Mega Thread #14 David Mackay - 14 possessions again

[Coopers]

Troll

He was being funny. Inappropriately, cos this is an incredibly serious forum for structured debate.

At best there was one player they could have brought in, and even he was a marginal selection at best. This year they have 3 players ready to go, plus Wigg, plus another 4-5 who have to be getting close. Big difference - and Mackay's future is looking much shakier as a result.

We also have a bucketload of early injuries, so Mackay will probably play anyway.

 

[Vader]

We also have a bucketload of early injuries, so Mackay will probably play anyway.

I have little doubt that he'll start the season in the AFL team, regardless of injuries. The question is how long he remains there.

It's looking unlikely that Sloane, Brouch, and Thompson will be available for R1, and Lyons was traded - so that's a minimum of 4 changes relative to our 2016 SF team. My guess is that Mackay will play, and we'll also see Milera, Knight, Hampton, and Wigg named in the R1 team as well. How long Mackay stays in the team may well depend on how quickly Thommo & Brouch return to action, and how well the other 4 players perform. It may also depend upon Seedsman's availability, noting that he will probably require several SANFL games before being promoted back to the AFL team.

 

[dogs105]

Mackay was on the fringe of the 22 last year, and was even dropped for one game (having spent several games in the SANFL in 2015). There just weren't any young players gunning for him last year. Milera was cooked by mid-season, Knight & Hampton were both injured, and the rest just weren't ready.

That equation changes dramatically this year. This year we have Milera, Hampton, Knight, Wigg, along with (less likely) Greenwood, Beech, Doedee, and Menzel. The first three players are all ready to go now, and there's a decent case to be made for Wigg as well.

Troll

Milera wasn't 'cooked'. What evidence do you have that he couldn't have been picked again after a spell in the SANFL?

 

[Vhaluus]

I asked one of the coaches tonight how Mackay keeps getting games.

He does lots of good things you may not notice that don't show up on the stat sheet.

What are they? Why don't they earn him any B&F votes?

We don't notice them either.

Then how do you know he's doing them?

He's played nearly 200 games. You don't play that much footy without learning a thing or two about how to play the game.

This is satire right? Its getting hard to tell

 

[billy fragos]

Milera wasn't 'cooked'. What evidence do you have that he couldn't have been picked again after a spell in the SANFL?

Maybe the fact that he was struggling to get 10 possessions per game in the sanfl at one point? 'cooked' or not Milera's form did not warrant a recall, especially considering we were 2nd place in the league for most of the year.

 

[Rear Admiral]

I had someone tell me some info on MacKay. If this turns out to be complete and utter horsesh*t....it's only what I was told. Not totally sure of the exact details, but something like he reached some Milestone (possibly 100 Games?)....without troubling or bothering the Umpires enough to rack up one, single, solitary Brownlow Vote. Not one. Couldn't have bribed the Umpires into giving him one. Nil, nada, zip, zero.

 

[Rear Admiral]

This thread is ridiculous. Relative to how most of the good players played, he played well. Players have to come in and take his spot and they haven't. There is an element of him not getting dropped and giving others an opportunity last season. But that argument applies to plenty of other blokes too - e.g., McGovern, Atkins, Douglas, Thommo, Seeds and even Smith.

I don't want him to be best 22 this season either. But I want the reason for that to be that other players have improved and taken his spot. Up until now there are not players that have proven themselves as warranting his spot. There were players playing last night that should be eyeing his spot and none of them owned it. So why not have a thread criticizing them on why they aren't performing indisputably better than Mackay yet.

I understand your comments, and absolutely no offence meat. Not talking about MacKay here....but any longterm/senior player -

If you're going to bring in Rookies, very rarely are they going to be racking up 3 Brownlow Votes per game in their first few games, and often they may not seem an instant improvement over the senior player they're replacing. This was Neil Craig's expectation of young players....pure idiocy. And that's the whole point - Rookies need a decent string of games to prove themselves, and ultimately the only way they can improve is on the big stage. Of course you don't bring in a newly Drafted 18-19 year old Rookie and immediately play him in the senior side - that's stupid. But once a Rookie has spent a year in the SANFL and the weights room, you make an assessment on the Rookie's longterm potential upside -vs- the overall, longterm performance of the veteran he's likely to replace. Not necessarily how they compare in any one specific game at that time. And this (in my opinion) is one of the reasons why Craig and Trigg are now gone (Lord hear our Prayer).
You don't wait until a veteran is so passed-it they can barely lace up their own boots or not take a p*ss without a walking frame. Or be scared of their own shadow.
You need to pull the trigger before that point.

 

[the universal]

I had someone tell me some info on MacKay. If this turns out to be complete and utter horsesh*t....it's only what I was told. Not totally sure of the exact details, but something like he reached some Milestone (possibly 100 Games?)....without troubling or bothering the Umpires enough to rack up one, single, solitary Brownlow Vote. Not one. Couldn't have bribed the Umpires into giving him one. Nil, nada, zip, zero.

You don't need someone to 'tell' you this, I think this sort of information is readily available online - and it's not exactly a secret that Mackay has only polled once in his career (in 2015).

 

[Rear Admiral]

You don't need someone to 'tell' you this, I think this sort of information is readily available online

I didn't know if/where it was available online, and I wasn't looking up any of this sorta info myself. Nor did I ask about it.
Like I said, it was just something I was told - no more, no less.

 

[1970crow]

I have little doubt that he'll start the season in the AFL team, regardless of injuries. The question is how long he remains there.

It's looking unlikely that Sloane, Brouch, and Thompson will be available for R1, and Lyons was traded - so that's a minimum of 4 changes relative to our 2016 SF team. My guess is that Mackay will play, and we'll also see Milera, Knight, Hampton, and Wigg named in the R1 team as well. How long Mackay stays in the team may well depend on how quickly Thommo & Brouch return to action, and how well the other 4 players perform. It may also depend upon Seedsman's availability, noting that he will probably require several SANFL games before being promoted back to the AFL team.

This year's injuries haven't been to Dmac's natural competition. The only way he plays round 1 is as a ball winning inside midfielder that we're hoping to get 17 touches from 80% TOG. He's been blessed, but he's not that blessed.

 

[Shaz2012]

I understand your comments, and absolutely no offence meat. Not talking about MacKay here....but any longterm/senior player -

If you're going to bring in Rookies, very rarely are they going to be racking up 3 Brownlow Votes per game in their first few games, and often they may not seem an instant improvement over the senior player they're replacing. This was Neil Craig's expectation of young players....pure idiocy. And that's the whole point - Rookies need a decent string of games to prove themselves, and ultimately the only way they can improve is on the big stage. Of course you don't bring in a newly Drafted 18-19 year old Rookie and immediately play him in the senior side - that's stupid. But once a Rookie has spent a year in the SANFL and the weights room, you make an assessment on the Rookie's longterm potential upside -vs- the overall, longterm performance of the veteran he's likely to replace. Not necessarily how they compare in any one specific game at that time. And this (in my opinion) is one of the reasons why Craig and Trigg are now gone (Lord hear our Prayer).
You don't wait until a veteran is so passed-it they can barely lace up their own boots or not take a p*ss without a walking frame. Or be scared of their own shadow.
You need to pull the trigger before that point.

No offense taken mate. I agree with you to a large extent. There were plenty of times throughout the season when we were coming up against soft opponents, particularly at home when we could have really given a few chances to a some blokes while giving others a much needed rest or a kick up the arse by sending them back to the twos.

But, my point was that blokes that come in have to truly take their opportunity and they havent. We saw that with CEY in his 2 games (the poor bloke). While he did ok and slotted a couple of nice goals, we needed him to come in and be a contested bull if he was to take Thommo's spot who was begging for someone to take it.

My issue with Mackay is that he is medium. Medium isn't actually poor. He does do some nice things in a game. He burns it as much as anyone else, he is no more a liability than many guys that get a free pass week in, week out in that respect. He just doesnt stay in the game long enough. He is also a bit of a push over, so at times when you need somebody to make a contest he isnt up to it. All these are definite grounds to bring in someone better and I agree with your point that he should have been dropped several times to give someone a go. But, when the next guy comes in, he has to show he is at least as good as Mackay and I think blokes on the fringes have failed to do that. We saw that with Hendo. And (I am sure this will be heavily disputed on this board), but there were games when Mackay was more useful than Seedsman. He also was better than Milera for the last few games of his 8 game stint. So, there is a decision to make when you are competing in a hot race for top 4 where you are in it up to your eyeballs but so are 6 or 7 other teams. You cant afford to drop points.

Personally, I would have picked both Hendo and Seeds over Mackay late last season, but Hendo is even more of a risk with his disposal and I recall Seeds was injured. I think it would have been too big a risk to bring back Milera. I would have loved to have seen Hampton, but his form in the SANFL wasnt dominating either and so I can understand the decision that it was again too big a risk with what was at stake. Same goes for others like Beech late in the season.

The problem last season is that Mackay was actually good (very good even) early last season. Then due to injuries and not enough form in the SANFL there was no clear cut (indisputable) choice to bring in when his form dropped. Same went for Douglas and Thommo and possibly Sauce and JJ. There was a risk either way in all of those cases and who is to say in the alternative universe where BF got all its wishes come true that we would have done any better. I think we got as far as we could have personally and it wasn't because of Mackay.

I am actually not a big Mackay fan, but I respect him because he is one of us and I think that there is no perspective when it comes to him on BF.

 

[jirkago]

The biggest misconception about Mackay is he is fast. When was the last time u saw him burn of a player?
He never uses his pace. If everybody thought he has no pace, we would thing he is average.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Godallblighty]

No offense taken mate. I agree with you to a large extent. There were plenty of times throughout the season when we were coming up against soft opponents, particularly at home when we could have really given a few chances to a some blokes while giving others a much needed rest or a kick up the arse by sending them back to the twos.

But, my point was that blokes that come in have to truly take their opportunity and they havent. We saw that with CEY in his 2 games (the poor bloke). While he did ok and slotted a couple of nice goals, we needed him to come in and be a contested bull if he was to take Thommo's spot who was begging for someone to take it.

My issue with Mackay is that he is medium. Medium isn't actually poor. He does do some nice things in a game. He burns it as much as anyone else, he is no more a liability than many guys that get a free pass week in, week out in that respect. He just doesnt stay in the game long enough. He is also a bit of a push over, so at times when you need somebody to make a contest he isnt up to it. All these are definite grounds to bring in someone better and I agree with your point that he should have been dropped several times to give someone a go. But, when the next guy comes in, he has to show he is at least as good as Mackay and I think blokes on the fringes have failed to do that. We saw that with Hendo. And (I am sure this will be heavily disputed on this board), but there were games when Mackay was more useful than Seedsman. He also was better than Milera for the last few games of his 8 game stint. So, there is a decision to make when you are competing in a hot race for top 4 where you are in it up to your eyeballs but so are 6 or 7 other teams. You cant afford to drop points.

Personally, I would have picked both Hendo and Seeds over Mackay late last season, but Hendo is even more of a risk with his disposal and I recall Seeds was injured. I think it would have been too big a risk to bring back Milera. I would have loved to have seen Hampton, but his form in the SANFL wasnt dominating either and so I can understand the decision that it was again too big a risk with what was at stake. Same goes for others like Beech late in the season.

The problem last season is that Mackay was actually good (very good even) early last season. Then due to injuries and not enough form in the SANFL there was no clear cut (indisputable) choice to bring in when his form dropped. Same went for Douglas and Thommo and possibly Sauce and JJ. There was a risk either way in all of those cases and who is to say in the alternative universe where BF got all its wishes come true that we would have done any better. I think we got as far as we could have personally and it wasn't because of Mackay.

I am actually not a big Mackay fan, but I respect him because he is one of us and I think that there is no perspective when it comes to him on BF.

Come on, Mackay was not 'actually good (very good even)' at any time last year. At his best he was 'not bad'. And as for 'Hendo is even more of a risk with his disposal'...what? Hendo's disposal was far superior to Mackay.

I am not a Mackay hater. I don't believe that everyone in the team needs to be a bloody legend. There are foot soldiers in every premiership side. But his contribution as a senior player is so underwhelming so often, it makes no sense to me not to have tried other players in his position before now. While Hendo was not without his failings, I would have played him over Mackay at every opportunity.

 

[Vader]

Come on, Mackay was not 'actually good (very good even)' at any time last year. At his best he was 'not bad'. And as for 'Hendo is even more of a risk with his disposal'...what? Hendo's disposal was far superior to Mackay.

Bolded bit is just not true at all. On average, he was "not bad", but he did have some games where he was much better than that.

 

[Godallblighty]

Bolded bit is just not true at all. On average, he was "not bad", but he did have some games where he was much better than that.

Which games?

 

[Vader]

Which games?

Based on the B&F voting...
R2 (vs Port) - 13 votes
R5 (vs Hawthorn) - 10 votes
R6 (vs Fremantle) - 11 votes
EF (vs North) - 11 votes

Over the course of the season he only averaged 6.2 per game, but he did have some games which were much, much better than that.

 

[dogs105]

Based on the B&F voting...
R2 (vs Port) - 13 votes
R5 (vs Hawthorn) - 10 votes
R6 (vs Fremantle) - 11 votes
EF (vs North) - 11 votes

Over the course of the season he only averaged 6.2 per game, but he did have some games which were much, much better than that.

How many coaches give how many votes? What is standard for "played his role"? Ta.

 

[Vader]

How many coaches give how many votes? What is standard for "played his role"? Ta.

5 coaches give votes.

Votes are defined as follows:
Club Champion Voting Protocol
1 vote – Played his role. Beat his man.
2 votes – Played his role. Beat his man – added to our team offence or defence.
3 votes – Played his role. Beat his man – added to both our team offence and defence.
4 votes – Major contributor. Dominated either offensively or defensively.
5 votes – Best on ground performance – elite impact on game.
http://www.afc.com.au/news/2015-09-26/dangerfield-wins-malcolm-blight-medal

Note that I only listed games where Mackay received 10+ votes.

 

[Scorpus]

How many coaches give how many votes? What is standard for "played his role"? Ta.

The maximum amount of votes is 20. Each of the 5 coaches would need to give a score of 4.

Club Champion Voting Protocol
1 vote: Played their role. Solid game without significant influence on the game
2 votes: Played his role well and influenced the game
3 votes: Played his role very well with significant influence on the game
4 votes: Played his role outstandingly and dominated the game

So a 13 would be a mix of 2s and 3s. An 11 would be mostly 2s but one 3.

In the four games Vader cited Mackay was:

R2 (vs Port) - 13 votes - 5th best
R5 (vs Hawthorn) - 10 votes - 5th best
R6 (vs Fremantle) - 11 votes - 7th best
EF (vs North) - 11 votes - 8th best

 

[Vader]

The maximum amount of votes is 20. Each of the 5 coaches would need to give a score of 4.

Club Champion Voting Protocol
1 vote: Played their role. Solid game without significant influence on the game
2 votes: Played his role well and influenced the game
3 votes: Played his role very well with significant influence on the game
4 votes: Played his role outstandingly and dominated the game

So a 13 would be a mix of 2s and 3s. An 11 would be mostly 2s but one 3.

Think you've found an old voting protocol. The current protocol has a maximum of 5 votes per coach.

 

[Scorpus]

Think you've found an old voting protocol. The current protocol has a maximum of 5 votes per coach.

Nope. Current protocol is up to 4 votes across 5 coaches (I assume the coaches are Pyke, Campo, Pods, Clarke and Teague)

http://www.afc.com.au/news/2016-09-23/more-glory-for-rory

 

[Vader]

Nope. Current protocol is up to 4 votes across 5 coaches (I assume the coaches are Pyke, Campo, Pods, Clarke and Teague)

http://www.afc.com.au/news/2016-09-23/more-glory-for-rory

My apologies - wasn't aware they'd changed the system from 2015 to 2016.

 

[Scorpus]

Interestingly, Mackay had 7 games where he polled less than or equal to 4 votes. In other words, in those games, at best one coach thought he didn't play his role. He also had two games where he polled 0 votes.

So in 2016, Mackay played 19 matches. In 37% of those games, at least one coach thought he didn't play his role.

 

[dogs105]

Interestingly, Mackay had 7 games where he polled less than or equal to 4 votes. In other words, in those games, at best one coach thought he didn't play his role. He also had two games where he polled 0 votes.

So in 2016, Mackay played 19 matches. In 37% of those games, at least one coach thought he didn't play his role.

Probably why he got dropped. I reckon he came back too soon too.

 

[1970crow]

The biggest misconception about Mackay is he is fast. When was the last time u saw him burn of a player?
He never uses his pace. If everybody thought he has no pace, we would thing he is average.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app

How often do we see him running behind not fast opponents and fail to catch them. He remains a couple of metres away, far enough away to not impact their disposal, but close enough to clock up a pressure act. He's absolutely not fast in any sense of the word.