disposal efficiency

[Dis Believer]

But since CJ is so often pilloried specifically for his disposal efficiency

Not correct. CJ is pilloried because of his piss poor kicking, not because of disposal efficiency. They are two different things.

His kicking is woeful. He runs to fifty and doesn't want to take responsibility, so runs around in a circle like a headless chook looking for someone else to take responsibility for the shot at goal. Eventually he handpasses to a teammate who is, by now, covered. Under pressure the second player doesn't score the goal, but CJ effectively got it to him, so 100% disposal efficiency, poor team outcome.

[bigcarl]

But since CJ is so often pilloried specifically for his disposal efficiency

Not correct. CJ is pilloried because of his piss poor kicking, not because of disposal efficiency. They are two different things.

His kicking is woeful. He runs to fifty and doesn't want to take responsibility, so runs around in a circle like a headless chook looking for someone else to take responsibility for the shot at goal. Eventually he handpasses to a teammate who is, by now, covered. Under pressure the second player doesn't score the goal, but CJ effectively got it to him, so 100% disposal efficiency, poor team outcome.

I've seen him criticised many times, not necessarily by you, for his kicks not finding their mark (disposal effeciency), so in that sense it is correct.

Some seem upset that their beliefs about this player are not born out by the facts.

It is true that he is not a long kick - he sort of chips it and gets under it and makes the purists shudder - but let's not write him off as a footballer on the basis of that.

He has strengths in other areas. He is a goer and can find the ball ... a rather important component of the game.

[terry smith rules]

But since CJ is so often pilloried specifically for his disposal efficiency

Not correct. CJ is pilloried because of his piss poor kicking, not because of disposal efficiency. They are two different things.

His kicking is woeful. He runs to fifty and doesn't want to take responsibility, so runs around in a circle like a headless chook looking for someone else to take responsibility for the shot at goal. Eventually he handpasses to a teammate who is, by now, covered. Under pressure the second player doesn't score the goal, but CJ effectively got it to him, so 100% disposal efficiency, poor team outcome.

Sorry TB but your post sums up my comment that the anti CJers etc are like a dog with a bone.
1 please explain the difference b/w piss poor kicking and disposal efficiency, because I suspect they are related
2 so you say piss poor kicking and then slam his handball

So my point is/ was if you are going to say these guys are lousy at disposal, I believe you (you been all the critics) can't change your critical "goal posts" because the first argument starts to look a bit shonky. This goes to the posts who say "oh we were never talking about efficiency we meant xxxxxx"

Possession is a great thing in footy, we all agree on that ... surely

So if these guys can help with that, even if it is only a chip pass backwards, it keeps us in possession and with a chance to give it to a guy who can deliver the 50m kick to a lead. Mind you I watch alot of footy and don't see too much of that in reality.

Saints game plan is one of possesion and switch so a 70-75% efficiency helps keep that plan alive.

[Foz]

The real picture is that the game is evolving and the simple, over-used stats don't!

This year, as outlined on AFL website, the long kick to break open the "rolling mauls" is becoming a game breaker. Speed, run and carry and long kicking are becoming vital. From Monday night, the bouncing Walker run and carry goal, the long 50 metre goals by Milera, Roo, the hit up pass from boundary by Joey etc. Interesting to hear Jimmy Webster say one of his focuses in game one was not to let his opponent "goal side" The games so open on the rebound, it will tear the opposition apart if used effectively.

CJ lacks the penetrating kick that put opposition teams to the sword. He dosent run and carry with the footy. He dosen't get handball receives.

The potential for us to not slip down the ladder is the new players....Wright -run and carry, break lines, Seb Ross -elite left foot kick, Jimmy Webster - elite kick, AGILITY (how long since w've had that!) Jack Steven - good speed, kicking a mini knock. Stanley is a fantastic kick.

The "smart" stats sites use 1) pressure gauge on the disposal and 2) how much pressure it puts the opposition under. 70%, 65% "effeciency" is meaningless. The Montagna kick from the boundary torched Carltons defenders. This is the key. 10 more inside 50's to Carlton....its meaningless because we need to consider the impact, not the number. Thats why CJ's on the outer, especially if his tagging role can be handed to another.

[SainterK]

I don't have a go at clint about his DE, I highlight his lack of score involvements.

Modern footy means you hurt your opponent the other way.

[terry smith rules]

The real picture is that the game is evolving and the simple, over-used stats don't!

This year, as outlined on AFL website, the long kick to break open the "rolling mauls" is becoming a game breaker. Speed, run and carry and long kicking are becoming vital. From Monday night, the bouncing Walker run and carry goal, the long 50 metre goals by Milera, Roo, the hit up pass from boundary by Joey etc. Interesting to hear Jimmy Webster say one of his focuses in game one was not to let his opponent "goal side" The games so open on the rebound, it will tear the opposition apart if used effectively.

agree but disagree, all of that has its place

but with 5 minutes to go on Monday it was the saints playing a possession game and working the ball forward to Saad that gave us the winning goal

You need to have more than one arrow, the slingshot game will only get you so far

As will the manic style favoured by Carl, Ess and Richmond last year or so, can look great but against a team employing real pressure folds like a house of cards

[Dis Believer]

But since CJ is so often pilloried specifically for his disposal efficiency

Not correct. CJ is pilloried because of his piss poor kicking, not because of disposal efficiency. They are two different things.

His kicking is woeful. He runs to fifty and doesn't want to take responsibility, so runs around in a circle like a headless chook looking for someone else to take responsibility for the shot at goal. Eventually he handpasses to a teammate who is, by now, covered. Under pressure the second player doesn't score the goal, but CJ effectively got it to him, so 100% disposal efficiency, poor team outcome.

Sorry TB but your post sums up my comment that the anti CJers etc are like a dog with a bone.
1 please explain the difference b/w piss poor kicking and disposal efficiency, because I suspect they are related
2 so you say piss poor kicking and then slam his handball

So my point is/ was if you are going to say these guys are lousy at disposal, I believe you (you been all the critics) can't change your critical "goal posts" because the first argument starts to look a bit shonky. This goes to the posts who say "oh we were never talking about efficiency we meant xxxxxx"

Possession is a great thing in footy, we all agree on that ... surely

So if these guys can help with that, even if it is only a chip pass backwards, it keeps us in possession and with a chance to give it to a guy who can deliver the 50m kick to a lead. Mind you I watch alot of footy and don't see too much of that in reality.

Saints game plan is one of possesion and switch so a 70-75% efficiency helps keep that plan alive.

I've encapsulated why you are wrong - I have never heard anyone complain about CJ's disposal efficiency, I have heard people complain that his kicking is crap. To use disposal efficiency to counter this is to mask the issue. The same would be said about Blake. Good DE stats but not a great kick. Opposition would leave him as our "plus one" in defence, knowing that his impressive disposal efficiency was a result of chipping it sideways to a free man 15 yards away, or handpassing it backwards to a player 10 feet away. Man up those options and force Blake to kick long downfield and you could force a contest, or even better, a turnover.
I am not trying to have a go at CJ. Very fit, great enthusiasm, great effort, hard worker and deserves respect for carving out a solid career in spite of his deficiencies. But let's not try and pretend his disposal is not a major issue, it is.

"So Mr Simpson, what do you say to the critics that point out that while burglaries and other crimes are down, heavy sack beatings are up a whopping two hundred percent?"
"You can use statistics to say anything you like Kent, 73% of all people know that.........."

[Dis Believer]

Sorry TB but your post sums up my comment that the anti CJers etc are like a dog with a bone.
1 please explain the difference b/w piss poor kicking and disposal efficiency, because I suspect they are related
2 so you say piss poor kicking and then slam his handball

So my point is/ was if you are going to say these guys are lousy at disposal, I believe you (you been all the critics) can't change your critical "goal posts" because the first argument starts to look a bit shonky. This goes to the posts who say "oh we were never talking about efficiency we meant xxxxxx"

Possession is a great thing in footy, we all agree on that ... surely

So if these guys can help with that, even if it is only a chip pass backwards, it keeps us in possession and with a chance to give it to a guy who can deliver the 50m kick to a lead. Mind you I watch alot of footy and don't see too much of that in reality.

Saints game plan is one of possesion and switch so a 70-75% efficiency helps keep that plan alive.

Answer me this - have you ever seen CJ run inside 50 with the ball, freeze and then look to pass off and bugger up the scoring opportunity? I have, more than once - that is a problem for any team strategy. The opposition can't cover off everyone - fine, don't worry about the bloke that won't kick at goal, but pick up everyone else1

When you have a major deficiency in your game and everyone knows about it, it becomes one of the points around which your opposition can build their game strategy against you.

[Foz]

Its all to do with quality possession and in a low scoring game, some moments that 'sword' the opposition really stand out.

The possession game worked well too -as you outlined. Saints had 41 greater positive disposals between the 'arcs' than Blues. They didn't rush into I50 but waited and went when the ducks lined up. The blues were more haphazard. Some of this is kicking ability and some is footy nous. Saints tend to defend stoically, get numbers back. They hold up. There are lots of tangibles but the ability to have quality possessions, whether the 'keep possession and set up' or 'torch' are both crucial, especially with our numbers back mentality.

The Dogs are the opposite end...great clearance team and inside 50's and can't score! Brisbane similar....

At the other end of the spectrum, Swans had 40 more long-kicks than Hawks in GF last year. This tended to go largely unnoticed.

Ability to hurt the opposition with disposal remains crucial to overall success.

[spert]

Sorry TB but your post sums up my comment that the anti CJers etc are like a dog with a bone.
1 please explain the difference b/w piss poor kicking and disposal efficiency, because I suspect they are related
2 so you say piss poor kicking and then slam his handball

So my point is/ was if you are going to say these guys are lousy at disposal, I believe you (you been all the critics) can't change your critical "goal posts" because the first argument starts to look a bit shonky. This goes to the posts who say "oh we were never talking about efficiency we meant xxxxxx"

Possession is a great thing in footy, we all agree on that ... surely

So if these guys can help with that, even if it is only a chip pass backwards, it keeps us in possession and with a chance to give it to a guy who can deliver the 50m kick to a lead. Mind you I watch alot of footy and don't see too much of that in reality.

Saints game plan is one of possesion and switch so a 70-75% efficiency helps keep that plan alive.

Answer me this - have you ever seen CJ run inside 50 with the ball, freeze and then look to pass off and bugger up the scoring opportunity? I have, more than once - that is a problem for any team strategy. The opposition can't cover off everyone - fine, don't worry about the bloke that won't kick at goal, but pick up everyone else1

When you have a major deficiency in your game and everyone knows about it, it becomes one of the points around which your opposition can build their game strategy against you.

I don't think that's just a problem with Jones, it seems to be common amongst the Saints that we choke coming up to the 50 mark, instead of backing in for a long goal- I've seen our mate Jack get to 50 many a time and lob it over the heads of the leading forwards or kick it into no-man's-land, same for Lenny and many others, as a matter of fact I have often wished that we had a midfielder who was confident of kicking goals from 50 on the run, as that has been a real weakness of our midfield for years. Jones isn't perfect in his style of disposal, but he has a lot of mates, though the new bunch coming through are much improved- Ross ,Milera, Newnes, Siposs and Webster have shown they have excellent disposal skills.

[Dis Believer]

Agreed Spert, Cj is not on his Pat Malone, just the worst of a generally sub-par bunch when it comes to that.

CJ has worked hard to mitigate what is a flaw in his game, and the structure had been kind to him, but we know Scott prizes postionally flexibility amongst his players, so expect high levels of disposal skill to be a key criteria in deciding our recruits under his coaching.

[sunsaint]

Efficiency stats aside, name a midfielder whose kicking is worse than CJ's?

agree with the stats sentiment - they can be misleading
to answer your question
in 2013? - NDS