Analysis 2023 All Australian Team Awards Night

Remove this Banner Ad

The 747 said:
Thank you, Sorry I don't agree team success is irrelevant. One player is the best player in a team that wins 16 and a row and the flag. That would suggest that this player played well to me. That is very different from being a standout player in a bottom 8 team.

I don't know why Stewart was picked and Sicily wasn't but if I had the choice I would pick them both in the team. If Stewart played for the Hawks do you think he would play VFL while Sicily is in the team?

What this is, and has always been, is just another thing for bitter tinfoil hat Hawks supporters to complain about for years. Because Geelong and the illumunati etc etc. And still nearly a year later they can't let it go.
Click to expand...
I'd like to critique some of the points made here please....

Firstly,...
What this is, and has always been, is just another thing for bitter tinfoil hat Hawks supporters to complain about for years. Because Geelong and the illumunati etc etc. And still nearly a year later they can't let it go.
Click to expand...

This is very unfair. Have you been reading the thread? I posted about James Sicily's performance in 2023. No mention of 2022 and definately no mention of Stewart whatsoever. A Geelong supporter replied with snide remarks about whether Geelong supporters should "cry" if Sicily gets named this year and Stewart doesn't (you know, given Sicily has effectively played 1 less game compared to effectively 6 less by Stewart last year). He then went on to post a series of factually incorrect reasons for Stewart being better las year (defends more, spoils more, rebounds more, etc). "Bitter Hawthorn supporters" didn't raise it at all.

What makes this call worse is mentions of "tin foil hats" and "illuminati". No one has mentioned illuminati or conspiracies at all. This portrays the argument that Sicily was unlucky last year as "crazy" when you well know it was anything but. What is especially galling about reframing the argument as "having always been this way" (i.e. crazy conspiracy believeeing Hawthorn supporters) is that the posts you have been responding to have all been neutral supporters. So no, it has nothing to do with crazy biased supporrts whatsoever and I think you know that.

Thank you, Sorry I don't agree team success is irrelevant. One player is the best player in a team that wins 16 and a row and the flag. That would suggest that this player played well to me. That is very different from being a standout player in a bottom 8 team.
Click to expand...

With the first part, I don't think there is much evidence to suggest he was the best player in the best team at all. ON what basis is that claim made? He finished 9th in the best and fairest. He wasn't even in the top 2 defenders in the B&F. He did not come close to earning the most coaches votes either. Cameron and Blicavs were both top 10 in that award and Stewart was nowhere near the leaderboard. Teams also nominate 3 players as their MVP and Stewart was not one of them. He did not finish top 3 for Geelong in any media based award either. Is everyone - including all the Geelong coaches and staff - wrong? I also disagree that team success should play much of a part. AA is not a measure of how good your teammates are. Particularly if a player misses effectively 30% of the season and the team is UNDEFEATED in that time. That tells me their success is not reliant on that player. This is further underscored by the fact that Geelong won the flag in a canter and I don't think Stewart earnt a single Norm Smith vote or Gary Ayers vote. Of course, that's not to suggest Stewart isn't important to Geelong (of course he is) but it obviously highlights that their high performance was not hugely reliant upon him, so using team succes to override all individual indicators is not a sound process in my view.

Finally, I wanted to highlight more generally that 'being a standout in a bad team' is easier 'than being very good in a good team' is one of the biggest furphies in football. Since the league became the AFL 30+ years ago, you want to guess how many Brownlow winners have come from bottom 4 teams? 0 - that's right, not a single one (with the vast majority coming from top 4 teams). What about Coaches award winners? Ablett Jnr is the only one to have ever come from a bottom 4 team (in his best season). Same story for MVP winners. What about AA? Completely dominated by teams at the top of the ladder. IN fact, if you look at the 'career best season' of AFL fooballers, 95+% of players best year coincides to when the team was playing well. Why? Because it is in fact much EASIER to be both be playing well and recognised as such, when the team is going well and incredibly difficult to standout (from aleague perspective) when the team is struggling.

With all that said, I abosultely rate Stewart (and believe he is deserving of multiple AA's). I don't care that he was selected in 2022 but am disappointed that Sicily was not (again). I also think Stewart was very fortunate to be selected last year given he effectively missed 30% of the season. Typically for a player to be selected after missing that much football, they need to be clearly head and shoulders above everyone else in their position (only Franklin at his best, Ablett Jnr at his best and Stevie J in his crazy year have ever been selected after missing 5 games, when they were miles clear of their competitors when on the park). The standard for defenders last year was very high and Stewart was not clearly better than his competitors at all. IN fact, his average performacne was probably slightly less than others who played every game (including Sicily). I think selectors feel the pressure to select more players from dominant teams or else they are relentlessly criticised for having no idea, with "X team finished 3 games clear on top, how can they have less AA than X team - the selectors have no clue". This doesn't just apply to Stewart either. Tom Papley, for example, made the squad last year and I am certain he would not be picked if not for Sydney finishing top 4 and having a lack of candidates. Papley missed 6 games and finished 39th! in the COleman as an exclusive small forward. He averaged 15 touches and less than 2 tackles. A lot of small forwards missed out that kicked a lot more goals, more of the ball, etc.

So no, not some kind of illuminati anti Hawks, pro Geelong conspiracy. Just an error in my view and one made with too significant a focus (in general) on the ladder position of the team they play for.
 
Last edited:
Shadow89 said:
Not sure this is the argument you think it is. If it was, Sicily and co. would be playing off in a Grand Final this year...

This is coming from someone who thinks Sic is a lock for AA, as well.
Click to expand...

Episode 5 Reaction GIF by The Office
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The Cryptkeeper said:
Episode 5 Reaction GIF by The Office
Click to expand...

You're using GAS in the 1989 GF who basically played a lone role on the day, and couldn't get us over the line - to illustrate that AFL isn't like NBA, and one or two players can't get it done alone. You're using this is a demonstration that Sicily is an elite player, but doesn't have the cattle alongside him - so can't win a game himself, like Jordan, Bryant, Lebron, Curry etc. in the NBA.

Why I said this argument doesn't work, is because it vastly undersells his year. If you're using that as a metric, then you're saying 'Sic is having an amazing year and is carrying the team...all the way to 16th.'

That's why I said it's not the argument you think it is.
 
Guardian Hawk said:
I'd like to critique some of the points made here please....

Firstly,...


This is very unfair. Have you been reading the thread? I posted about James Sicily's performance in 2023. No mention of 2022 and definately no mention of Stewart whatsoever. A Geelong supporter replied with snide remarks about whether Geelong supporters should "cry" if Sicily gets named this year and Stewart doesn't (you know, given Sicily has effectively played 1 less game compared to effectively 6 less by Stewart last year). He then went on to post a series of factually incorrect reasons for Stewart being better las year (defends more, spoils more, rebounds more, etc). "Bitter Hawthorn supporters" didn't raise it at all.

What makes this call worse is mentions of "tin foil hats" and "illuminati". No one has mentioned illuminati or conspiracies at all. This portrays the argument that Sicily was unlucky last year as "crazy" when you well know it was anything but. What is especially galling about reframing the argument as "having always been this way" (i.e. crazy conspiracy believeeing Hawthorn supporters) is that the posts you have been responding to have all been neutral supporters. So no, it has nothing to do with crazy biased supporrts whatsoever and I think you know that.



With the first part, I don't think there is much evidence to suggest he was the best player in the best team at all. ON what basis is that claim made? He finished 9th in the best and fairest. He wasn't even in the top 2 defenders in the B&F. He did not come close to earning the most coaches votes either. Cameron and Blicavs were both top 10 in that award and Stewart was nowhere near the leaderboard. Teams also nominate 3 players as their MVP and Stewart was not one of them. He did not finish top 3 for Geelong in any media based award either. Is everyone - including all the Geelong coaches and staff - wrong? I also disagree that team success should play much of a part. AA is not a measure of how good your teammates are. Particularly if a player misses effectively 30% of the season and the team is UNDEFEATED in that time. That tells me their success is not reliant on that player. This is further underscored by the fact that Geelong won the flag in a canter and I don't think Stewart earnt a single Norm Smith vote or Gary Ayers vote. Of course, that's not to suggest Stewart isn't important to Geelong (of course he is) but it obviously highlights that their high performance was not hugely reliant upon him, so using team succes to override all individual indicators is not a sound process in my view.

Finally, I wanted to highlight more generally that 'being a standout in a bad team' is easier 'than being very good in a good team' is one of the biggest furphies in football. Since the league became the AFL 30+ years ago, you want to guess how many Brownlow winners have come from bottom 4 teams? 0 - that's right, not a single one (with the vast majority coming from top 4 teams). What about Coaches award winners? Ablett Jnr is the only one to have ever come from a bottom 4 team (in his best season). Same story for MVP winners. What about AA? Completely dominated by teams at the top of the ladder. IN fact, if you look at the 'career best season' of AFL fooballers, 95+% of players best year coincides to when the team was playing well. Why? Because it is in fact much EASIER to be both be playing well and recognised as such, when the team is going well and incredibly difficult to standout (from aleague perspective) when the team is struggling.

With all that said, I abosultely rate Stewart (and believe he is deserving of multiple AA's). I don't care that he was selected in 2022 but am disappointed that Sicily was not (again). I also think Stewart was very fortunate to be selected last year given he effectively missed 30% of the season. Typically for a player to be selected after missing that much football, they need to be clearly head and shoulders above everyone else in their position (only Franklin at his best, Ablett Jnr at his best and Stevie J in his crazy year have ever been selected after missing 5 games, when they were miles clear of their competitors when on the park). The standard for defenders last year was very high and Stewart was not clearly better than his competitors at all. IN fact, his average performacne was probably slightly less than others who played every game (including Sicily). I think selectors feel the pressure to select more players from dominant teams or else they are relentlessly criticised for having no idea, with "X team finished 3 games clear on top, how can they have less AA than X team - the selectors have no clue". This doesn't just apply to Stewart either. Tom Papley, for example, made the squad last year and I am certain he would not be picked if not for Sydney finishing top 4 and having a lack of candidates. Papley missed 6 games and finished 39th! in the COleman as an exclusive small forward. He averaged 15 touches and less than 2 tackles. A lot of small forwards missed out that kicked a lot more goals, more of the ball, etc.

So no, not some kind of illuminati anti Hawks, pro Geelong conspiracy. Just an error in my view and one made with too significant a focus (in general) on the ladder position of the team they play for.
Click to expand...
Why did you round 23% up to 30?
 
Mr Meow said:
Why did you round 23% up to 30?
Click to expand...

I didn't. If you look at my earlier posts, I highlighted that he 'effectively' missed 6 games as he was injured and subbed out of another game in the first quarter. 6/22 games is 27% which I have rounded to 30. That's not counting Round 2 where he picked up a knock and spent nearly half the game on the bench.

However, the exact percentage is not really the point. I already highlighted that I think only 3 players have ever made it missing 5 games - Franklin when he nearly won the Coleman anyway and was easily the best CHF, Ablett Jnr in his freakiest year and that crazy good season from Stevie J. Stewart was not at that level IMO - and that's not counting the '6th game missed' (or the quiet ones when he was assigned a stopper).
 
Shadow89 said:
You're using GAS in the 1989 GF who basically played a lone role on the day, and couldn't get us over the line - to illustrate that AFL isn't like NBA, and one or two players can't get it done alone. You're using this is a demonstration that Sicily is an elite player, but doesn't have the cattle alongside him - so can't win a game himself, like Jordan, Bryant, Lebron, Curry etc. in the NBA.

Why I said this argument doesn't work, is because it vastly undersells his year. If you're using that as a metric, then you're saying 'Sic is having an amazing year and is carrying the team...all the way to 16th.'

That's why I said it's not the argument you think it is.
Click to expand...

I'm not using anything mate...you were responding to someone else. I am just querying that response.

The counter argument that has been put forward in here (not by you) is that Sicily can't be that good because his team is 16th. My rebuttal to that was about GAJ and questioning whether he became a lesser player once he moved to GC. By extension my argument is that team success is irrelevant. A great player is a great player.

The suggestion made in here that Tom Stewart was the best player in the best team, hence he beat Sicily to the AA jumper last year is a nonsense and has been exposed pretty badly. FWIW I would have picked Sicily first and probably found a spot for Stewart but he did miss a lot of football and that should have excluded him in truth.

The argument put forward that an elite basketballer can win games by himself where an elite footballer is less likely to is absolutely valid. At any one time one player on a basketball court represents 20% of the available talent to that team. A footballer represents under 6%. It is much easier for Lebron James or Michael Jordan to be the defining factor in a game than it is Buddy Franklin or Gary Ablett.
 
Guardian Hawk said:
I didn't. If you look at my earlier posts, I highlighted that he 'effectively' missed 6 games as he was injured and subbed out of another game in the first quarter. 6/22 games is 27% which I have rounded to 30. That's not counting Round 2 where he picked up a knock and spent nearly half the game on the bench.

However, the exact percentage is not really the point. I already highlighted that I think only 3 players have ever made it missing 5 games - Franklin when he nearly won the Coleman anyway and was easily the best CHF, Ablett Jnr in his freakiest year and that crazy good season from Stevie J. Stewart was not at that level IMO - and that's not counting the '6th game missed' (or the quiet ones when he was assigned a stopper).
Click to expand...
5 games missed is approaching the limit before it's a major factor to mark someone down.

Controversial opinion time: it was a pretty weak year for back pockets and back flanks. Sicily, Stewart and Sinclair were easy choices.

Like I showed the other day, Stewart had Saad well covered for almost every metric. The general of the top side's defence then gets more trump points than a flanker from the 9th best team. Saad played 4 games more but I don't think he had a better season.

Maynard was good but not AA-good. Stewart had an extra 5 combined rebound 50s/intercepts per game. Plenty of good lockdown back pockets miss every year.

Anyway, probably time to move on from the 100th discussion about 2022's AA backline selection.
 
Noidnadroj said:
Pretty good team that one. I’d have question marks over Langford and Gawn (missed a few games and only dominant since Grundy dropped). And I think Neale is dropping away so I had him locked a couple of weeks ago but not so sure now. But very hard to disagree with your other 19 picks.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
I’d drop Sinclair for the much under rated Nick Newman - his season has been immense - BOG against Sinclair’s Saints last weekend.
 
Mr Meow said:
5 games missed is approaching the limit before it's a major factor to mark someone down.

Controversial opinion time: it was a pretty weak year for back pockets and back flanks. Sicily, Stewart and Sinclair were easy choices.

Like I showed the other day, Stewart had Saad well covered for almost every metric. The general of the top side's defence then gets more trump points than a flanker from the 9th best team. Saad played 4 games more but I don't think he had a better season.

Maynard was good but not AA-good. Stewart had an extra 5 combined rebound 50s/intercepts per game. Plenty of good lockdown back pockets miss every year.

Anyway, probably time to move on from the 100th discussion about 2022's AA backline selection.
Click to expand...

Yes, agree with most of that (as I do with most of your posts).

Tall/key position defenders were crazy good last year but the 'smalls' (outside of Sinclair) were a tougher proposition to select. Still not a fan of raising where Saad (vs Stewart's) team finished as I don't think it is particularly relevant for reasons already highlighted. I simiarly believe Maynard (whilst obviously having a very good season) was also a beneficiary of his team's performance when it came to being selected for AA.

Also think it is about time we all move on (though no guarantee I won't reply when further posts on the topic are made, especially when they are factually incorrect ;) )
 
Guardian Hawk said:
I'd like to critique some of the points made here please....

Firstly,...


This is very unfair. Have you been reading the thread? I posted about James Sicily's performance in 2023. No mention of 2022 and definately no mention of Stewart whatsoever. A Geelong supporter replied with snide remarks about whether Geelong supporters should "cry" if Sicily gets named this year and Stewart doesn't (you know, given Sicily has effectively played 1 less game compared to effectively 6 less by Stewart last year). He then went on to post a series of factually incorrect reasons for Stewart being better las year (defends more, spoils more, rebounds more, etc). "Bitter Hawthorn supporters" didn't raise it at all.

What makes this call worse is mentions of "tin foil hats" and "illuminati". No one has mentioned illuminati or conspiracies at all. This portrays the argument that Sicily was unlucky last year as "crazy" when you well know it was anything but. What is especially galling about reframing the argument as "having always been this way" (i.e. crazy conspiracy believeeing Hawthorn supporters) is that the posts you have been responding to have all been neutral supporters. So no, it has nothing to do with crazy biased supporrts whatsoever and I think you know that.



With the first part, I don't think there is much evidence to suggest he was the best player in the best team at all. ON what basis is that claim made? He finished 9th in the best and fairest. He wasn't even in the top 2 defenders in the B&F. He did not come close to earning the most coaches votes either. Cameron and Blicavs were both top 10 in that award and Stewart was nowhere near the leaderboard. Teams also nominate 3 players as their MVP and Stewart was not one of them. He did not finish top 3 for Geelong in any media based award either. Is everyone - including all the Geelong coaches and staff - wrong? I also disagree that team success should play much of a part. AA is not a measure of how good your teammates are. Particularly if a player misses effectively 30% of the season and the team is UNDEFEATED in that time. That tells me their success is not reliant on that player. This is further underscored by the fact that Geelong won the flag in a canter and I don't think Stewart earnt a single Norm Smith vote or Gary Ayers vote. Of course, that's not to suggest Stewart isn't important to Geelong (of course he is) but it obviously highlights that their high performance was not hugely reliant upon him, so using team succes to override all individual indicators is not a sound process in my view.

Finally, I wanted to highlight more generally that 'being a standout in a bad team' is easier 'than being very good in a good team' is one of the biggest furphies in football. Since the league became the AFL 30+ years ago, you want to guess how many Brownlow winners have come from bottom 4 teams? 0 - that's right, not a single one (with the vast majority coming from top 4 teams). What about Coaches award winners? Ablett Jnr is the only one to have ever come from a bottom 4 team (in his best season). Same story for MVP winners. What about AA? Completely dominated by teams at the top of the ladder. IN fact, if you look at the 'career best season' of AFL fooballers, 95+% of players best year coincides to when the team was playing well. Why? Because it is in fact much EASIER to be both be playing well and recognised as such, when the team is going well and incredibly difficult to standout (from aleague perspective) when the team is struggling.

With all that said, I abosultely rate Stewart (and believe he is deserving of multiple AA's). I don't care that he was selected in 2022 but am disappointed that Sicily was not (again). I also think Stewart was very fortunate to be selected last year given he effectively missed 30% of the season. Typically for a player to be selected after missing that much football, they need to be clearly head and shoulders above everyone else in their position (only Franklin at his best, Ablett Jnr at his best and Stevie J in his crazy year have ever been selected after missing 5 games, when they were miles clear of their competitors when on the park). The standard for defenders last year was very high and Stewart was not clearly better than his competitors at all. IN fact, his average performacne was probably slightly less than others who played every game (including Sicily). I think selectors feel the pressure to select more players from dominant teams or else they are relentlessly criticised for having no idea, with "X team finished 3 games clear on top, how can they have less AA than X team - the selectors have no clue". This doesn't just apply to Stewart either. Tom Papley, for example, made the squad last year and I am certain he would not be picked if not for Sydney finishing top 4 and having a lack of candidates. Papley missed 6 games and finished 39th! in the COleman as an exclusive small forward. He averaged 15 touches and less than 2 tackles. A lot of small forwards missed out that kicked a lot more goals, more of the ball, etc.

So no, not some kind of illuminati anti Hawks, pro Geelong conspiracy. Just an error in my view and one made with too significant a focus (in general) on the ladder position of the team they play for.
Click to expand...

Sure, quite a long post. I come into this thread occasionally and I see the Hawks fans still going on about last year and how Siciliy is ignored - and somehow Geelong always seems to come into it. Whether a particular Hawk fan is all tin foil hats and illumanti is not really the point, I am mocking the year long sook in general. If Hawks fans were just about Sicily they would stop bringing Stewart into it constantly.

On Stewart, he is the best player at Geelong. Geelong's B&F is like many clubs a bit weird and hard to win if you miss games.

I don't agree with you on struggling v top team at all, but respect that you have posted detailed arguments about it so I'll leave it there.
 
While it might be a stretch to say Sicily is the most influential player in the competition, he is very easily the most influential player at Hawthorn this season.

If you want a concrete measure of the difference having Sicily in the side makes, our average margin across all games this season where Sicily didn't play is a 48 point loss (all 4 games were losses). The average margin across all games where Sicily DID play is only a 10 point loss, with 6 wins out of 16 games. So looking at that in isolation (obviously other factors do come into play), statistically Sicily makes us a 6 goal better team. I doubt many players with a sample size of at least 4 games in the played/not-played department would have had their absence/inclusion have as much difference on their team's margins this year.
 
The 747 said:
Sure, quite a long post. I come into this thread occasionally and I see the Hawks fans still going on about last year and how Siciliy is ignored - and somehow Geelong always seems to come into it. Whether a particular Hawk fan is all tin foil hats and illumanti is not really the point, I am mocking the year long sook in general. If Hawks fans were just about Sicily they would stop bringing Stewart into it constantly.

On Stewart, he is the best player at Geelong. Geelong's B&F is like many clubs a bit weird and hard to win if you miss games.

I don't agree with you on struggling v top team at all, but respect that you have posted detailed arguments about it so I'll leave it there.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response.

In this thread on this topic - it wasn't a 'year long sook' either. To the point you made that post - it was started by a Geelong supporter and most of the responses (including the one you responded to) were by supporters of other teams. With that said, I do think Hawthorn supporters have long memories about 'injustices' of this nature though - something I would argue you get some merriment from seeking out at times. The illuminati/conspiracy argument I think is particularly poor (in general) - as it is a very cheap way to undermine legitimate arguments being put forward as delusional or crazy rather than countering the actual arguments. If someone had claimed that it was a conspiracy or some such then fair enough but you were responding to reasoned arguments from a Carlton supporter.

On Stewart being Geelong's best player, I am inclined to agree (though I think Cameron has a very good case, particularly with how much harder his position is and how much harder it is to be consistent in that role). I don't agree Stewart was Geelong's best last year in isolation (which is all AA counts for) and it seems everyone agrees (B&F, coaches votes, media awards, MVP, BL votes, etc). You are right to suggest that B&F favours those that play more games - but this is the thing - so does AA! (which is the primary argument about why Stewart was fortunate to be selected).

With all that said, I think the majority of Hawthorn supporters (including myself) don't really care that Stewart was selected. Most feel Sicily should have been selected, both could have been selected and that Stewart was fortunate due to missing so much of the season.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Houston ______ Sicily
N Daicos Moore Sinclair
Gulden Bont J Daicos
Petracca Walker Greene
_____ Curnow _____
English Butters Dawson
Merrett Libba Rozzee _____

For me all of those are already in, blazer made. Full back out of Taylor, Andrews, Wilkie or possibly stewart and sicily goes key. Small forward is a crap shoot, would have langford near on locked, and still think charlie cameron makes it. Then your last bench spot could be anyone.
 
The 747 said:
Sure, quite a long post. I come into this thread occasionally and I see the Hawks fans still going on about last year and how Siciliy is ignored - and somehow Geelong always seems to come into it. Whether a particular Hawk fan is all tin foil hats and illumanti is not really the point, I am mocking the year long sook in general. If Hawks fans were just about Sicily they would stop bringing Stewart into it constantly.

On Stewart, he is the best player at Geelong. Geelong's B&F is like many clubs a bit weird and hard to win if you miss games.

I don't agree with you on struggling v top team at all, but respect that you have posted detailed arguments about it so I'll leave it there.
Click to expand...

Jeremy Cameron is the best player at Geelong, surely?
 
Guardian Hawk said:
Thanks for the response.

In this thread on this topic - it wasn't a 'year long sook' either. To the point you made that post - it was started by a Geelong supporter and most of the responses (including the one you responded to) were by supporters of other teams. With that said, I do think Hawthorn supporters have long memories about 'injustices' of this nature though - something I would argue you get some merriment from seeking out at times. The illuminati/conspiracy argument I think is particularly poor (in general) - as it is a very cheap way to undermine legitimate arguments being put forward as delusional or crazy rather than countering the actual arguments. If someone had claimed that it was a conspiracy or some such then fair enough but you were responding to reasoned arguments from a Carlton supporter.

On Stewart being Geelong's best player, I am inclined to agree (though I think Cameron has a very good case, particularly with how much harder his position is and how much harder it is to be consistent in that role). I don't agree Stewart was Geelong's best last year in isolation (which is all AA counts for) and it seems everyone agrees (B&F, coaches votes, media awards, MVP, BL votes, etc). You are right to suggest that B&F favours those that play more games - but this is the thing - so does AA! (which is the primary argument about why Stewart was fortunate to be selected).

With all that said, I think the majority of Hawthorn supporters (including myself) don't really care that Stewart was selected. Most feel Sicily should have been selected, both could have been selected and that Stewart was fortunate due to missing so much of the season.
Click to expand...

OK, agreed. I didn't watch much of last year but did Sicily play CHB like he has done this year?
 
The 747 said:
OK, agreed. I didn't watch much of last year but did Sicily play CHB like he has done this year?
Click to expand...

Pretty much that is his role. An undersized CHB but makes up for it with a superior ability to read the ball coming in and position himself accordingly.

I mean, if you look at who our options are in that role it really has been Sicily or bust. DGB has not yet come on and there are few other viable choices.
 
The Cryptkeeper said:
Pretty much that is his role. An undersized CHB but makes up for it with a superior ability to read the ball coming in and position himself accordingly.

I mean, if you look at who our options are in that role it really has been Sicily or bust. DGB has not yet come on and there are few other viable choices.
Click to expand...

So this bit I don't quite understand then; Stewart does not play CHB except in emergencies.
 
The 747 said:
So this bit I don't quite understand then; Stewart does not play CHB except in emergencies.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I know you and I have been at it a bit in here but my position has always been that both players should have been in last years' team. My only reservation is how much football Stewart missed.

But it certainly isn't a one or the other choice as far as I am concerned. Some players are just unlucky to miss a spot. And some are selected on reputation rather than output. I also don't subscribe to the idea that you pick purely based on position because roles change during seasons and during games. Selectors can only select players based on an overall positional assessment as to where they fit. That is, I just think these days you err towards picking the 6 best defenders rather than trying to nail a FB, a CHB, 2 flankers and 2 pockets. Most players are not pigeonholed to a specific role anymore. There are exceptions but these are often so evident that little discussion needs to be had. Sam Taylor is an example. Unless the selectors are outrightly stupid (a notion I do not discount) Sam Taylor will be AA FB this year, even allowing for his missed games. He has a defined role and he is the best player in that role by some margin. But guys like Sicily, Stewart, even Ryan could slot in anywhere in a defensive 6.

That all said, if Sicily misses this year the pitchforks will be out. He should be absolutely nailed on for a spot.
 
Last edited:
hk89 said:
While it might be a stretch to say Sicily is the most influential player in the competition, he is very easily the most influential player at Hawthorn this season.

If you want a concrete measure of the difference having Sicily in the side makes, our average margin across all games this season where Sicily didn't play is a 48 point loss (all 4 games were losses). The average margin across all games where Sicily DID play is only a 10 point loss, with 6 wins out of 16 games. So looking at that in isolation (obviously other factors do come into play), statistically Sicily makes us a 6 goal better team. I doubt many players with a sample size of at least 4 games in the played/not-played department would have had their absence/inclusion have as much difference on their team's margins this year.
Click to expand...

Flukey number and he is definitely not in the running for AA but I suspect Cuningham at Carlton would have a crazy relative number.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis 2023 All Australian Team Awards Night

Similar threads

Lingsface
Alliteration All Australian
Replies
22
Views
479
Lingsface
Lingsface
Gainzo
2023 All Mullet All Australian Team
Replies
0
Views
979
Gainzo
Gainzo
PowerfulPies2023
2024 Rolling ALL-Australian Team
162 163 164 165 166
Replies
4K
Views
178K
Guardian Hawk
G
C
All four Western Australian Team's 2024 Season Preview
Replies
14
Views
964
Liam Boy
Liam Boy
Lunchtime
Opinion Awards
Replies
0
Views
141
Lunchtime
Lunchtime
Chief
News Prelim Finals Milestones 2024 - plus TV times and teams on Thursday night.
Replies
4
Views
340
Chief
Chief
RUNVS
  • Poll
Best All Australian team in the last 20 years?
Replies
10
Views
867
Rustin Cohle
Rustin Cohle

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top