Stats and footy speak

[Cultured_Bogan]

I really think a "pass metres" stat needs be insituted.

 

[Swordy]

You sound like a bunch of whiny old tosspots. I’m going to make sure I talk about stats even more now.

No problem with that. Whinny old toss pots fits the description perfectly.
Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from 'Run hard, tackle hard'.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Hard running back rower

 

[kevinmcguinness]

its a very simple game. Hold the ball.

Unlike basketball etc

 

[twentyforty]

Great ! Reminds me, I’ve had a question on my mind for a while now. Does anyone know how to calculate the “passes to run ratio”?

Anyway, I know the numbers are wrong because two players with vastly different receipts and passes cannot have the same passes to run ratio.

 

[diedpretty]

Hard running back rower

As opposed to a soft running plodder. I thought all footballers were meant to run hard - although we have had our share of SRPs over the years.

 

[jirskyr]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

 

[happy_tiger]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Cricket would be taking 20 wickets wouldn't it ...scoring 900 /7 and the not being able to bowl them out twice would be a lot of boring draws

 

[JC99]

I dont know what It is, but why the increase in quoting stats such as post contact metres, times over 20m, g-force wangleschmits, blah blah blah.

Especially you young uns...

Concentrate on this. Rugby league is the simplest game of all. Run hard, tackle hard. Leave all the cool talk and wank words to the first grade coaches. Youre not impressing anyone, and most of what you quote only means something in context with other things.

Rant over.

Who hurt you? Stats are important. Learn what they mean and you’ll understand how important they are to the modern game. Lot more than running hard and tackling hard.

 

[Geo]

I can see some of what Swordy is saying tho as an example using his favourite post contact metre stat..

Last season Matt Eisenhuth had the second most post contact metres behind Matterson for a forward and second highest tackle efficiency behind Twal in our team he also had the 3rd fastest ave PTB speed..statistically that makes him probably the mvp in our team..

Yet 96.25477 % of Wests Tigers fans think he's a plodder..

 

[cktiger]

Agree Swordy. It is just another example of the pitiful way Aussies follow American example.
Deeeeeefence.
Can't stand it either.
Ben Ikin I think started the rubbish stat of "possessions" in the NRL to describe how many times a playmaker has touched the ball.

Defence always being referred to as “the D” irritates me no end.

 

[JC99]

I can see some of what Swordy is saying tho as an example using his favourite post contact metre stat..

Last season Matt Eisenhuth had the second most post contact metres behind Matterson for a forward and second highest tackle efficiency behind Twal in our team he also had the 3rd fastest ave PTB speed..statistically that makes him probably the mvp in our team..

Yet 96.25477 % of Wests Tigers fans think he's a plodder..

People worry too much about how fast people run. Eisenhuth would make 100+ metres in some games and would defend brilliantly as always and people thought he was bad because he didn’t look fast. Same with woodsy, was pretty evident how much we missed his metres and defence when he left despite the fact he didn’t ‘run hard’.

 

[twentyforty]

If stats are important then it’s important to know how they are calculated.
I thought JR was getting tackled too often, he seemed to have Sims on a yo-yo string and was playing like a 3/4. I was really looking forward to seeing Doueihi with some clean ball.Being a little disappointed, I went to the stats to find out the facts, but could not find any relative numbers to support the “passes to run ratio” 😕

 

[rustycage]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Fair point. Likewise, if the core basics don't fit your mindset, and it's all too simplistic for you why bother to post in this thread? I still think Geo's "wrongness of head" stat is a very critical one and iis pretty indicative of whether a player is gonna make it or not.

 

[Geo]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Fair point. Likewise, if the core basics don't fit your mindset, and it's all too simplistic for you why bother to post in this thread? I still think Geo's "wrongness of head" stat is a very critical one and iis pretty indicative of whether a player is gonna make it or not.

While I help develop the plodder scale I can't take credit for wrongness of head..that belongs to @jirskyr

 

[happy_tiger]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Fair point. Likewise, if the core basics don't fit your mindset, and it's all too simplistic for you why bother to post in this thread? I still think Geo's "wrongness of head" stat is a very critical one and iis pretty indicative of whether a player is gonna make it or not.

While I help develop the plodder scale I can't take credit for wrongness of head..that belongs to @jirskyr

Well the only thing that matters in wrongness of head

So you were as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike again .......@willow

 

[jirskyr]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Fair point. Likewise, if the core basics don't fit your mindset, and it's all too simplistic for you why bother to post in this thread? I still think Geo's "wrongness of head" stat is a very critical one and iis pretty indicative of whether a player is gonna make it or not.

While I help develop the plodder scale I can't take credit for wrongness of head..that belongs to @jirskyr

Very important - keeps ET from immortality and kept Nick Youngquest from regular first grade.

 

[jirskyr]

Last season Matt Eisenhuth had the second most post contact metres behind Matterson for a forward and second highest tackle efficiency behind Twal in our team he also had the 3rd fastest ave PTB speed…statistically that makes him probably the mvp in our team…

I would argue that some folks forget that one stat is exactly what it is - one stat. A player is the sum of "all possible statistics", some of which are more important than others. To ignore stats completely (i.e. data input = 0) is as big an error as to only focus on one stat.

But the sum of several important stats, with "importance" being somewhat subjective, becomes very informative.

So Huth was effective PCM, tackle efficiency and PTB speed, great. But what about overall metres gained (or pre-contact metres), total tackles, minutes played, 1-1 tackles etc.

 

[Geo]

Last season Matt Eisenhuth had the second most post contact metres behind Matterson for a forward and second highest tackle efficiency behind Twal in our team he also had the 3rd fastest ave PTB speed…statistically that makes him probably the mvp in our team…

I would argue that some folks forget that one stat is exactly what it is - one stat. A player is the sum of "all possible statistics", some of which are more important than others. To ignore stats completely (i.e. data input = 0) is as big an error as to only focus on one stat.

But the sum of several important stats, with "importance" being somewhat subjective, becomes very informative.

So Huth was effective PCM, tackle efficiency and PTB speed, great. But what about overall metres gained (or pre-contact metres), total tackles, minutes played, 1-1 tackles etc.

1963m gained (700) pcm 152 kick return m ave 93.5 mpg 733 tackles 37 missed minutes played not listed 1 on 1 tackles not listed..

 

[Swordy]

Ive no dramas with quoting this garbage, but at least know what youre talking about (not you Nelson, youre good value) and put it into some context. Then tell me how it somehow differs from ‘Run hard, tackle hard’.
The game is simple, like us simpletons that watch it. If you want to be more, go an comment on the Yachting Forum or the Bocce Forum or the Chess forum

Rugby League is actually very complicated, but if you just want to dumb it down to 1 or 2 core values, then yeah being big and smashing everyone in sight will do some of the job.

But it begs the question - if rugby league is simple and running hard and tackling hard is the crux of it, then why are the most important players in the game - the spine - the least likely players in the side to run hard and tackle hard? Fullbacks don't tackle hard, though they do run hard sometimes, if they are not ball-playing. Hookers rarely tackle hard, their job is to do high numbers not small numbers of big hits. Halves hardly have the capacity to run hard, nor tackle hard either - they need to keep themselves out of the defensive action if possible.

And if rugby league is just doing things "hard", then surely soccer is simply "kicking into the net", tennis is simply "keeping the ball in the court", basketball is simply "chuck the ball in the hoop" and cricket is simply "smash the ball to the fence, avoiding fielders".

This is a dumb thread, if it is indeed serious. If you don't like stats or analysis or deeper talk, fine, don't participate. Everyone takes something different out of sports.

Dont take it too serious mate