My name geoff
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2015
- 4,523
- 6,097
- AFL Club
- Carlton
2017 Rising Star Discussion
- Thread starter eDPS
- Start date
- Tagged users None
KermitJagger
Professional Thread Derailer
- May 17, 2017
- 16,412
- 53,871
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Shame he's made no real progress since.
Dennis Trumpet
Toot Toot
Found this pearler from the afl website
Ashley Browne
5. Ryan Burton (Haw)
4. Andrew McGrath (Ess)
3. Charlie Curnow (Carl)
2. Sam Powell-Pepper (PA)
1. Eric Hipwood (BL)
Why he should win: Burton was the best and most consistent defender all year for the season in a team that won 10 and a half games. Not sure he will win, though. The Essendon mafia in the media have been lobbying hard for McGrath, who had a fine year, but unlike Burton, needed to be 'managed' at various stages. Hope the judges remember that.
Big mistake there by Ashley Browne. Now Timmy Watsons going to have to stop by his house tomorrow morning and break his legs.
Ashley Browne
5. Ryan Burton (Haw)
4. Andrew McGrath (Ess)
3. Charlie Curnow (Carl)
2. Sam Powell-Pepper (PA)
1. Eric Hipwood (BL)
Why he should win: Burton was the best and most consistent defender all year for the season in a team that won 10 and a half games. Not sure he will win, though. The Essendon mafia in the media have been lobbying hard for McGrath, who had a fine year, but unlike Burton, needed to be 'managed' at various stages. Hope the judges remember that.
Big mistake there by Ashley Browne. Now Timmy Watsons going to have to stop by his house tomorrow morning and break his legs.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,647
- 43,798
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
That's quite funny. BF hysteria (which Im happy to say Ive been fuelling) making it to "almost legitimate" media.
As for Darling, he managed 24 goals in his Rising Star year. Just a little bit over half of what Hogan managed. So Im not sure about the comparison.
That said, there is a Coach award for the "Best young player" which is for up to 2 years of football. But Darling didnt win that either. Cyril did. O'Meara too.
I'm not even sure what relevance this has? McGrath and Burton both played the same amount of games....
HeHateMe
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 28, 2009
- 8,065
- 6,829
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
RIP Ashley Browne
hilarious. The idea that the judges should remember McGrath being 'managed' (what exactly does he mean by the inverted commas anyway?) is about as relevant as the judges remembering that Burton is a second year player with a more mature body that naturally requires less 'management'.
IE: not even remotely relevant
- May 28, 2013
- 25,997
- 28,289
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Seattle Seahawks
Coleman kicked 100 in his first year - kicking 100 in your first year is still unprecedented.
it is simply baffling that you can look at that and, despite the fact they play in different roles for different teams, with a straight face say that proves Burton has been better.
Make of it what you will......Bias aside, Burton's got it just over McGrath.
Pretty much all of the stats are so close as for it to be ridiculous to call them definitively, either way. And any of the ones that are more towards one player or the other are easily explained by the simple fact they do play different roles.
What the heck are you pointing at? The:
- 0.7 of a disposal per game extra?
- 0.3 more of a tackle each game?
- 0.7 more of an uncontested disposal per game? Overlooking the equally stunning 0.2 contested possession deficit?
- 0.3 more of a contested mark?
- 0.2 more of a scoring involvement?
Or perhaps you think the metres gained differential is significant? Or that Burton has 1.7 more marks per game on average? That would be like me trying to say that McGrath has less clangers, less turnovers and a better disposal efficiency, whilst completely neglecting to consider that Burton kicks it more and so is more likely to have those stats. It's all role-based differences.
Bias aside? Yeah I don't think so
it is simply baffling that you can look at that and, despite the fact they play in different roles for different teams, with a straight face say that proves Burton has been better.
Pretty much all of the stats are so close as for it to be ridiculous to call them definitively, either way. And any of the ones that are more towards one player or the other are easily explained by the simple fact they do play different roles.
What the heck are you pointing at? The:
- 0.7 of a disposal per game extra?
- 0.3 more of a tackle each game?
- 0.7 more of an uncontested disposal per game? Overlooking the equally stunning 0.2 contested possession deficit?
- 0.3 more of a contested mark?
- 0.2 more of a scoring involvement?
Or perhaps you think the metres gained differential is significant? Or that Burton has 1.7 more marks per game on average? That would be like me trying to say that McGrath has less clangers, less turnovers and a better disposal efficiency, whilst completely neglecting to consider that Burton kicks it more and so is more likely to have those stats. It's all role-based differences.
Bias aside? Yeah I don't think so
Whether you like it or not, roles aside....Burton's stats are slightly better. It what it is.
Dennis Trumpet
Toot Toot
Whether you like it or not, roles aside....Burton's stats are slightly better. It what it is.
So his extra 1.7 disposals each game which result in 1.7 more turnovers makes him better than mcgrath?
not only is it hilarious that you are clearly just counting the bold numbers and declaring Burton to have had the better season in the absence of any context, even doing that describing Burton's advantage as "slight" is so barely sufficient as to be utterly nonsensical.Whether you like it or not, roles aside....Burton's stats are slightly better. It what it is.
Out of the areas Burton leads, that are POSITIVE stats (ie, counting a lead in clangers and turnovers etc as being negative despite being bold, and ignoring Time on ground as being any measure of who is better) the lead Burton has over McGrath on those figures is, wait for it...
13 to 11
Oh yeah man, call the competition off, Burton is slightly better in just 2 of 30 statistical measures!!! Wowee!! It is what it is!!
He means that McGrath had two stinkers and was dropped but they called it managed
Thank- you for reiterating my point. 13-11, Burton marginally better, we can go all day regarding roles, but the fact remains the stats point in Burton's direction.
So his extra 1.7 disposals each game which result in 1.7 more turnovers makes him better than mcgrath?
Handball to kick ratio.....kicks are more prone to error.
He would be wrong there as McGrath was first rested after the round 6 Melbourne game in which he got 23 disposals and a goal. He was one of our best.
There were a few laughs in that article. I liked this quote from Michael Whiting:
"fitted into Essendon's team like a seasoned campaigner"
I'm sure being a campaigner would help you fit into any Essendon team.
Last edited:
Well that is largely because a lot of the very close stats where they were pretty hard to separate (stuff like 0.6 versus 0.7 went in McGrath's favour).
If you look at the positive stats that were won by more than 0.2 by either player, and ignore those that had a 0.2 or smaller difference, then Burton dominates the stats 11-4. Or put another way, McGrath edged Burton by very small margins in a number of stats, but Burton dominated McGrath in quite a few more than McGrath dominated Burton.
In any case, I think only looking at positive stats is being generous to Burton. McGrath should probably have wins for a few of the negative stats (namely Frees against, Clangers and Turnovers), making it a bit closer after removing line ball stats at 11-7 (I didn't give extra ToG as a win to Burton, as I figured it was largely neutral - it means Burton had a chance to accumulate more stats, but it also means McGrath had to have his game time managed more).
I think those negative stats of Clangers and Turnovers are pretty easy to explain when you look at Burton having more than 50% more kicks than McGrath. Clearing the ball out of defence by kicking to a one-on-one is going to create a few turnovers when the opposition wins the one-on-one compared to a handball to a team mate standing a few metres away (probably reflected positively for Burton in his massive metres gained advantage). Anyway , I'm sure you could explain a number of stats McGrath lost in terms of role differences too.
- Mar 2, 2015
- 19,401
- 35,170
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
How about we peruse the "Player of the Year" votes from the club boards?
Both use the same 5-4-3-2-1 method.
Essington
40 - Michael Hurley
40 - Zach Merrett
32 - Dyson Heppell
29 - David Zaharakis
24 - Brendon Goddard
23 - Joe Daniher
21 - Orazio Fantasia
19 - Andrew McGrath
15 - Anthony Tipungwuti
13 - Cale Hooker
Hawthorne
80 - Tom Mitchell
38 - Ben McEvoy
37 - Ryan Burton
23 - James Sicily
20 - Shaun Burgoyne
19 - Jack Gunston
18 - Jarryd Roughead
14 - Isaac Smith
13 - Liam Shiels
11 - Luke Breust, Luke Hodge
Burton (along with Mitchell) was one of Hawthorn's few good players during their woeful 1-6 start
Side note: Those votes above also highlight how Joe Daniher's season has been overrated in terms of whether he deserves All Australian selection. Hardly a dominant season by him to be in 6th place behind Goddard, Heppell and Zaharakis. The Essendon mafia has been working long and hard to ensure his name is placed up there alongside the 2 best KPFs: Franklin and Kennedy
Last edited:
- Mar 2, 2015
- 19,401
- 35,170
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Hahahahaha
You're acting as though the Bombers are premiership contenders. It's not as though the Hawks were a bottom four team either. Not a whole difference between our sides this season. Just 1.5 wins. I wouldn't beat my chest about finishing 7th, for christ's sakes... We're both middle-of-the-road teams.
Essendon 12-10
Hawthorn 10-11-1
We f**ked our chances with the terrible start.
Here's the ladder from Round 5 to 23
- Sydney 14-4
- Port Adelaide 12-6
- GWS Giants 11-5-2
- Adelaide 11-6-1
- Geelong 11-6-1
- Richmond 11-7
- Hawthorn 10-7-1
- Essendon 10-8
- Melbourne 10-8
- West Coast 9-9
- St Kilda 9-9
- Collingwood 8-9-1
- W.Bulldogs 8-10
- North Melb 6-12
- Fremantle 6-12
- Carlton 5-13
- Gold Coast 4-14
- Brisbane 4-14
Two horse race between McGrath and Burton.
Happy to have Curnow, though, he could be anything.
Happy to have Curnow, though, he could be anything.
The fact that Daniher only got 23 votes (having kicked 62 goals - while spending a decent amount of time in the ruck) and Burton got 37 votes on the equivalent rankings for Hawks just shows how poor the Hawks actually were this year. Not hard to be placing top 5 each week when you have one great player in Tom Mitchell and not much else. Well they do have 34 year old Burgoyne - he's still pretty good, albeit no longer in his prime.
You only have to look at how many votes Mitchell got relative to everyone else to realise how difficult it was to finish top 5 each week at the Hawks (not very). I mean Mitchell had a great year - and will be a deserved AA but he's not Dustin Martin or Dangerfield good. 80 votes is pretty funny. The enormous gulf between him and the rest of the list just shows a thin list with few reliable performers.
I mean Sicily had as many votes as Daniher. That is hilarious!!!
By all means Hawks supporters - go start the poll. Who had the better 2017: Daniher vs Sicily
