James Frawley

[Jarka 767]

so in that case you're talking about his decision making rather than quality of disposal.

Fair point, i still stand by what I posted, Morton2Watts' figures are wrong

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl...5014368,00.html

Nothing like making things up to prove your point, still 72% also seems a little high

[Jarka 767]

Agreed, I thought he was very good. 70-80% you can read either way. 96% is indisputably good.

It's also complete crap

[jabberwocky 2,301]

It's also complete crap

Fair enough J you are right to point out the error, but I dont think M2W has deliberately made it up. I am sure from what I know of M2W it is just an error.

I personally felt that Frawley's game was reasonable and I for one has serious doubts about him. I am still unsure of his ability to handle a power forward but he showed enough Sat night to show he could be a useful player. Cheney showed a little bit too and I thought his disposal and decsion making were a feature.

[Jarka 767]

Fair enough J you are right to point out the error, but I dont think M2W has deliberately made it up. I am sure from what I know of M2W it is just an error.

I personally felt that Frawley's game was reasonable and I for one has serious doubts about him. I am still unsure of his ability to handle a power forward but he showed enough Sat night to show he could be a useful player. Cheney showed a little bit too and I thought his disposal and decsion making were a feature.

Pretty poor error to make and anyone with half a brain should be able to pick it up.

For someone to get 96% then they would need 25 touches with only one error, and as it's well known how many touches he got...

If you're goign to use stats to win in a debate then you should at the very least check to see if they're correct.

72% puts Frawley in the bottom third efficiency rating for the team, and that is not very good.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Pretty poor error to make and anyone with half a brain should be able to pick it up.

For someone to get 96% then they would need 25 touches with only one error, and as it's well known how many touches he got...

If you're goign to use stats to win in a debate then you should at the very least check to see if they're correct.

72% puts Frawley in the bottom third efficiency rating for the team, and that is not very good.

Yeah, but then I thought he played well and many demonlanders put him in their votes. He got a bit of the footy and we shall see if he can move forward with a bit of confidence and become a handy player for us. Confidence is a massive part of decision making.

[LeBron James 41]

Jarka, i'm 100% certain they said Frawley got 96% disposal efficiency in the Sunday sport section of the age.

If anyone still has it- there was a category which was called 'the ball winners' or 'the numbers', i can't remember. It had three Melbourne players, one was McLean, the other was Frawley and the other one i forgot. It had all of Frawleys stats, including the disposal efficiency.

EDIT: Here we go, bottom of the page. http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/hawk...087.html?page=3

And my bad, i just looked at the 96% and thought it was disposal efficiency, i should have looked up to Hawthorns first one and saw it was game time. My fault.

[Jarka 767]

Jarka, i'm 100% certain they said Frawley got 96% disposal efficiency in the Sunday sport section of the age.

If anyone still has it- there was a category which was called 'the ball winners' or 'the numbers', i can't remember. It had three Melbourne players, one was McLean, the other was Frawley and the other one i forgot. It had all of Frawleys stats, including the disposal efficiency.

This is where you got it from

James Frawley: (18 disposals, 4 contested possessions, 5 marks, 4 tackles, 96%).

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/hawk...ge#contentSwap2

But just think about it for one second...how could you possibly get a rating of 96% from 18 disposals? Clearly no matter how you think look at it they've made an error.

Sadly Frawley did not have a great game disposal wise. Was he better than previous years? Yes, but he's still behind a fit Rivers, Warnock, Garland and Martin. I'll be rapt if he can turn things around but there are other players who I think are just better footballers.

But please don't try to sell the lie that he has great disposal.

[Jarka 767]

Yeah, but then I thought he played well and many demonlanders put him in their votes. He got a bit of the footy and we shall see if he can move forward with a bit of confidence and become a handy player for us. Confidence is a massive part of decision making.

Someone had Sylvia in their votes as well....but his problem isn't just decision making, his skills aren't great and it's the reason why most people were surprised that we picked him up in the first round.