So you want a good half forward to play ruck instead of a ruckman?plugger66 wrote:Jacks Back wrote:What would you rather have, a ruckman that can tap the ball to one of our player's advantage or one that just wins the tap but just hits it onto the ground? Correlating it back to not winning games is pointless as the mid fielders or the forward lines may be crap.
And thats why i used the stats about teams makinjg the finals. I would think their midfields is ok. And Id rather have a ruckmen kick 3 goals or take 5 or so contested marks than either of the things you mentioned.
big mac and the pelican...
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- desertsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10404
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
- Location: out there
- Has thanked: 186 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
Re: big mac and the pelican...
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
Re: big mac and the pelican...
desertsaint wrote:So you want a good half forward to play ruck instead of a ruckman?plugger66 wrote:Jacks Back wrote:What would you rather have, a ruckman that can tap the ball to one of our player's advantage or one that just wins the tap but just hits it onto the ground? Correlating it back to not winning games is pointless as the mid fielders or the forward lines may be crap.
And thats why i used the stats about teams makinjg the finals. I would think their midfields is ok. And Id rather have a ruckmen kick 3 goals or take 5 or so contested marks than either of the things you mentioned.
I dont think I said that. Obviously you have to contest the ruck otherwise the other side would get huge advantage. Why did people think Hickey played well on Saturday. Im guessing if people are telling the truth it was his 3 goals and possessions around the ground more than any hitouts he had.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12421
- Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 296 times
- Been thanked: 55 times
Re: big mac and the pelican...
plugger66 wrote:
I dont think I said that. Obviously you have to contest the ruck otherwise the other side would get huge advantage. Why did people think Hickey played well on Saturday. Im guessing if people are telling the truth it was his 3 goals and possessions around the ground more than any hitouts he had.
I think he did his role which was to minimise the dominance of Mumford and make Mummy accountable for him by using his speed advantage and punish them by kicking goals and make their dominance a weakness. It was a smart plan by our coaching staff (possibly Jolly) and extremely well executed. It was one of the best performances by a Saints ruck for a long time not just around the ground though. He gets off the ground and actually times the tap well. He probably more versatile around the ground though as he has a bit of pace and mobility. Mac was great as a backline chop out but he was more adequate in other areas.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5016
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Re: big mac and the pelican...
How do you know Hickey lost the hit outs?plugger66 wrote:Obs wrote:I still don't rate mcevoy, nor do I rate his game on Friday. Remember he was versing Carlisle and Daniher in the ruck for basically the last half. He should of absolutely smashed the last half of that game.
Let's be honest he wasn't a ruck that fit into our side being such a poor tap ruckman. Our midfield is fairly young and not having a ruck that can tap to advantage just amplifies it's weaknesses. Hawthorn on the other hand don't need it too much with such a quality midfield. I think the trade was such a win for both sides when we ended up with Dunstan and Longer anyway. I don't rate immobile ruckman and if you've been watching longer's matches he's an absolute star in the making.
Not even bringing up Hickeys domination against GWS.
Hickey as lost the tap outs in both games. he has had good games because of his around the ground work. Can we please forget about tap outs.
Just because he had less doesn't mean he lost them, it could have been when Stanley was relieving, especially when Spencer rucked as a lone hand...
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3465
- Joined: Fri 29 Oct 2004 1:01pm
- Has thanked: 91 times
- Been thanked: 162 times
Re: big mac and the pelican...
How about 8?plugger66 wrote:You have to stop somewhere...
You're talking about the number of teams that made the eight. The number of top six HOA teams to make the eight is an insufficient sample size for what you're trying to show - the correlation between winning and HOA. When it turns out that the reason you used that number was because 1/6 < 3/8, you've manipulated the data to misrepresent the correlation.
Yeah nah pleasing positive
Re: big mac and the pelican...
vacuous space wrote:How about 8?plugger66 wrote:You have to stop somewhere...
You're talking about the number of teams that made the eight. The number of top six HOA teams to make the eight is an insufficient sample size for what you're trying to show - the correlation between winning and HOA. When it turns out that the reason you used that number was because 1/6 < 3/8, you've manipulated the data to misrepresent the correlation.
And even if I used 8 it shows there is no correlation. When stats are used the people using then do exactly what I did. 3 out of the top 8 made the finals which means 5 out of the bottom 10 made the finals. Again it proves that the HTA mean jack when making finals or winning games. Nextt time I will just of the 18 sides in HTA only 8 made the finals.