Rumours and Stuff

[84 Baby]

Morgs sample size then???

More like an Eels in close game faecal matter sample size

 

[TheRam]

I agree that sometimes he’s hesitant in defence but his biggest issue is technique. If he is going to rush up, he has to hammer the shit out of his opposite. But too often when he rushes up he’s just grabs air. Actually it isn’t even really technique because he has done some heavy tackles. But whatever it is, if he rushes up and smashes a merkin (even f**ken illegally if need be) then it puts the uncertainty on that player instead.

You refute what I said, then you prattle on about technique, then you dismiss technique, then you don't know what it is.

OK then...what about he is hesitant in defense because he is unsure of himself about what he should be doing or feels capable of what he should be doing? Therefore he doesn't have a real understanding and feel for the game? Which is what I suggested in the first place.

He has no clue in defense which adversely affects his overall game and unless he can rectify that he will never overcome his yoyo liabilities that then create doubts in the minds of the players around him and the cycle of disjointed defensive lapses in our backline continue on.

 

[TheRam]

Penrith sold us a lemon

Yes, I believe you are right Hindy. It's a pity because he has all the skills and physical attributes to be a real quality player.

 

[TheRam]

His winning record at Penrith was 50%. At our club he has won 68%. Stop spreading bullshit.

You and you ridiculous win/loss record when assessing a players capabilities.

Maybe some players like say Waqa are good enough to be first graders and the team mates around him can cover enough of his liabilities when playing against the lesser teams, but when the real heat and pressure is on any liability is exploited enough for it to ruin a teams chances of success?

Blake can be one of these players. Enough quality when things are going well, but a liability when the chips are down.

So overall he can be considered a lemon for the money he is on and for the doubt he must be creating in the minds of his team mates.

 

[gaffer]

You refute what I said, then you prattle on about technique, then you dismiss technique, then you don't know what it is.

OK then...what about he is hesitant in defense because he is unsure of himself about what he should be doing or feels capable of what he should be doing? Therefore he doesn't have a real understanding and feel for the game? Which is what I suggested in the first place.

He has no clue in defense which adversely affects his overall game and unless he can rectify that he will never overcome his yoyo liabilities that then create doubts in the minds of the players around him and the cycle of disjointed defensive lapses in our backline continue on.

and who's in charge of defence KIDWELL

 

[84 Baby]

You refute what I said, then you prattle on about technique, then you dismiss technique, then you don't know what it is.

OK then...what about he is hesitant in defense because he is unsure of himself about what he should be doing or feels capable of what he should be doing? Therefore he doesn't have a real understanding and feel for the game? Which is what I suggested in the first place.

He has no clue in defense which adversely affects his overall game and unless he can rectify that he will never overcome his yoyo liabilities that then create doubts in the minds of the players around him and the cycle of disjointed defensive lapses in our backline continue on.

Settle the f**k down merkin. I was agreeing with you mostly. Just think if he was uncertain or hesitant, hitting his opponent hard would give him more leeway through the game to be uncertain, but for some reason he doesn’t tackle them, let alone hard

 

[chiefy1]

You and you ridiculous win/loss record when assessing a players capabilities.

Maybe some players like say Waqa are good enough to be first graders and the team mates around him can cover enough of his liabilities when playing against the lesser teams, but when the real heat and pressure is on any liability is exploited enough for it to ruin a teams chances of success?

Blake can be one of these players. Enough quality when things are going well, but a liability when the chips are down.

So overall he can be considered a lemon for the money he is on and for the doubt he must be creating in the minds of his team mates.

Win loss records for individual players only matter in single player sports like tennis.. Ray stone has a +60% win rate doesn't mean his value rises because of it.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Big enough sample size???

It was a big enough sample for you merkins to run your shit mouths.

 

[84 Baby]

Win loss records for individual players only matter in single player sports like tennis.. Ray stone has a +60% win rate doesn't mean his value rises because of it.

Baseball’s most important stat is wins above replacement. So literally how many more wins a player is going to get you over another bloke.
Although I concede baseball is the most individual effort focused team sport

 

[hineyrulz]

It was a big enough sample for you merkins to run your shit mouths.

We don’t need sample sizes for that merkin.

 

[hineyrulz]

More like an Eels in close game faecal matter sample size

Thats a lot of poop.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You and you ridiculous win/loss record when assessing a players capabilities.

It's a good heuristic. Much better than half arsed analyses by mouth breathers layering logical fallacies on each other. Wins matter, especially over an increasing sample of games/seasons. And since winning games is the purpose of playing in them, if a player isn't good enough he won't win many games.

Here's our players listed by wins per year over the age of 18. It's a heuristic I've come up with to show the quality of a player's career, and it tells a much bigger story than trying to cherry-pick shit to match your preconceptions:

14.4 Drown
10.8 Jennings
9.1 Ferguson
8.5 Paulo
7.9 Moses
7.7 Blake
7.7 RCG
7.2 Gutherson
7.1 Matterson
6.8 Mahoney
6.3 Lane
5.6 Papali'i
5.3 Cartwright
5.0 Nrown
4.8 Niukore
3.7 Kaufusi
3.2 Sivo
2.6 Oldfield
2.4 Opacic
2.4 Smith
2.3 Hipgrave
2.2 Stone
1.4 Roache
1.2 Rankin
0.0 Dunster
0.0 Lussick
0.0 Hollis
0.0 Hughes
0.0 Penisini

In light of his sustained success, you're off your f**kenead if you think Waqa Blake isn't a first grader.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Win loss records for individual players only matter in single player sports like tennis.. Ray stone has a +60% win rate doesn't mean his value rises because of it.

Wins per season matter more than wins per game. If a dude isn't playing much first grade (but wins when he does play) it means he is a backup at a decent club, like Stone. He only has 2.2 wins per year since age 18.

 

[hindy111]

His winning record at Penrith was 50%. At our club he has won 68%. Stop spreading bullshit.

Who cares what someone's winning record is. It means nothing in a team sport of 17.
Based on his 1.5yrs with us it has been ordinary. I reckon BA himself would be dissapointed. I was excited when we signed him. I couldn't beleive they let him go tbh.

 

[hindy111]

You and you ridiculous win/loss record when assessing a players capabilities.

Maybe some players like say Waqa are good enough to be first graders and the team mates around him can cover enough of his liabilities when playing against the lesser teams, but when the real heat and pressure is on any liability is exploited enough for it to ruin a teams chances of success?

Blake can be one of these players. Enough quality when things are going well, but a liability when the chips are down.

So overall he can be considered a lemon for the money he is on and for the doubt he must be creating in the minds of his team mates.

He is a half a million dollar player. When we signed him I thought he was at that age where he will explode and be the top 3 centres in the game.
Now he isn't in the top 10. Also not in the bottom 10 either. Perhaps somewhere between 10-20 of 32 centres playing. At the moment closer to 20. The guy is paid to be a top 10 centre.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Who cares what someone's winning record is. It means nothing in a team sport of 17.

It does, because the team doesn't win without merkins contributing.

 

[hindy111]

It does, because the team doesn't win without merkins contributing.

Sure. But a plodder can be in a great side. While a super star can be in a poor side. Who will win more?
Teddy's win record ant the Tigers was ordinary.......Just saying.

 

[lingard]

I’m patient

I've forgotten the question.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Sure. But a plodder can be in a great side. While a super star can be in a poor side. Who will win more?
Teddy's win record ant the Tigers was ordinary.......Just saying.

A superstar in a shit side doesn't equate to a plodder in a great side. The reason being that plodders just don't get enough games in great sides. Name one other plodder in a great side with more than 7 wins per season after age 18.

As for Tedesco, he still had 4.4 wins per season (after 18) at the Tigers. But you have to look at his entire career. He is up to 7.7 wins since age 18. You can't discard data that doesn't suit you. You have to look at the lot, that goes for Blake as well as for Tedesco. They have both won a lot of games over a long time. You would be an idiot to call either of them a reserve grader.

 

[lingard]

His winning record at Penrith was 50%. At our club he has won 68%. Stop spreading bullshit.

Why did Penrith's win rate go up after he left?