Mitchell Pearce

[mxlegend99]

Pearces winning percentage in origin is on par with any other player over the same period. He's had neither a negative or positive effect on our chances while in the Blues jersey.

It is the Blues as a whole who have been desperately unlucky (or outright robbed on a couple occasions) to not have another 2-3 series wins in the last 10 years. There has been at least 4, maybe even 5 series in that time decided by a single call (whether the call was right or not largely dependant on if you live north or south of the tweed)

That is a load of shit.

5 players in our current 17 played part in our 2014 series. Those players are Jarryd Hayne, Brett Morris, Josh Dugan, Aaron Woods and Boyd Cordner. They are series winners, something Pearce isn't.

Here's the other 12 players without a series win ranked in order of series played in:

Pearce - 6 series losses. 29.41% game win rate
Fifita - 3 series losses. 33.3% game win rate
Jackson - 3 series losses. 37.5% win rate
Ferguson - 2 series losses. 50% game win rate
Maloney - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Klemmer - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Tedesco - 1 series loss. 66.6% game win rate
Graham - 1 series loss. 66.6 game win rate
Frizzell - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Bird - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Peats - First series. 50% game win rate
Trbojevic - First series. 50% win rate

Of the players without a series win, he has twice as many series losses or more. He has the lowest win rate of all those players aswell.

That said there is one player with a series win who is technically worse statistically to Mitchell Pearce. Boyd Cordner played Game 3 2014 which was a loss, so he was part of that series but didn't actually contribute to winning it. Throw in the fact he has a 25% win rate at Origin level which is even worse than Mitchell Pearce and he is maybe as bad at Origin as Mitchell Pearce.

 

[Albert Rosenfeld]

If NSW win Origin 3 with Pearce playing, will the anti-Pearce obsessives change their minds about him? I don't think so.

 

[King hit]

For all those Pearce haters who would you have picked in the Blues halfback spot this year?

 

[mxlegend99]

For all those Pearce haters who would you have picked in the Blues halfback spot this year?

Literally anyone else.

Are we going to miss all the try assists and linebreak assists he offers? His kicking game? His clutch plays when the game is on the line?

Cant possibly make a worse decision.

 

[umina panther]

If NSW win Origin 3 with Pearce playing, will the anti-Pearce obsessives change their minds about him? I don't think so.

Nope would need to dominate the next 3+ years to break even

 

[SBD82]

If NSW win Origin 3 with Pearce playing, will the anti-Pearce obsessives change their minds about him? I don't think so.

If we win in spite of Pearce playing? Or if he actually does his job?

 

[mxlegend99]

Nope would need to dominate the next 3+ years to break even

If he dominated even one series I would come around.

But he's yet to have an above average game... he hasnt improved since his debut really.

 

[Better_Dead_Than_Red]

Pearce turns those around him to shit. He is a cancer that slowly destroys a team.

It seems removing him at the 50 minute mark is the only cure to win with him.

Yeah that's why the Roosters have won a premiership and three minor premierships with Pearce. We also played the GF in 2010 with Pearce. Dribblers

 

[Better_Dead_Than_Red]

If he dominated even one series I would come around.

But he's yet to have an above average game... he hasnt improved since his debut really.

That's is just a dumb comment. Do you watch football man?

 

[OldPanther]

Yeah that's why the Roosters have won a premiership and three minor premierships with Pearce. We also played the GF in 2010 with Pearce. Dribblers

Dribblers yet it been said a thousand times Pearce club form = good, Pearce origin form = bad.

 

[Nice Beaver]

For all those Pearce haters who would you have picked in the Blues halfback spot this year?

Discussed already.

Maloney in the 7 and Moylan or Bird in the 6.

 

[Danish]

That is a load of shit.

5 players in our current 17 played part in our 2014 series. Those players are Jarryd Hayne, Brett Morris, Josh Dugan, Aaron Woods and Boyd Cordner. They are series winners, something Pearce isn't.

Here's the other 12 players without a series win ranked in order of series played in:

Pearce - 6 series losses. 29.41% game win rate
Fifita - 3 series losses. 33.3% game win rate
Jackson - 3 series losses. 37.5% win rate
Ferguson - 2 series losses. 50% game win rate
Maloney - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Klemmer - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Tedesco - 1 series loss. 66.6% game win rate
Graham - 1 series loss. 66.6 game win rate
Frizzell - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Bird - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Peats - First series. 50% game win rate
Trbojevic - First series. 50% win rate

Of the players without a series win, he has twice as many series losses or more. He has the lowest win rate of all those players aswell.

That said there is one player with a series win who is technically worse statistically to Mitchell Pearce. Boyd Cordner played Game 3 2014 which was a loss, so he was part of that series but didn't actually contribute to winning it. Throw in the fact he has a 25% win rate at Origin level which is even worse than Mitchell Pearce and he is maybe as bad at Origin as Mitchell Pearce.

throwing up a bunch of

That is a load of shit.

5 players in our current 17 played part in our 2014 series. Those players are Jarryd Hayne, Brett Morris, Josh Dugan, Aaron Woods and Boyd Cordner. They are series winners, something Pearce isn't.

Here's the other 12 players without a series win ranked in order of series played in:

Pearce - 6 series losses. 29.41% game win rate
Fifita - 3 series losses. 33.3% game win rate
Jackson - 3 series losses. 37.5% win rate
Ferguson - 2 series losses. 50% game win rate
Maloney - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Klemmer - 2 series losses. 37.5% game win rate
Tedesco - 1 series loss. 66.6% game win rate
Graham - 1 series loss. 66.6 game win rate
Frizzell - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Bird - 1 series loss. 50% game win rate
Peats - First series. 50% game win rate
Trbojevic - First series. 50% win rate

Of the players without a series win, he has twice as many series losses or more. He has the lowest win rate of all those players aswell.

That said there is one player with a series win who is technically worse statistically to Mitchell Pearce. Boyd Cordner played Game 3 2014 which was a loss, so he was part of that series but didn't actually contribute to winning it. Throw in the fact he has a 25% win rate at Origin level which is even worse than Mitchell Pearce and he is maybe as bad at Origin as Mitchell Pearce.

Picking blokes with 3 or less games under their belt is not how you go about building a good statistical analysis, champ. Cherry picking only players without series wins is also facetious.

You have to compare him to other stalwarts of the team over the years and their winning percentages.

Jarryd Hayne - 40%
Aaron Woods - 38%
Michael Jennings - 38%
Paul Gallen - 37%
Robbie Farah - 37%
Josh Dugan - 36%
Greg Bird - 33%
Brett Morris - 28%
Kirt Gidley - 25%

Outside of Hayne, not a one of them has a record that put them in a position much different than Pearce i.e. losing every series they are involved in. The 2014 series was an statistical miracle for all of those men, particularly when you factor in that we couldn't score a point in that series (literally our worst attacking series in 20 years).

If you want to talk just halves over that same period... well the winning records get even worse, with the 4 other halves tried in the Pearce era (Wallace, Hodko, Mullen, Reynolds) averaging 27% victories.

The overall point being, NSW have simply been a worse football team across the park than QLD for a decade, largely due to the simple fact that QLD have had a far and away better core squad (who also rarely get injured) in that time.

If Pearce fails this series and we wind up losing, I am more than happy for him to be dumped from the team Kimmorley style and never have to bother with it again. Actually I'd have been more than happy for any of the other halves I mentioned to have been stuck carrying the burden of being flogged by several future immortals every year for the last 8 years. We'd probably have won another premiership without all the extra workload on Mitchell

 

[mxlegend99]

throwing up a bunch of


Picking blokes with 3 or less games under their belt is not how you go about building a good statistical analysis, champ. Cherry picking only players without series wins is also facetious.

Yeah putting up the stats for the current team is cherry picking them... because I picked this team afterall. .

Mitchell Pearce stands out as the worst in this team. He not only wins less than a third of his games, but he has a ZERO percent series win rate. 6 series losses. No series wins. There is no one in our team that is close to that bad outside of perhaps Boyd Cordner.

He is an Origin loser. He has lost 100% of the series he played in and has lost 71% of the games he played in. Even worse is he has more power over the teams results than most other players.

 

[mxlegend99]

Jarryd Hayne - 40% - series winner
Aaron Woods - 38% - series winner
Michael Jennings - 38% - series winner
Paul Gallen - 37% - series winner
Robbie Farah - 37% - series winner
Josh Dugan - 36% - series winner
Greg Bird - 33% - series winner
Brett Morris - 28% - series winner
Kirt Gidley - 25% - 5 series losses

The players you picked outside of Kurt Gidley are all series winners, and Kurt Gidley has only played part in 5 series losses... which is one seriess less than Pearce.

Anyone with a series win is automatically on a separate list to Pearce. Because their series success rate is above zero... winning a random game here and there counts for shit if you lose the series.

Pearce can only compare to other pplayers with a 100% series loss rate. Gidley is a good comparison. Although still lost less series than Pearce.

Pearce so far has more failures for no success than anyone mentioned.

 

[Danish]

Yeah putting up the stats for the current team is cherry picking them... because I picked this team afterall. .

No, picking players with only 2-3 games under their belt and trying to use such a tiny sample to show a winning or losing trend is stupid. If those players had been involved in as many games as Pearce, their winning records would wind up about the same (as is shown when looking at most of the other stalwarts of the squad).

Mitchell Pearce stands out as the worst in this team. He not only wins less than a third of his games, but he has a ZERO percent series win rate. 6 series losses. No series wins. There is no one in our team that is close to that bad outside of perhaps Boyd Cordner.

He is an Origin loser. He has lost 100% of the series he played in and has lost 71% of the games he played in. Even worse is he has more power over the teams results than most other players.

Pearce's record about perfectly reflects that of NSW in general over the last 12 series of QLD dominance. Since the big 4 era started in 06, NSW have won only 11 games in 35 attempts (31%). 5 of those wins are with Pearce, 6 are without. Of those 6 wins without Pearce, 3 of them were dead rubbers (with at least 1 coming after QLD spent the entire week partying and not giving a f**k), while Pearce has taken part in 0 dead rubber victories.

Its baffling that you think he is the linchpin to all of our woes given how we get consistently beaten with or without him in the side.

 

[Danish]

The players you picked outside of Kurt Gidley are all series winners, and Kurt Gidley has only played part in 5 series losses... which is one seriess less than Pearce.

Anyone with a series win is automatically on a separate list to Pearce. Because their series success rate is above zero... winning a random game here and there counts for shit if you lose the series.

Pearce can only compare to other pplayers with a 100% series loss rate. Gidley is a good comparison. Although still lost less series than Pearce.

Pearce so far has more failures for no success than anyone mentioned.

Why does a series win make any difference to a winning percentage?

If you want to get nit picky like that, perhaps we should take out dead rubber victories from players win records also?

 

[OldPanther]

Why does a series win make any difference to a winning percentage?

If you want to get nit picky like that, perhaps we should take out dead rubber victories from players win records also?

Series wins are the entire point though. It's what we all want from the players.

 

[Danish]

Series wins are the entire point though. It's what we all want from the players.

Then don't talk about game win percentage. They are 2 different stats and using one to dismiss the other to suit your argument is stupid.

The first point that was tried on was Pearce kills our point scorimg and that's why we won without him. Turned out that's complete crap since we scored less in 2014 than any other year this century.

Then we moved onto win percentage. Pearce definitely sucks in this area, but then again so do pretty much all NSW players who took part in origin from 06-17.

Now it's all about series wins, which again is fine, but again there are few players if any for NSW who actually have a good record in that area too.

Fact is, in 12 series we've won 6 games without Pearce and 5 games with. He has never had a great origin game to be sure, but there is no basis to believe that picking hoskinson, Mullen, Wallace, or any of the other dud half options that we've had over the years would have made an ounce of difference to our successes.

He's been unlucky enough to be the best of a very pedestrian generation of halves for NSW during a time when QLD has been overflowing with class across the board. Any half for NSW was pushing shit up hill during this period

 

[mxlegend99]

Why does a series win make any difference to a winning percentage?

If you want to get nit picky like that, perhaps we should take out dead rubber victories from players win records also?

Only a Mitchell Pearce fan would think series wins aren't important.

Deadset. Pearce has failed to win a series 100% of the time in the 6 series he has participated in. That's an entirely different level of failure compared to the likes of Hayne, Dugan, Gallen, Farah etc. who have proven they can be part of a winning series.

Find a player with as many or more series losses than Mitchell Pearce with no wins and I will agree he is not the worst player in the history of Origin. But if there is none, how can you argue he is not the worst ever? He would have failed more times than anyone without a series victory.

 

[mxlegend99]

Roosters fans... Pearce is just unlucky. Winning is out of the hands of a halfback....

Yep He's so unlucky that after every failed series it was his halves partner with a better win percantage than him that got dropped.

He was so unlucky to face an unbeatable team... meanwhile Knights reserve grader Trent Hodkinson managed to win a series against a QLD team with Inglis,Scott, Thurston, Boyd, Slater, Smith etc. in his first series.

Pearce is shit. Losing 6/6 series as the player with the most influence over the result is a sign of a bloke who just isnt good enough.

How can anyone ever become an Origin half when no one is given more than 3 games? No way any other half fails as often as him. That experience is what improves players. But no... lets just stick with a proven failure. Then make excuses for him.