The way he stood up in the first half vs Eagle in the Prelim reinforced my view that he’s built for finals and is the type of player (like Stewart Dew circa 2008), who can impact and change a big game with sheer physicality, tenacity and drive towards goal. 

Those who recommend him being pushed out by Fritz or KK evidently missed how brutally physical finals are to play in and win. 

Jeebus, seems we're trading best 22 players like Hogan AVB and Tyson, but re-signing huge duds like JKH wtf.

Tom Harley this morning say they've met with Vandenberg and have a definite interest in him.

so we thinking we'll a 2nd rounder for him?

on trade for KK?

Not happy about it but it looks like it's happening.

On 9/30/2018 at 6:38 PM, Rusty Nails said:

This is backed up objectively also.

In the season's composite average stats i keep Vanders finished 19th, just behind ANB!

From the 4 matches that qualified him for the ranking, he played against 3 top eight sides in the Swans, Giants and  eventual Premiers, the Eagles.

Not bad for a guy out of the game for pretty much 2 entire seasons.

* Played less than 3 matches and does not qualify.  Included for interest / curiosity purposes only.  Move players up to replace in rankings as required.

Yes but he also came into his handful of games against good teams with a completely fresh set of legs. The fact he was serviceable is to be expected of a player that's been in the system as long as he has. In fact I would have expected him to poll higher than he did based on that. 
If your looking at composite average stats, the fact he only played a handful of games and polled at 19 is quite a negative thing - it's much harder to keep your average stats up the more games you play after all. 

Don't let his story romance you too much - he ain't best 22 and I would be concerned if he was next year. 

Kolodjasnij, Vandenberg, Rohan, I wonder, it may be that all three are rated at about the same level by the clubs targeting them. All we need now is for Gold Coast to want a Geelong player and they can all just stand up and move to the next chair.

On 9/30/2018 at 6:47 PM, picket fence said:

Vanders reminds me very much like Kevin Dyson who I rated very very highly in the 90ts and a touch of Andrew Obst !!anyone else see similarities in Style?

Keeper for mine!

I do agree with the Dyson comparison. 

10 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Kolodjasnij, Vandenberg, Rohan, I wonder, it may be that all three are rated at about the same level by the clubs targeting them. All we need now is for Gold Coast to want a Geelong player and they can all just stand up and move to the next chair.

George Horlin-Smith, although I doubt he’s in contract and they could just sign him as a de-listed free agent.

Regarding distances from Sydney to Canberra/Tathra/etc. Josh Mahoney on trade radio also mentioned that AV’s mother is moving to Sydney, which appears to be more sound reasoning for the potential move.

Edited October 2, 20186 yr by Mach5

Vanders departure will probably hurt us more than Jesse's, imo. VDB is a big body that can throw his weight around, we walk taller when he is in the team. He forms part of the fabric of the club.

If we lose Hogan i will be upset, but if we lose VDB too, i'll be devastated.

23 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Vanders departure will probably hurt us more than Jesse's, imo. VDB is a big body that can throw his weight around, we walk taller when he is in the team. He forms part of the fabric of the club.

If we lose Hogan i will be upset, but if we lose VDB too, i'll be devastated.

You are definitely over rating AVB.  Solid player but easily replaced and in no way is in the same league as Hoges 

I think Vanders will stay.... just a hunch.

2 hours ago, Smokey said:

Yes but he also came into his handful of games against good teams with a completely fresh set of legs. The fact he was serviceable is to be expected of a player that's been in the system as long as he has. In fact I would have expected him to poll higher than he did based on that. 
If your looking at composite average stats, the fact he only played a handful of games and polled at 19 is quite a negative thing - it's much harder to keep your average stats up the more games you play after all. 

Don't let his story romance you too much - he ain't best 22 and I would be concerned if he was next year. 

125 best and fairest votes in only 7 games.

Had he played the full 25 games he would've finished 5th. I'm not going to crunch the per game average on every player but it's fair to say Melksham, Viney, Brayshaw, T Mc would've finished ahead of him but one way or another he'd be in the top dozen.

Unless the coaches were just feeling sorry for him or thought he had a few unsustainable games I don't see how he's not very highly rated by the coaches.

 

3 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Vanders departure will probably hurt us more than Jesse's, imo. VDB is a big body that can throw his weight around, we walk taller when he is in the team. He forms part of the fabric of the club.

If we lose Hogan i will be upset, but if we lose VDB too, i'll be devastated.

That is a significant factor the club needs to consider DD.   Let's hope they do as we are sorely lacking in the hit man type role across the park, especially up forward that makes others around stand tall as you say.  In finals this is even more crucial, especially if we get to the big dance.

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

125 best and fairest votes in only 7 games.

Had he played the full 25 games he would've finished 5th. I'm not going to crunch the per game average on every player but it's fair to say Melksham, Viney, Brayshaw, T Mc would've finished ahead of him but one way or another he'd be in the top dozen.

Unless the coaches were just feeling sorry for him or thought he had a few unsustainable games I don't see how he's not very highly rated by the coaches.

 

Excuse my ignorance DS but that would suggest the voting includes finals appearances is that correct?

On 9/30/2018 at 6:38 PM, Rusty Nails said:

This is backed up objectively also.

In the season's composite average stats i keep Vanders finished 19th, just behind ANB!

From the 4 matches that qualified him for the ranking, he played against 3 top eight sides in the Swans, Giants and  eventual Premiers, the Eagles.

Not bad for a guy out of the game for pretty much 2 entire seasons.

* Played less than 3 matches and does not qualify.  Included for interest / curiosity purposes only.  Move players up to replace in rankings as required.

Is this ranking based on a custom algorithm you have come up with?

Theres's quite a few anomalies with my subjective observations and our best and fairest results, even if they are ranked by points per game.

Calculations do not equal objectivity.

4 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Vanders departure will probably hurt us more than Jesse's, imo. VDB is a big body that can throw his weight around, we walk taller when he is in the team. He forms part of the fabric of the club.

If we lose Hogan i will be upset, but if we lose VDB too, i'll be devastated.

The definition of hyperbole. You can't be serious?

i'd prefer to vanders to stay and have a run without injuries, but if he can get a longer contract and more security elsewhere, he should take it. but, i wonder what he'd be worth in trade? there seems to be a 50/50 split on demonland whether or not vanders is essential to our style of play, or just a to-up player filling a role.

would trading him get us something in the 30-40 range or 50+ pick range i wonder?

26 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Is this ranking based on a custom algorithm you have come up with?

Theres's quite a few anomalies with my subjective observations and our best and fairest results, even if they are ranked by points per game.

Calculations do not equal objectivity.

It's not that sophisticated 55.  Just weighted composite averages to attempt to offer a very rough comparative guide over a meaningful number of matches / data in order to attempt to see trends in form arising.

The only complexity was a little reverse engineering in the first 3 to 4 rounds to attempt to find a rough similarity in the outcomes/rankings vs what was actually occurring performance wise on the park.  Not so much for super accuracy as that was/is never going to happen with pure data (calculations not equaling objectivity as you say) vs real live observation of game day performance under any circumstances, but merely to avoid wild anomalies occurring.  Most of that is of course subjective though so i have no doubt there would be wild swings in the rankings if someone else attempted their own weighted averages.  10 people might probably arrive at 10 wildly different results!

Having said all that, the eyes are always the best judge but only provided you have the time to scan over the replays and rewind / rewind / review each player's involvement to see the minute detail that can sometimes be missed in the heat and /or the fast paced madness/congestion of a match from start to finish IMO.

Stats can sometimes highlight a player you may not have felt contributed that much on the day but you then go back through the game, look for the areas of play you might not have seen initially (especially live) and say (in some cases...not all obviously) "hey he actually did do some bloody good work in close or on the outside.  He pressured / ran down a few opponents that i overlooked in that first half that contributed towards saving a goal or two or helped a few players score up the other end!  Hec, I missed much of that in the match for some reason (possibly too many sherbets!)".  Of course the reverse might be said and the stats indicate a shocker.  When you look back through replay you realise it bloody was (what was i thinking!!??... Fan Fav bias maybe!??).  Or maybe it wasn't and the player just played a stopping role very effectively and was never meant to rack up serious ball use stats etc.  He performed his role admirably and the lack of stats are exactly that way for a bloody good reason!

In the end i see such rankings as purely a very rough amateurish personal guide only.  To be used with severe caution at all times!  The eyes are a much better judge, but IMHO only when looking at a player objectively and provided you have the time and wherewithal to carry out a full game day review of each and every player.  But that is also flawed as we generally do not get the  behind the goal vision from both ends like the coaches do in order to see the entire play.  And who would have the luxury of this time every week anyway?  Exactly why most (all?) teams have game day analysts who no doubt get paid bloody good coin and do it very well i'm sure.

1 hour ago, Rusty Nails said:

Excuse my ignorance DS but that would suggest the voting includes finals appearances is that correct?

I can answer that. 

Yes. 

On 10/1/2018 at 12:50 PM, PaulRB said:

is the type of player (like Stewart Dew circa 2008), who can impact and change a big game with sheer physicality, tenacity and drive towards goal. 

Those who recommend him being pushed out by Fritz or KK evidently missed how brutally physical finals are to play in and win. 

They should go back and re look at our weak effort in 2000.  To see just that, 'PRB'.

We were boys to the slaughter, not ready for a Hot Grand-Final.  They wilted in the springtime sunshine.

1 hour ago, A F said:

The definition of hyperbole. You can't be serious?

Jesse is gone and we will be compensated. VDB goes and we will get nowhere near his value to the side in a trade.

29 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Jesse is gone and we will be compensated. VDB goes and we will get nowhere near his value to the side in a trade.

He's a player in the 16-22 range of our list, with a checkered injury history and some of the worst disposal on the list. To say you'd be devastated if he left is ridiculous IMO, but each to their own.

Edited October 2, 20186 yr by A F

11 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

125 best and fairest votes in only 7 games.

Had he played the full 25 games he would've finished 5th. I'm not going to crunch the per game average on every player but it's fair to say Melksham, Viney, Brayshaw, T Mc would've finished ahead of him but one way or another he'd be in the top dozen.

Unless the coaches were just feeling sorry for him or thought he had a few unsustainable games I don't see how he's not very highly rated by the coaches.

 

But we don’t really know if he would be able to sustain that form over the period of 22 games and that’s my point. He is still a fairly unproven commodity to me after years on the sidelines. I can see his potential value, he just ain’t in my best 22 (yet).