Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
He does have the talent i agree, i base my opinion on his last few years.
What do you base yours on?
Snippy. I thought I said it was fine that we had different opinions. I base my opinion on us winning when he played and us losing when we didn't. That doesn't even slightly mean he was the difference but it does mean I think he certainly helped and now that we have a young side with still many players not up to it I think he becomes even more important.
He does have the talent i agree, i base my opinion on his last few years.
What do you base yours on?
Snippy. I thought I said it was fine that we had different opinions. I base my opinion on us winning when he played and us losing when we didn't. That doesn't even slightly mean he was the difference but it does mean I think he certainly helped and now that we have a young side with still many players not up to it I think he becomes even more important.
In the last three years we've gone 8-13 when he's played, and 7-33 when he hasn't. That's a lot bigger difference than I thought!
He does have the talent i agree, i base my opinion on his last few years.
What do you base yours on?
Snippy. I thought I said it was fine that we had different opinions. I base my opinion on us winning when he played and us losing when we didn't. That doesn't even slightly mean he was the difference but it does mean I think he certainly helped and now that we have a young side with still many players not up to it I think he becomes even more important.
In the last three years we've gone 8-13 when he's played, and 7-33 when he hasn't. That's a lot bigger difference than I thought!
I had no idea of those stats but it is much bigger difference than I thought as well. I may have finally got one right.
So it appears that Gilbert does have a future. They keep picking him. Can't get a better rec than that. Maybe the question should have been about Sipposs
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They’re eating – they are eating the pets of the people that live there.
He does have the talent i agree, i base my opinion on his last few years.
What do you base yours on?
Snippy. I thought I said it was fine that we had different opinions. I base my opinion on us winning when he played and us losing when we didn't. That doesn't even slightly mean he was the difference but it does mean I think he certainly helped and now that we have a young side with still many players not up to it I think he becomes even more important.
In the last three years we've gone 8-13 when he's played, and 7-33 when he hasn't. That's a lot bigger difference than I thought!
I had no idea of those stats but it is much bigger difference than I thought as well. I may have finally got one right.
You know there's a comparison of 40 games to 21 games right?
He does have the talent i agree, i base my opinion on his last few years.
What do you base yours on?
Snippy. I thought I said it was fine that we had different opinions. I base my opinion on us winning when he played and us losing when we didn't. That doesn't even slightly mean he was the difference but it does mean I think he certainly helped and now that we have a young side with still many players not up to it I think he becomes even more important.
In the last three years we've gone 8-13 when he's played, and 7-33 when he hasn't. That's a lot bigger difference than I thought!
I had no idea of those stats but it is much bigger difference than I thought as well. I may have finally got one right.
You know there's a comparison of 40 games to 21 games right?
Statistics says those results are significant to 95%.
and who else was out in those stats?
and who did we play for each game?
and who did they have out?
where were they on teh ladder compared to us?
what were the odds on each game?
were we expected to win or lose?
its a little more complicated than:
when he is out we lose more games
matrix wrote:and who else was out in those stats?
and who did we play for each game?
and who did they have out?
where were they on teh ladder compared to us?
what were the odds on each game?
were we expected to win or lose?
its a little more complicated than:
when he is out we lose more games
I hope you are joking because no one who thinks logically could be serious.
matrix wrote:and who else was out in those stats?
and who did we play for each game?
and who did they have out?
where were they on teh ladder compared to us?
what were the odds on each game?
were we expected to win or lose?
its a little more complicated than:
when he is out we lose more games
Yes, but the sample size is big enough for there to be something there. The difference in win rate is that when he's played it's 38%, when he hasn't it's 17.5%. That's a huge difference and it's unlikely all of it is luck.
In the last three seasons 2013-15 he has played in only 21 games.
GCS x 3
Rich x 3
GWS x 3
Ess x 2
Syd x 3
Col
WB x 2
Melb x 2
WCE
Freo (The 2013 Kosi Milne game we won by 10 goals.
He has not played either Hawthorn or Geelong once but has managed to play both GWS and the GC 3 times each and Melb and WB twice each. So half of his games have come against just four sides - GWS, GC, Melb, WB. Three of them basket cases.
(He has faced the Swans three times).
He has not scored above a 6/10 on AFL Player Ratings since Rd 22, 2013 and hasn't scored above a 7 since ratings began in 2012).
Con Gorozidis wrote:In the last three seasons 2013-15 he has played in only 21 games.
GCS x 3
Rich x 3
GWS x 3
Ess x 2
Syd x 3
Col
WB x 2
Melb x 2
WCE
Freo (The 2013 Kosi Milne game we won by 10 goals.
He has not played either Hawthorn or Geelong once but has managed to play both GWS and the GC 3 times each and Melb and WB twice each. So half of games have come against just four sides - GWS, GC, Melb, WB. Three of them basket cases.
(He has faced the Swans three times).
He has not scored above a 6/10 on AFL Player Ratings since Rd 22, 2013 and hasn't scored above a 7 since ratings began in 2012.
p.s I know Geelong are only 9th but I cant remember the last time we beat them? Same with Hawks. So he has avoided games that could be described as certain losses.
Whilst I couldn't be bothered doing that myself, Gilbo is easy to judge simply based on watching him play over the last few seasons.
And that's the key... You judge based on what you see. Where a few forumites have gone wrong is that they judge him on imagined form of what he could do.
I'm not saying that Sam can't be an asset, but the stats simply don't support it... The form doesn't support it.
Moving into next season, Sam will be a player that hasn't had a good season for at least 4 years AND he's a senior player.
He is right in the zone of players we need to upgrade to improve
I am not anti-Gilbo by the way. He is easily in our best 22. But lets not get carried away about him either. He has flaws. I see him as the Shane Watson of the Saints. Had one red-hot year and has been battling to live up to it ever since. Wont ever deliver to his 'potential.'
skeptic wrote:I'm glad you went through that Con...
Whilst I couldn't be bothered doing that myself, Gilbo is easy to judge simply based on watching him play over the last few seasons.
And that's the key... You judge based on what you see. Where a few forumites have gone wrong is that they judge him on imagined form of what he could do.
I'm not saying that Sam can't be an asset, but the stats simply don't support it... The form doesn't support it.
Moving into next season, Sam will be a player that hasn't had a good season for at least 4 years AND he's a senior player.
He is right in the zone of players we need to upgrade to improve
One stat supports it and that's the winning and losing stat. He is still important to us just based on that alone. We don't need to upgrade on him. If he was the 22nd best player we would have a bloody good side.
kosifantutti wrote:Can someone do the stats to show we have been a better team since Eddy and McQualter left.
I think we are clearly worse since they left. The difference is the stats for Gilbert are done in the same 3 years when he has and hasn't played. Yep there could be easier games he has played in but the sample is big enough to suggest he must have some pretty reasonable influence on games. He isn't a star and has probably never been a star but IMO he is still important to us.
I'd argue that Fisher's stats re: games are probably similar.
Fisher has played some poor games this year also, but will probably get another year next year (Rookie List) as support for Roberton, Goddard and Delaney. If Gilbert has another year on his contract he will go around again.
When both Fisher and Gilbert aren't in the side, the thrashings really start. I think that the last five matches will give us a clear indication of where the team sits. I wanted us to avoid any real hidings in the last 6 games, but we've had one already. I'm starting to get the FEAR.
skeptic wrote:I'm glad you went through that Con...
Whilst I couldn't be bothered doing that myself, Gilbo is easy to judge simply based on watching him play over the last few seasons.
And that's the key... You judge based on what you see. Where a few forumites have gone wrong is that they judge him on imagined form of what he could do.
I'm not saying that Sam can't be an asset, but the stats simply don't support it... The form doesn't support it.
Moving into next season, Sam will be a player that hasn't had a good season for at least 4 years AND he's a senior player.
He is right in the zone of players we need to upgrade to improve
One stat supports it and that's the winning and losing stat. He is still important to us just based on that alone. We don't need to upgrade on him. If he was the 22nd best player we would have a bloody good side.
I don't have an issue that u rate the guy... But ur argument with the stats is just silly. We've been in decline since 2010, more so the previous two seasons. Surely u can't actually believe that.
Not saying he should go but at least make reasonable arguments
skeptic wrote:I'm glad you went through that Con...
Whilst I couldn't be bothered doing that myself, Gilbo is easy to judge simply based on watching him play over the last few seasons.
And that's the key... You judge based on what you see. Where a few forumites have gone wrong is that they judge him on imagined form of what he could do.
I'm not saying that Sam can't be an asset, but the stats simply don't support it... The form doesn't support it.
Moving into next season, Sam will be a player that hasn't had a good season for at least 4 years AND he's a senior player.
He is right in the zone of players we need to upgrade to improve
One stat supports it and that's the winning and losing stat. He is still important to us just based on that alone. We don't need to upgrade on him. If he was the 22nd best player we would have a bloody good side.
I don't have an issue that u rate the guy... But ur argument with the stats is just silly. We've been in decline since 2010, more so the previous two seasons. Surely u can't actually believe that.
Not saying he should go but at least make reasonable arguments
Why is it silly? because it shows we win more when he plays than when he doesn't. Being in decline has nothing to do with the stats. I think that argument alone is better than your argument of just having an opinion he isn't good enough. At least my argument is supported by fact. Yours is complete opinion that isn't supported by any fact at all.
Have you got anymore than he isn't good enough? Actually im not sure you have argued anything apart from disagreeing with me that I think he is important.
Like Fisher in the backline, Gilbert's best days are long gone, but still is useful as a taller running defender, though he is a rabbit in the spotlight under pressure, and coughs up the ball too easy to the opposition for my liking. Probably a good player in a good team, but a bit ordinary in a struggling team like ours.
I'm not having a go at your opinion... your claim that is supported by fact is what is farcical
you're implying that because Gilbert has been in a select number of games that it demonstrates his performance/presence influences whether we win
that is not a fact
Con for example has pointed out that he has played less games against teams higher on the ladder, and as matrix pointed out it doesn't show who else was/wasn't playing for us and the opposition, likelihood etc
You're misrepresenting the facts to suit your argument, which is not anymore valid than mine
This is like the Schrodinger's Cat thing is it alive or dead. We don't know whether Gilbert can again be a good player until he plays... I say it's unlikey based on his form over the last few seasons, and I'll point to Con's AFL player ratings to back that up too though it's plain obvious if you actually watch the games... you're trying twist select data to draw conclusions that don't exist.
It's farcical. I don't know why you won't admit it. Anyway, good luck with that. I hope Sam turns it around.
how on earth can you do stats for that?
im guessing thats tongue in cheek lol
look, if he stopped the little brain fades he has every now and then and his kicking went back to the quality of when he started and was in AA form then gee whizz he can be a very good player
id still rather see him on the wing and push back to help savage
get running, have a few bounces and kick the bloody thing to a one on one!
no good making boo boos down back where we get punished
everything else he does is fantastic
second and third man up, can have good hands, one percenters, chasing and tackling, position and reading the play...all good
we know this
its like gears, does everything right but sometimes gets caught out with kicking/disposal
