1 minute ago, Dr evil said:

He doesn't get a game because he's a spud, if Pederson were a regular in our team we wouldn't be considered potential finalists 

Except we win more games when he is in the side than we he is not.

Just now, --coach-- said:

Except we win more games when he is in the side than we he is not.

I'd probably let that stat go champ, he's a dud. 

I'm a fan of Cam, developed a soft spot for him when I read an article about him being a rookie and working part time at Bunnings to make ends meet. I thought I'd never give him a second chance after the ducking incident vs the power way back when but after his first year he always is putting his body on the line and either getting crunched or crunching others.

He slimmed down a lot over the offseason and is clearly covering more yards and if he stays in the best in the VFL then I'd like to see him get another chance.

Im not fussed if he isn't in the team however as I really just want the best 22 out there each week. If the coaches don't think it's him as he isn't meeting certain metrics then fine. I just wonder what these metrics are however as although he's no world beater, I think he deserves a chance over Smith this week and would have definitely helped vs the Cats and Freo.

I really hope the football department doesn't put lines through players they no longer think will make it and pick accordingly week to week

 

Just now, Dr evil said:

I'd probably let that stat go champ, he's a dud. 

 A spud that has an uncanny ability to play in Melbourne wins champ

Just now, --coach-- said:

 A spud that has an uncanny ability to play in Melbourne wins champ

Kidding yourself buddy, he's a dead set potato

4 minutes ago, --coach-- said:

Except we win more games when he is in the side than we he is not.

You have to be taking the p*** with that stat, surely.

No harm in picking him if he warrants it.

There is more harm done picking players that don't .

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

You have to be taking the p*** with that stat, surely.

What stat would you use Nasher?

Perhaps a poll of who thinks he's a spud or not?

1 minute ago, --coach-- said:

What stat would you use Nasher?

Perhaps a poll of who thinks he's a spud or not?

The stat is, the % of teams that play finals with a potato in their teams is 0

3 hours ago, Demons11 said:

I've just about had enough of people banging on about Pedo on this site and that he should be in our team.  

I am struggling to think of 1 game where he played a great game.  He may have been serviceable in a couple but he goes missing within games and from week to week.  The way people talk on here is that he is the missing link.  What have I missed???

 

 

Watch the last qtr of our Hawks win last year, he was instrumental in turning the game for us, one of the best wins we have had in more than 10 years.

I don`t think too many here think he is best 22, however he has been an important role player when he is required, and I`d have thought in the past 2 weeks he would have been required as many on here suggested. IMO, if we`d played him for Weid, we`d have won. We could have left Watts forward all day too, which improves the whole forward structure particularly with Hogan out.

Goodwin clearly disagrees with me though!

11 minutes ago, --coach-- said:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning, however I don't see how you can suggest a total lack of relationship when we are 33% more likely to win when he is in the team than when he is not?

I shouldn't need to explain this, but whatever:

There's nothing to establish any link between Pedersen playing and the increased wins. 

Just now, Dr evil said:

The stat is, the % of teams that play finals with a potato in their teams is 0

Hahahah, I like it ?

Im simply putting forward the actual stats, people can descide for themselves.

Personally I think he has a place on the right day.

6 minutes ago, --coach-- said:

What stat would you use Nasher?

Perhaps a poll of who thinks he's a spud or not?

I don't think he's a spud.  Players who make 50 or more AFL games have to have done so because they add something to their team.  You wouldn't make it that far otherwise.  I don't see the world in black and white.

But your "we win more games" stat is just silly.  For a start, it hardly showed a huge difference - what was it, 25% vs 26%? As they say correlation doesn't mean causation.  I just don't know how you can conclude anything with that statistic.  There's no link between the stat and Pedersen playing, it's just a co-incidence.

How about a "Games in AFL" vs "Games in VFL" ratio? Not an easy stat to get but the fact that he's spent a significant portion of the last two seasons in the VFL is indicative of his standing amongst his coaching group.

1 minute ago, --coach-- said:

Hahahah, I like it ?

Im simply putting forward the actual stats, people can descide for themselves.

Personally I think he has a place on the right day.

You're entitled to your opinion, i just think it's wrong, Pederson has been a good clubman but his time at AFL level is just about done, better of playing the kids who aren't potatoes 

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

I shouldn't need to explain this, but whatever:

There's nothing to establish any link between Pedersen playing and the increased wins. 

True, but the fact remains, he plays in a higher percentage of wins than just about any other player in our team (with a statistically significant number of games played).

3 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I don't think he's a spud.  Players who make 50 or more AFL games have to have done so because they add something to their team.  You wouldn't make it that far otherwise.  I don't see the world in black and white.

But your "we win more games" stat is just silly.  For a start, it hardly showed a huge difference - what was it, 25% vs 26%? As they say correlation doesn't mean causation.  I just don't know how you can conclude anything with that statistic.  There's no link between the stat and Pedersen playing, it's just a co-incidence.

How about a "Games in AFL" vs "Games in VFL" ratio? Not an easy stat to get but the fact that he's spent a significant portion of the last two seasons in the VFL is indicative of his standing amongst his coaching group.

66% versus 30.7% in 2016 Nasher.

Don't disagree with the part about VFL versus AFL Nasher, and also completely understand the idea that we need to play guys like Weidermsn to get them up to speed so to speak, also understand that the selectors are in the best position to pick the team, but I still believe he is a player who can help us win depending on the opposition and not a spud as others like to suggest.

2 minutes ago, --coach-- said:

What stat would you use Nasher?

Perhaps a poll of who thinks he's a spud or not?

I posted the same general point in the preview thread without diluting it with too much statistical noise: We were 6-3 last year with Pedo in the team.

Those wins were against GWS, Collingwood, Richmond, GC(1), Hawthorn and Port, mostly matches where we played our best footy for the season. He didn't play in our flat wins vs. Freo, Brisbane & GC (2) and was absent from the decent win v Collingwood (2). For balance, the losses he played in included Essendon, but also the Bulldogs and St. Kilda (1) where we were simply hammered around the ball.

There is merit in the idea that Pedersen provides something structurally that betters our performance. And it's not such a wild idea, because that's why people often call for his inclusion - not due to some notion that he'll kick a swag of goals as our #1 KPF.

 

8 minutes ago, --coach-- said:

True, but the fact remains, he plays in a higher percentage of wins than just about any other player in our team (with a statistically significant number of games played).

That stat doesn't mean anything without more.

Such as:

Just now, Skuit said:

I posted the same general point in the preview thread without diluting it with too much statistical noise: We were 6-3 last year with Pedo in the team.

Those wins were against GWS, Collingwood, Richmond, GC(1), Hawthorn and Port, mostly matches where we played our best footy for the season. He didn't play in our flat wins vs. Freo, Brisbane & GC (2) and was absent from the decent win v Collingwood (2). For balance, the losses he played in included Essendon, but also the Bulldogs and St. Kilda (1) where we were simply hammered around the ball.

There is merit in the idea that Pedersen provides something structurally that betters our performance. And it's not such a wild idea, because that's why people often call for his inclusion - not due to some notion that he'll kick a swag of goals as our #1 KPF.

I agree with your final point that Pedersen provides something structurally that benefits the team.

I don't think things are right with Hogan, Watts and Weideman/Smith, especially when Watts is in the ruck.

I just don't want Wattsy in the ruck

He's far too damaging as a forward 

 

15 minutes ago, Nasher said:

How about a "Games in AFL" vs "Games in VFL" ratio? Not an easy stat to get but the fact that he's spent a significant portion of the last two seasons in the VFL is indicative of his standing amongst his coaching group.

 Well, we did win a high % of games in the VFL last year also . . .

Thinking of having roast Pedersons with my dinner, thoughts?

1 minute ago, Dr evil said:

Thinking of having roast Pedersons with my dinner, thoughts?

You are adding nothing to this topic.  Knock it off.

1 minute ago, Nasher said:

You are adding nothing to this topic.  Knock it off.

My apologies Nash, i thought it was quite funny.

1 minute ago, Dr evil said:

My apologies Nash, i thought it was quite funny.

I got a laugh out of it ?

4 minutes ago, Dr evil said:

Thinking of having roast Pedersons with my dinner, thoughts?

That you should spell his name correctly before you call him a spod.