 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Invigoration
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| masoncox wrote: | | A great kick means a great kick ..... it would include both field and goal kicking. That goal kicking stat is pretty weird for a guy who most claim to be a great kick. |
This is about the biggest oversimplification possible
_________________
Brown re his GF omission:
"It’s not about me & it never has been. It’s about the team & it’s about Collingwood & it’s about the 22 other blokes out there on the park. That’s all that matters to me" |
|
|
|
 |
mudlark
Joined: 19 Mar 2002
Location: Maroochydore Qld
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| masoncox wrote: | | A great kick means a great kick ..... it would include both field and goal kicking. That goal kicking stat is pretty weird for a guy who most claim to be a great kick. |
A couple of questions here. Do you think Locket,Dunstal or McKenna were great kicks? Could any of them kick accurately with their non preferred? Could they have gathered the ball on the run and at full tilt, hit a team mate ,lace out 40 mtrs away, either foot??In Buckleys case 50 or more mtrs. But they were all great kicks YEAH?? |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
P4S mate we had better stop doing this agreeing stuff people will wonder what's up in the world.
Mate everything you said is 100%
Daicos like Buckley was a very good field kick and better than average goal kick.
You comment about Pendles made me read it twice that's a hell of a rap mate but very deserving. For me he was the prototype of the new generation midfielder. Buckley would make anyone's greatest Collingwood team I'm imaging as would Pendles and Daicos and likely Swanny what a freaking skilled team that would be.
Kicking eff can be a misleading stat some times. In 2016 Jack Frost was our best kick by the stats but would you trust him kicking for your life ?
Backs and HBF types generally have a higher kicking eff due to mostly only kicking it 15-30m and more often than not to a unmarked team mate. It's the kicks going forward of centre that you need the ball in the hands for your best kick.
Another thing stats don't always show is where players get there touches and how. Tom Mitchell this year had a record amount of touches but did he hurt anyone ? He had 50 against us and wouldn't have ranked in the top 10 on the field because half of them were 1-2 handballs or soft 10m set up plays |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | masoncox, I'm not sure whether you're being deliberately obtuse or trying to get a rise out of people. You'll get no opposition from anyone much, ever, that Daicos' forward play was way better than Buckley's. My point was, rather, that when you look at the time Daicos spent in the midfield over his career, his goal-kicking percentage as a mid wasn't much different from Buckley's. So much should be evident from his dramatic improvement in conversion over the three years you've extracted. In fact, in his last stint up forward, Daics kicked 234 (to the end of his career in 1993) of his career goals. Have a look, though at, eg, 1979, 1980, 1983 or 1984. There, he's around 50/50. |
In fact, following on from that, if you take out the 6 seasons where Daics played wholly or substantially forward (81, 82, 90, 91, 92, 93 and 94) and kicked 369 of his 549 career goals (and 186 points, for a goal-kicking proportion of 66%), his stats as a mid across his other 9 seasons are 180 goals 177 behinds (that is, his goal-kicking percentage as a mid looks to have been just slightly worse than Buckley's). |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
More detailed data is definitely needed here: as others have said, at the very least set-shot statistics, but preferably a breakdown of that. Champion Data certainly has that for current players at least.
Re. the point mentioned about shots from way outside 50m making one look bad, I think Trent McKenzie is a clear example:
22.38 at 36.67%.
Not many are as bad as that looks.
As for visual impressions, many would think this typical:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_hndOXycu0
Last edited by K on Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
MJ23
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Crazy thread.
Been said, set shot goal kicking much diff to midfield shots at goal especially by Bucks who could convert from a long way out.
Good indication would be assists or score involvment.
Bucks was the best penetrating, Feild, short/long or however you want to measure kick I've seen in a Collingwood jumper.
Pendles is up with Obree in the left/right foot kicking ability but not the distance and penetration Bucks had.
_________________
"Even when Im old and gray, I wont be able to play but Ill still love the game"
Michael Jordan |
|
|
|
|
ronrat
Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Buckley was exactly what we needed when Travis Cloke was at his peak. He would havekicked 80 goals 120 behinds a year with Bucks drilling the 50 metre bullets in front of his face and not on top of his head.
_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967. |
|
|
|
|
jg22
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Buckley was clearly one of the most devastating kicks I have seen. His ability to sizzle a ball 50 metres lace out was delightful to watch. However I rate Darren Jarman as the best field kicker I've seen, with Greg Williams close behind. That pair could sizzle it 50 metres either foot, but also delicately chip it as well as anyone I saw.
_________________
Explain it to me like I'm a four year old. Ted Whitten is an AFL legend, and Bob Rose isn't? |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: Re: Was Buckley really a good kick? | |
|
| masoncox wrote: | I was having a discussion with a work colleague this morning about Buckley's kicking. The general consensus with most posters was he was a great kick. My work colleague disagreed, he said although he could kick the ball long and flat, he oftened missed his target and he told me to check his statistics re goal to behind kicking ratio over his career. So I did.
In his career Buckley had a ratio of 284 to 262 which to me was pretty poor. I then checked a few other players. Lockett was 1360 to 590, Pendlebury was 157 to 96, Sidebottom was 139 to 90 and then I checked Patrick Dangerfield who is considered a poor kick at goal and he was going at 232 to 171. Clearly if it was goal shooting only Buckley would be considered very poorly. It is all about perception. Langdon to most posters is a lousy disposal of the ball yet he led the disposal efficiency this year at 83.8% at collingwood. |
You've got to be phucking kidding even asking such a question. His goal to points ratio is skewed by the fact that he often kicked from 60 metres out, whereas full forwards like Lockett generally were kicking from close to goal. If you're asking who was the most accurate goal kicker then McKenna wins hands down, followed closely by Dids. But as an overall kick, particularly field kicking, Bucks was the best I've ever seen, not just from Collingwood, but from the entire AFL. |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
| Post subject: Re: Was Buckley really a good kick? | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | I was having a discussion with a work colleague this morning about Buckley's kicking. The general consensus with most posters was he was a great kick. My work colleague disagreed, he said although he could kick the ball long and flat, he oftened missed his target and he told me to check his statistics re goal to behind kicking ratio over his career. So I did.
In his career Buckley had a ratio of 284 to 262 which to me was pretty poor. I then checked a few other players. Lockett was 1360 to 590, Pendlebury was 157 to 96, Sidebottom was 139 to 90 and then I checked Patrick Dangerfield who is considered a poor kick at goal and he was going at 232 to 171. Clearly if it was goal shooting only Buckley would be considered very poorly. It is all about perception. Langdon to most posters is a lousy disposal of the ball yet he led the disposal efficiency this year at 83.8% at collingwood. |
You've got to be phucking kidding even asking such a question. His goal to points ratio is skewed by the fact that he often kicked from 60 metres out, whereas full forwards like Lockett generally were kicking from close to goal. If you're asking who was the most accurate goal kicker then McKenna wins hands down, followed closely by Dids. But as an overall kick, particularly field kicking, Bucks was the best I've ever seen, not just from Collingwood, but from the entire AFL. |
Yes It was all about his kicking from a long way out.
Been said by a few posters on this thread. Now who else was a long kick at goal around Buckleys time....ah yes...Ryan Lonie and his goal to behind kicking ratio was 61 to 33. Oh dear there goes that theory. |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mudlark wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | A great kick means a great kick ..... it would include both field and goal kicking. That goal kicking stat is pretty weird for a guy who most claim to be a great kick. |
A couple of questions here. Do you think Locket,Dunstal or McKenna were great kicks? Could any of them kick accurately with their non preferred? Could they have gathered the ball on the run and at full tilt, hit a team mate ,lace out 40 mtrs away, either foot??In Buckleys case 50 or more mtrs. But they were all great kicks YEAH?? |
Saw them all and they were all great kicks.
Stats for all re goals to behinds ratio.
MacKenna 874 to 470
Dunstall 1254 to 641
Lockett. 1360 to 590
So for those great forwards it is roughly 2 to 1 goals to behinds ratio. Far superior to Buckley's. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| McKenna was a better kick for goal than Buckley. I think we know that. So what? |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| masoncox wrote: | | mudlark wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | A great kick means a great kick ..... it would include both field and goal kicking. That goal kicking stat is pretty weird for a guy who most claim to be a great kick. |
A couple of questions here. Do you think Locket,Dunstal or McKenna were great kicks? Could any of them kick accurately with their non preferred? Could they have gathered the ball on the run and at full tilt, hit a team mate ,lace out 40 mtrs away, either foot??In Buckleys case 50 or more mtrs. But they were all great kicks YEAH?? |
Saw them all and they were all great kicks.
Stats for all re goals to behinds ratio.
MacKenna 874 to 470
Dunstall 1254 to 641
Lockett. 1360 to 590
So for those great forwards it is roughly 2 to 1 goals to behinds ratio. Far superior to Buckley's. |
You do realise you are comparing forwards with mids
Try comparing Bucks to Voss or Judd
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| neil wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | mudlark wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | A great kick means a great kick ..... it would include both field and goal kicking. That goal kicking stat is pretty weird for a guy who most claim to be a great kick. |
A couple of questions here. Do you think Locket,Dunstal or McKenna were great kicks? Could any of them kick accurately with their non preferred? Could they have gathered the ball on the run and at full tilt, hit a team mate ,lace out 40 mtrs away, either foot??In Buckleys case 50 or more mtrs. But they were all great kicks YEAH?? |
Saw them all and they were all great kicks.
Stats for all re goals to behinds ratio.
MacKenna 874 to 470
Dunstall 1254 to 641
Lockett. 1360 to 590
So for those great forwards it is roughly 2 to 1 goals to behinds ratio. Far superior to Buckley's. |
You do realise you are comparing forwards with mids
Try comparing Bucks to Voss or Judd |
Both Voss and Judd have better goal to behind kicking ratio.
With Voss by a fair way. And Judd wasn't considered much of a kick. The problem here is that there are not any stats to back up the theory that Buckley was a great kick. There is the goal to behind ratio and that is it as far as I know. There is no kicking efficency or hit ups or whatever. We know he was a long spearing kick on both sides of his body. But what was his success rate? As I said before who on this board would have said that Langdon was our top disposal player of 2017? Read the weekly match day thread and every week Langdon was bagged about his disposals. A bit more objective please. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Interesting.
Buckley was a great kick on either foot, he could hit a bloke on the chest from 50m with a low flat pass. he had to learn depth and timing, in his early years he used the 1 wood when he should have used a 7 iron and damn near drilled the ball through players, but he learned.
he wasn't a great kick for goal however, particularly from set shots. he wouldn't be the only midfielder who was far better spotting a target while running than taking a set shot.
I'm not sure what the point of this thread is, other than to downgrade Buckley's playing career as some cheap shot though. The overall package was a pretty damn good footballer.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
