If Heeney?

[Meteoric Rise]

Well no it isn’t.

Champion data can’t, as far as I’m aware, differentiate, between a player taking a contested mark that is a contested mark as classification defines it, and a contested mark like the one Heeney takes against GWS when he’s putting them in his back and trying to cart them over the line, or a mark like Riewoldt’s famous one with the flight of the ball. It can’t put a value on composure and so many of the intangibles that an observer can notice when they watch a game.

The data that is USED to reach a player rating, I don’t doubt could be of value. But the conclusions that it reaches to me don’t add any more than what is reached by other means

Yes, clear limitation of an objective rating system is they can't factor in the degree of difficulty in individual contests, match ups etc. Unless they do have a way of doing that, but I doubt it.

We can do that by watching, you are spot on. The trouble is, by watching once, through one set of eyes, we miss so much that they notice. So their deficit here that you are correctly indentifying might have an error of +-10% built into it over a whole season. Our error factor from just watcing once I am willing to bet is closer to the 30-50% range. We don't even record what we see, we just process the part we see and memorise only part of that well enough to recall faithfully post match.

 

[Cleansweep17]

Don't cha wish your girlfriend was hot like Heeney?
Don't cha wish your girlfriend could mark like Heeney?
Don't cha? Don't cha?
Don't cha wish your girlfriend was skilled like Heeney?
Don't cha wish your girlfriend could kick like Heeney?
Don't cha? (Ah-ah-ah) Don't cha?

In his itsy bitsy teenie Heenie yellow polka dot bikini

 

[hawkman]

I will post below th top 20 Hawks by average rating in 2024. I presume you watch al the Hawks games. Now obviously we overlook the guys who only played 1 & 4 games that is going to be subject to massive variance. But look at the other 18. We know it seems to favour rucks, fairly or otherwise, compared to received judgement. So look past Meek as well. And look at the other 17. Are they in some sort of reasonable order of merit for the 2024 season, or does it just look totally random to you?

View attachment 2122935

Not really the order I would have it. A number of them well out of place

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Not really the order I would have it. A number of them well out of place

Is it radically wrong? Like such that you would give it zero credibility?

And what would your order be?

 

[DeathlyAccurate]

No

Wow compelling argument.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

People tend to sleep on Sam Mitchell being a finals colossus. His 2015 series is pretty hard to beat...

QF - 35 disposals (next best on ground = 26), 10 clearances (next best on ground = 6), 655 m gained, 7 score involvements (6 of them score launches), etc, etc. Easily best on ground despite the loss.
SF - 33 disposals, 14 contested, 4, clearances, 6 score involvements, etc, etc. Best mid on the ground with only Breust (who kicked 6 challenging for BOG honours)
PF - 33 disposals (next best on ground = 27), 15 contested, 6 marks, 5 clearances, 5 score involvements. Clear best on ground.
GF - 34 disposals (#1), 6 clearances, 4 tackles. Runner up in the Norm Smith, with half the voters having him best on. A bit unlucky to miss out to Rioli's 18 disposal, 2 goal game (who was also great).

It's not often a player, who uses it like Mitchell did, has the most ball of either team in every single final (most of the time comfortably). Mitchell was obviously awarded best finals player at the premier for the 2nd year running and this series represents the most disposals in a finals series by a player ever by some margin. The Gary Ayers medal was unfortunately introduced the following year (which is very Sam Mitchell, given he was unluckily runner up in the Norm Smith twice, runner up in the Brownlow twice and very unlucky with AA selection at times) but had it been in place, I think it is likely Mitchell would comfortably hold the votes record based on this series.

Yeah it’s true, but Dusty.

 

[terrybull]

Hahaha I’m not, there are many players up for debate. McLeod 98 Ablett 89 Matera 92 Martin 19 Cable 77 Bell 99 Hird 2000 Hodge 15 just to name a few.

Bartlett 80 for me