Gator

It's just logic, but you've articulated it very well.

I didn't think it was possible that anybody could put a positive spin on having so many in rehab, i.e. an interrupted preseason. I was wrong.

I doubt any coach would say that in December about a player who clearly wasn't in 2018. And if they did it was to probably shut up an annoyance as they tried to go about their work.

Gee thanks. I'm somewhat aware of a player closer to 200 games than 150. I'm also aware he's kicked 40 goals, or more, 4 odd times. I've also seen him play for Melbourne. We've moved past a very soft player that doesn't contribute Goodwin-style, which is why he was dropped. What we put up with in the past we no longer will. Clue - this bit is important. If he wants to have a complete recalibration of his mind as he confronts his football mortality then GREAT. It will "please" me. I won't be holding my breath.

I'll answer your feeble question this way. I want to win a flag. Any player that proves they deserve a spot in the best 22, or even if they're no longer best 22, but contribute meaningfully when/if they get an opportunity, please me. I don't think Garlett will be getting the chance to please me too often.

How can he prove my eyes "wrong" ? It's up to him if he changes his behaviours.

Must have had a huge downpour at Etihad during the VFL GF. Didn't put his body on the line or stand under a high ball. He's not a "Goody-type"player.

Garlett is finished. Our club and team has moved past flaky players who pick and choose when it suits them.

There's a difference between game-day kicking and kicking at training ---- pressure. Pleasing that Jordon has a good technique.

Really ? Looks ghastly.

I'm devastated we have a bloke with a man bun on the list.

Why did you bring up the wording "team to beat" then ? What was your query ? Your inference was that it was CD's term. If you knew it was a journo's interpretation I don't know why you'd make the post you did. It doesn't make sense.

One thing about Petracca is the quality of his disposals. He really impacts games with his ball use, which I suspect is why he's previously been classified by CD as elite.

CD are not evaluating "teams" they've ranking "lists" of players who have played at least 5 games over the past two years. It doesn't take into account game-plans, etc. A team is quite different to a list.

I would have delisted him after that GF performance, which was probably the worst performance I've ever seen from a senior player at that level. It was doubly worse because it happened in the biggest game of the year.

The Eagles stats were elite when it mattered - finals. The competition is so close with no standout teams. If you make finals and perform at the right time you can walk away with the chocolates Footscray-style-2016.

That's a sub editor's headline. It's a journo's interpretation. It's not a comment from CD.

Did I read that Goodwin's status rose on "6 good games" ? Sometimes I wish I could say what I really think. I'm with you. I would never give any coach longer than three years. It's completely unnecessary.

Where did you read that this was a flag prediction ranking ?

It's not an "analysis", it's stats. For example, West Coast ranked 18th for ground-ball gets. Stats where they weren't great during the H&A they excelled at in finals. They weren't a great contested ball winning team whereas Melbourne were no.1 in the competition, but who won the contested stats in the prelim ? Sheed had been in and out of the side during the year, but was great in the finals. Redden had a great last 6 weeks. West Coast were 18th for ground-ball stats, 11th for contested possessions, 11th for clearances, and 15th for tackles. It is what it is. It's just stats.

The topic doesn't overly interest me, but having heard a CD rep on SEN this morning it was clear that none of this is subjective opinion. It's 100% raw stats. As to the poignancy of the stats or how they rate each stat I wouldn't know. But they've been doing stats for over 20 years, so I suspect their models would be reasonably relevant.

I don't think this is correct. CD said today on SEN that it is entirely stats based. They may give more weight to some stats over others, but none of their assessments are linked to "opinion".

This isn't correct. It's a full two seasons finishing at the Grand Final. It's also weighted with more recent games having a heavier loading than round 1, 2017. Even the second half of 2018 has more weight than the first half of 2018. Every player in the competition who has played at least 5 games is measured individually and then the algorithms spit out the values attributed to each player and then determine the list rankings. The above can be attributed to a spokesperson from CD who was just interviewed on SEN.

You should have been far more astute with your judgement. It was plainly obvious he had immense talent and would break through the plateau he was experiencing, which is why some of us regularly called out your comments at the time.

It's based on a rolling 40 games I believe and Gawn was rubbish when he came back from his bad hamstring in 2017. Note: the above isn't quite true. See a few posts down.