 point win, except the scoreboard stat. We walked away with a 45 point win, with their back not broken until midway through the last.

It still indicates the same problems. Can't get good enough reward on the scoreboard for our midfield dominance.

I felt we fell asleep for a while in the 3rd. Just stopped bulling them in the middle. Once they got back in the game, our mids stepped it up again.

Defense is still leaky. Upto half time the Lions were going at a ridiculous efficiency rate.

It is not just the forwards or just the backs. It is a whole team thing that is unbalanced.

There were really only a few misses that were sitters. Broomheads was the worst. How 20m DIF is missed is beyond me. A lot of the misses were good looks, but had a decent element of difficulty. But we seemed to miss most of these, rather than coming away with say 50% of them.

Calls for Blair are currently unfair, when Faz is playing like he is. Poor positioning, poor effort, poor choices, flying for marks against Moore, instead of getting front and center. Sitting out the back for the easy one. Not chasing hard enough. The list goes on. Surely the is something better we can bring through from the VFL? Faz is not playing a good role IMO. He has the talent, but needs to have a hard look at himself and how he plays. He could be so much better. I wonder if this is a coaching problem or a player one. How he has been let go to play like he does is baffling. It needs correction urgently.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
melliot 



Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 1:42 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

And Sidebottom missed a lot of targets he should hit. Some of these cost us goals.

Disposal efficiency is one measure. But simply, does the player decide on the right option and hit that option when they are given the time to.

Sidebottom missed a lot of these.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
didick 



Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 2:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

For the disposal efficiency stat, is a kick or hand pass considered as being effective/efficient even if it was dropped or fumbled by the intended receiver? I remember a couple of simple drops from great kicks yesterday which made me wonder. If you drill 10 kicks perfectly to team mates, but three of them drop them, is your DE 70%?

EDIT: Found this on BF:

Effective disposals are made up of effective long kicks, effective short kicks and effective handballs. An effective long kick is one that is 40 metres to a 50/50 or better for the team. An effective short kick is one that results in a teammate's possession who was the intended target of the kicker. A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target to the team's advantage is recorded as an effective handball.

_________________
"The night is a very dark time for me" Chaz Michael Michaels
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
MJ23 



Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 2:58 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Funny Sidey gets compared to Beams. Two very different types of mids. Must be because they were drafted the same year.Id suggest the club would be more than happy with the mid Sidey is rather than worrying about what he isnt given there are others to balance out.

There career stats don't really have one dominating the other. Both have strengths though.

Sidey kicks more, marks more (runs harder/longer so gets more uncontested), actually tackles more per game just.
Clearances 2.28 / clangers 2.1 / cp 7.54 / 1.6 one%rs

Dayne handballs more and averages a couple more disposals per game because of it, averages 1 goal a game to Sideys .8.
Clearances 4.38/clangers 2.24, cp 9.84 / 1.1 one%rs

Sidey though has played 37 more games and is nearly a full year younger.
While not winning a B&F - hes been fairly consistent even beating Beams in his final year.

I think what is being pointed out in the whole scheme of things is very detailed - I guess that is what happens to the very best players.
Wink

_________________
"Even when Im old and gray, I wont be able to play but Ill still love the game"
Michael Jordan
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies2016 



Joined: 12 Sep 2014


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 3:10 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

didick wrote:
For the disposal efficiency stat, is a kick or hand pass considered as being effective/efficient even if it was dropped or fumbled by the intended receiver? I remember a couple of simple drops from great kicks yesterday which made me wonder. If you drill 10 kicks perfectly to team mates, but three of them drop them, is your DE 70%?

EDIT: Found this on BF:

Effective disposals are made up of effective long kicks, effective short kicks and effective handballs. An effective long kick is one that is 40 metres to a 50/50 or better for the team. An effective short kick is one that results in a teammate's possession who was the intended target of the kicker. A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target to the team's advantage is recorded as an effective handball.


Exactly. People should know what stats actually mean before they knock them. The people who usually knock stats are the same people who don't like opinions questioned.

Disposal efficiency when taken in context is a good stat. The larger the sample, the less you can argue with it.
What it doesn't take into account is decision making. A player can receive an effective disposal based on his decision but it may not have been the best option for his team.
For stats to be most effective, they need to be measured against all the other clubs, not just internally.
Clubs don't just say we are going ok with a kicking efficiency of 70 % across the board but they will measure that stat against all other clubs and see where they sit in the pecking order. ( statistical differential )

Cheers
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 3:12 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Now that is saying a mouthful.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Match All times are GMT + 10 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 11 of 13   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group