A bit of fun - numerically rate the players

[Poupou Escobar]

This should be a fun thread to pass the time while the pre-season drags its arse.

I propose we play around with rating the players on a numerical scale. This will provide us with hours of fun, frustration and resentment, as we vehemently disagree with each other, and come to the conclusion that every player in the squad is a steaming pile of sh*t.

I propose that we use a scale from 1-5, since any broader scale adds an unnecessary degree of complexity (ie. what's the difference between a 7 and an 8?).

Therefore the following basic scale is used (at least in this post - what you do in your own posts is out of my hands):

1. Not up to first grade standard
2. Average first grader
3. Above-average (fringe rep player)
4. Good (ie. Origin regular)
5. Great (contender for 'world's best player')

Bear in mind then, that 'average' is 2, not 3 - this scale presupposes a logarithmic rather than an even distribution of talent across the bands of player ability. That is, there are a lot more sh*t players than good ones.

Keep in mind as well, that the players in the '5' category could potentially vary an talent a fair bit as well, and some people might be tempted to add a sixth category if they feel Hayne is that much better than everyone else. Personally I think 1-5 should do it.

And I'll go first:

1.
Oake
Te Maari

2.
Cayless
Burt
Inu
Keating
Keating
Robson
Wright
Humble

3.
Hindmarsh
Reddy
Shackleton
Poore
Horo

4.
Grothe
Mateo
Moimoi
Smith
Tahu
Mannah

5.
Hayne

Come on guys! Put sh*t on me...

 

[Mr Angry]

1. Big head, tall guy.

2. All others.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

1. Big head, tall guy.

2. All others.

We're rating players not coaches you f**ken idiot.

 

[Mr Angry]

He was a great player.....little dick.

Big head though......tall as well.

 

[boxhead]

5.

EVERY F**KING PARRAMATTA PLAYER IN EXISTENCE

4. Everyone else.

 

[mrpwnd]

1.
Oake
Te Maari

2.
Cayless
Burt
Inu
Keating
Keating
Robson
Wright
Humble

3.
Hindmarsh
Reddy
Shackleton
Poore
Horo

4.
Grothe
Mateo
Moimoi
Smith
Tahu
Mannah

5.
Hayne

Come on guys! Put sh*t on me...

Maybe add a 0 for players that have been useless nuffies this season like MK, Tahu and Morts.

 

[Eels Dude]

Are we judging them on potential or consistency? I wouldn't be putting Mateo, Grothe and Smith into category 4 of 'origin regular'.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Are we judging them on potential or consistency?

Ability. How good are they likely to be in their next game?

I wouldn't be putting Mateo, Grothe and Smith into category 4 of 'origin regular'.

I would. At their best, Mateo and Grothe are as good as any regular Origin player - they have just been hampered by injuries (Grothe) and poor coaching (Mateo).

Ben Smith should be an Origin regular. Every week he's one of the best players on the field, however this was only his second full season in the back row.

Obviously this is just my opinion.

 

[ROGUE]

This should be a fun thread to pass the time while the pre-season drags its arse.

I propose we play around with rating the players on a numerical scale. This will provide us with hours of fun, frustration and resentment, as we vehemently disagree with each other, and come to the conclusion that every player in the squad is a steaming pile of sh*t.

I propose that we use a scale from 1-5, since any broader scale adds an unnecessary degree of complexity (ie. what's the difference between a 7 and an 8?).

Therefore the following basic scale is used (at least in this post - what you do in your own posts is out of my hands):

1. Not up to first grade standard
2. Average first grader
3. Above-average (fringe rep player)
4. Good (ie. Origin regular)
5. Great (contender for 'world's best player')

Bear in mind then, that 'average' is 2, not 3 - this scale presupposes a logarithmic rather than an even distribution of talent across the bands of player ability. That is, there are a lot more sh*t players than good ones.

Keep in mind as well, that the players in the '5' category could potentially vary an talent a fair bit as well, and some people might be tempted to add a sixth category if they feel Hayne is that much better than everyone else. Personally I think 1-5 should do it.

And I'll go first:

1.
Oake
Te Maari

2.
Cayless
Burt
Inu
Keating
Keating
Robson
Wright
Humble

3.
Hindmarsh
Reddy
Shackleton
Poore
Horo

4.
Grothe
Mateo
Moimoi
Smith
Tahu
Mannah

5.
Hayne

Come on guys! Put sh*t on me...

Robson-1
Reddy-2
grothe-2
Smith-3
Mateo-3
and if you had morts there i'd go morts-2
Would be my changes and additions

 

[Eels Dude]

Ability. How good are they likely to be in their next game?



I would. At their best, Mateo and Grothe are as good as any regular Origin player - they have just been hampered by injuries (Grothe) and poor coaching (Mateo).

Ben Smith should be an Origin regular. Every week he's one of the best players on the field, however this was only his second full season in the back row.

Obviously this is just my opinion.

That's your opinion I disagree. Mateo isn't poorly coached, he lacks consistency because that's his game and his risky style of play results in brain explosions.

Grothe at his devestating best was an origin level player, but like Mateo he has flaws in his game in general and struggles with defensive positioning hence why he's only been selected for one origin series.

As much as rate Ben Smith, he's not an origin regular. He's a solid first grade backrower and does his job well but he's well below the standard of other players competing for the Blues jersey.

 

[Haynzy]

Hindy a 3 behind Grothe, Mateo, Moimoi, Smith, Tahu and Mannah all on 4! :crazy:

 

[Poupou Escobar]

he's well below the standard of other players competing for the Blues jersey.

I'll f**ken end your life!

Hindy a 3 behind Grothe, Mateo, Moimoi, Smith, Tahu and Mannah all on 4!

I'm rating on ability not history.

Hindy was great but I think he's on the decline. Still a solid first-grader though.

 

[mrpwnd]

Hindy was great but I think he's on the decline. Still a solid first-grader though.

It's a pity, he's still in his early 30s and already starting to play like he's in his mid 30s. I still remember the better days when he'd run with a lot of intent, made Shillington look like a cheap version of him.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

It's a pity, he's still in his early 30s and already starting to play like he's in his mid 30s. I still remember the better days when he'd run with a lot of intent, made Shillington look like a cheap version of him.

Man do you remember when Hindy played wide on the left and made a dozen linebreaks every year? And when he did he could go the length of the field.

I still remember him outrunning the entire Bulldogs team for a 50m try somewhere around 2001.

 

[Eels Dude]

No-one should be knocking Hindy. He's not as good as he was in his best days but he stills regularly makes 50 tackles a match, and 100 metres gained a match. Not to mention his cover defence. At 32 he's not going to be playing the same as he was at 25.

 

[jk13]

hindy may not out run people these days, but his ability to turn up and perform a try saver happens on a regular basis. if smith can be a 4 on defence, why can't hindy?

 

[guruminga]

Hindy a 3 behind Grothe, Mateo, Moimoi, Smith, Tahu and Mannah all on 4! :crazy:

That's exactly what I thought.

I also noticed he missed out Morts? Why is that Pou Pou?

G

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I'm reserving my judgement on Morts until he's played two consistent seasons in a row. Last year and this year were very different for him, and I imagine next year will be different again.

 

[Eels Dude]

I'm reserving my judgement on Morts until he's played two consistent seasons in a row. Last year and this year were very different for him, and I imagine next year will be different again.

So does that mean you don't even attempt to rate players who aren't consistent at all?:? How does Mateo get a 4 then?

 

[Springs]

Hindmarsh is far more valuable to a team doing what he has done over the past few years then if he stayed out on the left near the wing and ran into a hole once a game like a Ben Creagh or Mitch Aubusson.

You rated Tahu above Hindmarsh... no, no, wrong, bad.