Eels release Kieran Foran

[Happy MEel]

At their respective positions (edge forward) it is a massive indicator of importance and impact. Of course game changers like offloads, linebreaks, tries and their assists are very important when comparing edge forwards too. I find tackle breaks another telling stat (especially for forwards).

Wouldn't offloads and tackle breaks also be a good indicator of impact and contribution for middle forwards? 6 of the top 10 offloaders this year are middle forwards and of the top 20 tackle breaks that are forwards, 8 play in the middle so it's certainly not exclusive to edge forwards.

If we compare Scott's and Watmough's game changer stats, Scott has more offloads (24 vs 13) and more tackle breaks (13 vs 9). This is in spite of the fact he has run 70 less times. Seems to me that Watmough's attack was very one dimensional, although he was good at that third or fourth tackle hit up. However, a metre eater is much easier to replace than someone that can offload effectively and bust tackles IMO.

 

[Happy MEel]

Only if you think the stats are flawed.

#SeeICanThrowOutGlibOneLinersToo

I actually think the stats are often a good indicator. See my post above for a comparison of stats.

 

[Happy MEel]

If I had to dumb it down (and you're convincing me I should) then I would rate the two like this:
Scott: Defence 8 Attack 4
Watmough Defence 7 Attack 7

Scott probably has more hit points as well. Mannah has the most Manas

Ok thanks. If we're dumbing it down, I'd rate the two like this:
Scott: Defence 9 Attack 6
Watmough: Defence 7 Attack 6.5

Also, you can never have too many manas so the more Tims the better

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Wouldn't offloads and tackle breaks also be a good indicator of impact and contribution for middle forwards? 6 of the top 10 offloaders this year are middle forwards and of the top 20 tackle breaks that are forwards, 8 play in the middle so it's certainly not exclusive to edge forwards.

If we compare Scott's and Watmough's game changer stats, Scott has more offloads (24 vs 13) and more tackle breaks (13 vs 9). This is in spite of the fact he has run 70 less times. Seems to me that Watmough's attack was very one dimensional, although he was good at that third or fourth tackle hit up. However, a metre eater is much easier to replace than someone that can offload effectively and bust tackles IMO.

That's true, but Scott's ability to offload or bust tackles is nothing special. Offloads just happen to be his only attacking strength, so of course he throws plenty. And while versatility is a nice bonus, it doesn't make an all-rounder better than a specialist. Gower has quite the bag of tricks but it doesn't make him more valuable than more one dimensional attacking players like Wicks. Edwards, on the other hand, probably makes less runs and metres than Watmough did (I'm sure you'll tell me if I'm wrong), but he is clearly a better contributor because his game changing plays are significantly higher (and if they're not don't hesitate to let me know). Scott's game changers are higher but not significantly so. The difference between tackle breaks is negligible, and roughly double the offloads in no way makes up for roughly double the metres. In fact, offloads are a dubious statistic because they don't differentiate good offloads from bad ones.

 

[Eelementary]

Bottom line - rugby league is a team sport, and you need all sorts of players to put in.

It'd be like having a basketball team where your guards and forwards are awful, but your centre is the MVP...wouldn't get too far...

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Ok thanks. If we're dumbing it down, I'd rate the two like this:
Scott: Defence 9 Attack 6
Watmough: Defence 7 Attack 6.5

Also, you can never have too many manas so the more Tims the better

Scott's defence against the Panthers proved he is not a 'defence 9' guy. I understand he was out of position but he still has a lot of experience there. Ma'u has far less experience defending at centre but he still does a better job.

I also don't see how you could give Scott an above average score for attack. He is a plodder who offers little more than the odd offload. In many cases a quick play-the-ball would be better.

 

[Dibs]

that's why people don't bother with you

You seem to be trying pretty hard

 

[El Diablo]

that's what i'd expect someone like you to think

 

[Dibs]

You are a confoundedly nonintuitive lackey and a belligerent one dimensional vulgarity to all and sundry

 

[hineyrulz]

More clutching at straws Alan?

I always clutch at Straws Pou.

 

[phantom eel]

Why is the Foran thread derailed with pages of Pou talking shit about Watmough and Beau Scott?

FMD, please send his FIFO trolling to The Swamp!

 

[Happy MEel]

That's true, but Scott's ability to offload or bust tackles is nothing special. Offloads just happen to be his only attacking strength, so of course he throws plenty. And while versatility is a nice bonus, it doesn't make an all-rounder better than a specialist. Gower has quite the bag of tricks but it doesn't make him more valuable than more one dimensional attacking players like Wicks. Edwards, on the other hand, probably makes less runs and metres than Watmough did (I'm sure you'll tell me if I'm wrong), but he is clearly a better contributor because his game changing plays are significantly higher (and if they're not don't hesitate to let me know). Scott's game changers are higher but not significantly so. The difference between tackle breaks is negligible, and roughly double the offloads in no way makes up for roughly double the metres. In fact, offloads are a dubious statistic because they don't differentiate good offloads from bad ones.

Actually, Scott's ability to offload is something special, but you were to lazy to actually look into it. Scott is 16th overall for offloads in the NRL and the 4th highest edge forward (don't forget there are twice as many edge forwards as "locks" to compare against) If Watmough can be a one dimensional 3rd/4th tackle specialist then why can't Scott be a one dimensional offloading specialist. It sure seems that's how we're using him.

Speaking of Watmough's amazing one dimensional attacking specialty, he's actually quite average so I fail to see how you rate him a 7. Watmough was the 8th ranked lock for average run metres and significantly lower when you consider all middle forwards. If Watmough is in the team for his runs for run metres as you say, then he is really only doing an average job of it.

It could be argued that Scott is serving his attacking role in the team better than Watmough was last year. This combined with the better defence as you concede suggests a higher onfield contribution.

 

[phantom eel]

So Foran's interview with Rothfield, huh....

 

[Twizzle]

So Foran's interview with Rothfield, huh....

well apparently the Sloth sells RL tickets now, journo's wages mustn't be cutting it

 

[Noise]

Bottom line - rugby league is a team sport, and you need all sorts of players to put in.

It'd be like having a basketball team where your guards and forwards are awful, but your centre is the MVP...wouldn't get too far...

Basketball is a bad example. 1 player can carry a team because there are only 5 on the court. The 2006/07 Cavs team (all plodders except for Lebron) are proof that you can go far and reach the NBA finals with a 1 man team.

Also, last year's Cavs got close to winning the title when they went the majority of the playoffs with just Lebron plus plodders as Irving and Love were injured.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Actually, Scott's ability to offload is something special, but you were to lazy to actually look into it. Scott is 16th overall for offloads in the NRL and the 4th highest edge forward (don't forget there are twice as many edge forwards as "locks" to compare against) If Watmough can be a one dimensional 3rd/4th tackle specialist then why can't Scott be a one dimensional offloading specialist. It sure seems that's how we're using him.

Because total number of offloads by itself means less than total running metres. Offloads includes all offloads to players not in a better position than the offloader. I prefer to judge a forward's ball-playing by linebreak assists.

Speaking of Watmough's amazing one dimensional attacking specialty, he's actually quite average so I fail to see how you rate him a 7. Watmough was the 8th ranked lock for average run metres and significantly lower when you consider all middle forwards. If Watmough is in the team for his runs for run metres as you say, then he is really only doing an average job of it.

'All middle forwards' includes at least 80 players every week (16 times 5), so if Watmough is hovering around 40th then you could say he's average.

It could be argued that Scott is serving his attacking role in the team better than Watmough was last year. This combined with the better defence as you concede suggests a higher onfield contribution.

I would go as far as saying Scott is only in the team for his defence. His ability to offload is not a key feature of our attack or he would carry the ball more than half a dozen times a game.

 

[Eelementary]

Basketball is a bad example. 1 player can carry a team because there are only 5 on the court. The 2006/07 Cavs team (all plodders except for Lebron) are proof that you can go far and reach the NBA finals with a 1 man team.

Also, last year's Cavs got close to winning the title when they went the majority of the playoffs with just Lebron plus plodders as Irving and Love were injured.

To counter that - the Lakers (my team).

Even with Kobe, we sucks balls.

Maybe the Cavs weren't as bad as people made them out to be...

 

[Happy MEel]

Who says running metres means more than offloads? You?? If run metres is the main measure of attacking contribution then Faraimo would have a higher contribution to Watmough, which is ridiculous to suggest.

I'd actually be surprised if he was 40th but even if that's the case, you have been singing the praises of an "average" attacking player.

Scotts offloading ability is enough of a feature to have us win more than we lost with Scott in the team. Something watmough's run metres didn't.

Anyway, I get the feeling people are annoyed we have derailed a thread that's meant to be about Foran. No amount of evidenced based reasoning is going to change the opinion of someone with an "I'm right because I said so" mindset so we'll just have to agree to disagree and apologies to everyone else for going off topic.

 

[Twizzle]

no appologies needed, interresting read

 

[Noise]

To counter that - the Lakers (my team).

Even with Kobe, we sucks balls.

Maybe the Cavs weren't as bad as people made them out to be...

Kobe was no longer in 'MVP' conversations this year and was way too old and to be carrying a team. In fact for the first half of the year he was actually a plodder.