Prediction Changes v bulldogs

[Freomaniac]

Purely because we didn't want to make more than 4 changes.

We would of at least made 4 changes if freo had at least 4 injuries in the derby.

dropping 7-9 players because of a bad loss vs an admittedly bottom 4 side would of been crazy, unless we are rebuilding, which we are not.

 

[DocT]

He’s not even an emergency so something must be going on

Rumour is that he was nursing a hammy anyway. Maybe that's why he's been given a longer break, he's always touch and go.

 

[mattis117]

What rankings are you referring to.

Rating points.

 

[MadMundy]

O'Meara gets a game because he's in the leadership team and plays as an on field leader, that's why.

Put to bed your ridiculous theories (joking or not)

 

[mike91]

Rating points.

......

 

[mattis117]

We would of at least made 4 changes if freo had at least 4 injuries in the derby.

dropping 7-9 players because of a bad loss vs an admittedly bottom 4 side would of been crazy, unless we are rebuilding, which we are not.

Exactly. Making too much change negatively influences team cohesion. We're already settling back to having Darcy as the main ruck.

It's a real shame there is a Peel bye as it would have been great to maintain some selection pressure from guys like Stanley and Brodie.

 

[Madas]

I'm surprised by this comment and all the likes. Sturt's 1st was 21:43 in the 2nd. I'm surprised because at the time it was a glimmer of hope!

Sturt is one of the reasons we bomb it into the forward line , because he doesn’t work hard to create an option in space
Those 2 goals were gifts dropped into his lap .

Simpson is the future and I’m stoked JL is giving him a go

Those saying to drop Walters perplex me , we wouldn’t have won the first 3 without him
He’s been pretty bad last couple of weeks but not worthy of dropping
Probably a good sub so we can start Simpson

 

[Wray27]

O'Meara gets a game because he's in the leadership team and plays as an on field leader, that's why.

Put to bed your ridiculous theories (joking or not)

He's not providing leadership and is having zero impact on the game.
I was big on him being the mid/forward connection piece we needed this season.
He is being gifted games based on reputation not performance.

 

[mattis117]

......

Dismiss it all you want, it's still a better metric than an individual opinion. How many people have gone back and rewatched the tape three times to identify exactly what each player did? None of course, except those paid by the club to do so.

As we don't know specific roles, we're forced to use some metrics to grade how the players are going.

Cognitive bias is real. We see the mistakes that certain players we dislike make and gloss over the mistakes of the ones we like.

Surprisingly, Walker has hardly copped it this week despite another Cat. 10 brain fade.

Dont just dismiss rating points as if they're useless because they're not telling the story you want to hear.

 

[Hazelsnuts]

Voss and Treacy taking out Lobb.
View attachment 1970663

The ‘Bash’ brothers MkII
The Malachi Crunch - look out Pinky Tuscedero ala R Lobb

 

[mike91]

Dismiss it all you want, it's still a better metric than an individual opinion. How many people have gone back and rewatched the tape three times to identify exactly what each player did? None of course, except those paid by the club to do so.

As we don't know specific roles, we're forced to use some metrics to grade how the players are going.

Cognitive bias is real. We see the mistakes that certain players we dislike make and gloss over the mistakes of the ones we like.

Surprisingly, Walker has hardly copped it this week despite another Cat. 10 brain fade.

Dont just dismiss rating points as if they're useless because they're not telling the story you want to hear.

Keep goggling stats bro, you'll never need to watch a game again at this rate

 

[Wray27]

Dismiss it all you want, it's still a better metric than an individual opinion. How many people have gone back and rewatched the tape three times to identify exactly what each player did? None of course, except those paid by the club to do so.

As we don't know specific roles, we're forced to use some metrics to grade how the players are going.

Cognitive bias is real. We see the mistakes that certain players we dislike make and gloss over the mistakes of the ones we like.

Surprisingly, Walker has hardly copped it this week despite another Cat. 10 brain fade.

Dont just dismiss rating points as if they're useless because they're not telling the story you want to hear.

What rating points are you using. AFL?

 

[Freomaniac]

Sturt is one of the reasons we bomb it into the forward line , because he doesn’t work hard to create an option in space
Those 2 goals were gifts dropped into his lap .

Simpson is the future and I’m stoked JL is giving him a go

Those saying to drop Walters perplex me , we wouldn’t have won the first 3 without him
He’s been pretty bad last couple of weeks but not worthy of dropping
Probably a good sub so we can start Simpson

Random Question, I want your personal opinion on this, actually all dockers fans opinion on this question.

If Lachie Schulz was still on freos list, would walters been dropped already this season?

 

[mattis117]

What rating points are you using. AFL?

Yes. They're far from perfect, but they still have the same rough order as people intuit.
The only point I wanted to make is that there were other players that should have been dropped before JOM and Walters, and three of the them were.

If the replacements are better and JOM/Walters are still not contributing, then they become next in line for replacement.

I also think people are using selection (if they were the selectors) to punish players for poor performance. It's not as simple as people make out, as the selection panel need to consider who is the best available for a specific role(!).

Because of the changes we've made, Walters, JOM, and Banfield will be playing different roles, so their previous performance in a different role is less relevant.

Punishing players because they had a poor game in a role that isn't their best is dumb.

 

[ilikepotatoes]

Yes. They're far from perfect, but they still have the same rough order as people intuit.
The only point I wanted to make is that there were other players that should have been dropped before JOM and Walters, and three of the them were.

If the replacements are better and JOM/Walters are still not contributing, then they become next in line for replacement.

I also think people are using selection (if they were the selectors) to punish players for poor performance. It's not as simple as people make out, as the selection panel need to consider who is the best available for a specific role(!).

Because of the changes we've made, Walters, JOM, and Banfield will be playing different roles, so their previous performance in a different role is less relevant.

Punishing players because they had a poor game in a role that isn't their best is dumb.

Except that's literally what we did to Sturt.

He didn't play the best game, played as a 3rd and sometimes second tall, yet still kicked 2 goals.

 

[mattis117]

Except that's literally what we did to Sturt.

He didn't play the best game, played as a 3rd and sometimes second tall, yet still kicked 2 goals.

I think that just comes down to Freddie being the best for the same role. Thus Sturt didn't get dropped because of his performance, it is because Freddie is available this week.
Same argument is going to be made about Voss next week when Amiss returns.

 

[332docker]

I think that just comes down to Freddie being the best for the same role. Thus Sturt didn't get dropped because of his performance, it is because Freddie is available this week.
Same argument is going to be made about Voss next week when Amiss returns.

What if Voss kicks 4

 

[FreoMatt]

O'Meara gets a game because he's in the leadership team and plays as an on field leader, that's why.

Put to bed your ridiculous theories (joking or not)

Sorry the last guy to get a game because he was a leader was Mike Brearley for England cricket team in the late 70’s early 80’s


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Madas]

Random Question, I want your personal opinion on this, actually all dockers fans opinion on this question.

If Lachie Schulz was still on freos list, would walters been dropped already this season?

No
Emmet wouldn’t be getting a game
And I wish Shultz was still with us

 

[TheMcManusNose]

God only knows how JOM survives but at least we have some decent movement.

 

[Quazar2]

I'm pleased both Voss and Simpson get to debut, of course it's likely Coops will be sub which lets a bit of air out the party balloon, but still stoked for the pair for them. Not sure what happened to Tabs.

But utterly bummed for Brodie, I felt he was an absolute shoe-in after that performance for Peel, was showing exactly what we need in our team. Jaeger getting away with blue murder is a worry, because like others I just don't see what he's bringing to the team right now. Shame for Switta too, always concerns me with him because he's injury-prone no matter what. And I can understand why people are frustrated Walters gets exonerated for some poorer performances, but we all know Sonny is class when he plays well; I hope this is the game he can find his shine again.

Not too unhappy, but shades of it reek of the too safely-safe methodology. I knew they'd only be 4 changes! Let's just hope they can find a way to win now

 

[Quazar2]

Also no Stanley is a bit sh**

 

[believe_it]

What is a cat 10 exactly ? What does it stand for

 

[freo84]

4 changes is good.

If Omeara fails again then bring in Brodie.

Keep changing out the underperforming players.

 

[pK75]

Yes. They're far from perfect, but they still have the same rough order as people intuit.
The only point I wanted to make is that there were other players that should have been dropped before JOM and Walters, and three of the them were.

If the replacements are better and JOM/Walters are still not contributing, then they become next in line for replacement.

I also think people are using selection (if they were the selectors) to punish players for poor performance. It's not as simple as people make out, as the selection panel need to consider who is the best available for a specific role(!).

Because of the changes we've made, Walters, JOM, and Banfield will be playing different roles, so their previous performance in a different role is less relevant.

Punishing players because they had a poor game in a role that isn't their best is dumb.

Do you mean Champion data rating points or AFL fantasy points, I’m still confused?