Pendlebury or Gibbs?

[Lupton Warchild Pittman]

I guess I will be guided by what neutral supporters think. Have you noticed that the only posters posting in support of Pendlebury are Collingwood supporters (& don't go playing the anti-Collingwood card, because we regularly cop it as well)? While Carlton & Collingwood supporters will post along 'party lines', the neutrals are more inclined to give an objective opinion & those opinions seem to be well in favour of Gibbs. I'm happy to accept the judgement of neutrals.

So you've gone from judging Player X v Player Y on statistics to perception on BF?

Officially S T ruggling.

The neutrals who have some clout & expertise in AFL have rated Pendlebury higher. That is the SOO selectors, the RS selectors, players such as Brent Harvey.

 

[hellfire]

im not taking any piss i think theyre both great players pendlebury gives us a hiding every time we play them i just think gibbs is way better than most or all young players in the AFL

Roos fans should know all about upside, given that Wells has plenty of it... but can't seem to translate it into performance. Though he is definitely getting there.

 

[Rhino27]

Maybe I am watching the wrong games but I don't see Pendlebury as anything more than a handy player and a solid contributor. There are a number of Magpies I would rate superior to him in the ball moving, getting, receiving, flair and goal sense departments.
You want to talk long term proof, Gibbs was dominating the second best senior football comp in Australia as a 16 year old, 35+ possession and 5/6 goals in a game is exceptional by anyones standards. Yes AFL is a far superior competition but that ability speaks volumes.
Further to this Gibbs is doing this as a barometer of the teams success, as the team gets better so does he and vice-versa. Plateauing in a team in decline does not a champion make.
Sure the excuse of having quality around him will be used against him, I say this is a plus. First, he has more competition to get into the midfield more regularly and second, having Judd and co around will only improve his game exponentially.
Sorry Magpies supporters, you will have all September to debate this with Pendle's as you will have more spare time than those of the Navy Blue.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Sorry Magpies supporters, you will have all September to debate this with Pendle's as you will have more spare time than those of the Navy Blue.

I gather you haven't caught much football this decade, if you think the Pies are going to miss finals but Carlton will make the eight? I guess stranger things have happened, but you're not playing the percentages with that statement.

 

[mediumsizered]

So you've gone from judging Player X v Player Y on statistics to perception on BF?

Officially S T ruggling.

The neutrals who have some clout & expertise in AFL have rated Pendlebury higher. That is the SOO selectors, the RS selectors, players such as Brent Harvey.

No what I have done is said that Carlton supporters will lean towards Gibbs, Collingwood supporters will lean towards Pendlebury. That being the case, we need to rely on the neutrals to break the deadlock. Particularly given the most recent stats point towards there being nothing between Gibbs & Pendlebury, based on the most recent season of football they played. That wasn't enough for your Collingwood supporting colleagues.

As far as RS selectors go, they rated Murphy ahead of Pendlebury in the 2006 season (as did the AFLPA). Can we therefore comfortably state that Murphy is better than Pendlebury? Or do the rules change when it suits you? The RS selectors also rated Jared Rivers ahead of Jarrad McVeigh, Steven Salopek, Hamish McIntosh & Daniel Wells. How does that ranking sit now? They also rated Justin Koschitzke ahead of Nick Riewoldt, Alan Didak, Shaun Burgoyne, Daniel Kerr, Kane Cornes & Drew Petrie. Do we therefore assume that Koschitzke is better than these players?

As for the SOO selectors, they saw fit to select Jarrad Waite as Victoria's CHB. How do you rate him as far as CHB's go? Is he Victoria's best?

I respect Brent Harvey's opinion, but I remember a post match interview with Jason Akermanis during his Brisbane days, in which he spoke highly of Andrew Walker after Walker had limited his impact during their just completed clash. In these politically correct days, players aren't about to say anything negative about their opponents.

 

[Rohan Coventry]

Can we therefore comfortably state that Murphy is better than Pendlebury?

Pendles first season of AFL football didn't end at the end of 06, therefore it's a limp argument on your part.

Pendlebury has achieved more, which indicates neutrals rate him higher, he has also achieved more in a better side, which has won finals recently.

 

[__aria__]

ok so because i voted for gibbs collingwood fans start bagging out daniel wells

great i guess

 

[mediumsizered]

Pendles first season of AFL football didn't end at the end of 06, therefore it's a limp argument on your part.

Pendlebury has achieved more, which indicates neutrals rate him higher, he has also achieved more in a better side, which has won finals recently.

Judd has achieved more than Ablett, I guess that means he is still a better player than Ablett. Fev 2 x AA & 1 x Coleman Medal > Franklin 1 x AA & 1 x Coleman (not really true, but it would be according to your theory).

Tell me again how Pendlebury was better than Gibbs in 2008, I can't find those facts in any of your posts. Are we measuring players on where they are at now, or where they have been in the past?

 

[BlueDW]

ok so because i voted for gibbs collingwood fans start bagging out daniel wells

great i guess

Gotta love BF!

 

[hellfire]

ok so because i voted for gibbs collingwood fans start bagging out daniel wells

great i guess

Hardly bagging, given I said he's starting to perform to his potential. I was merely suggesting that given his example, you should be aware of upside, because everyone knew he had the potential, but wasn't translating it on the field. It was a past reference, because again, I said he's starting to put it together. Is that clear enough, or will you misinterpret this too?

 

[hellfire]

Judd has achieved more than Ablett, I guess that means he is still a better player than Ablett. Fev 2 x AA & 1 x Coleman Medal > Franklin 1 x AA & 1 x Coleman (not really true, but it would be according to your theory).

Tell me again how Pendlebury was better than Gibbs in 2008, I can't find those facts in any of your posts. Are we measuring players on where they are at now, or where they have been in the past?

From a statistical point of view:

Pendlebury averaged two more disposals per game, they averaged they same percentage of contested possessions (I'm a little surprised at this, I thought Pendlebury would've been more). Pendlebury had a 1.6 better disposal efficiency (which is negligable, we know both a elite users), but Pendlebury had only 37 clangers to Gibbs' 53. To the guy who said Gibbs is a better mark, he took only 2 contested marks to Pendlebury's 10. Gibbs kicked more goals, thanks to his accuracy, Pendlebury had more shots but couldn't convert. Pendlebury averaged more clearances and inside 50s, but obviously Gibbs had more rebound 50s, as he plays back more. Gibbs averaged 0.13 more tackles, which is negligible.

I think statistically, Pendlebury has a small advantage. He also had a 10.5 points per game advantage in terms of champion data. In the latter part of the year, Gibbs did some fantatic defensive jobs on some big names, and that has to be taken into account, but I think overall, Pendlebury was the better play in 2008. Unfortunately, we can't base it on much more than statistics and subjective perception, so there is nothing else I can substantiate my claim with. Just like you can't for the opposite!

 

[mdc]

He also had a 10.5 points per game advantage in terms of champion data.

This is sufficient. 10.5 points is a large margin in CD points - and it's useful because it incorporates stats which are actually meaningful, not just simple possessions or marks.

Pendlebury had the better 2008, and he was playing injured for a good chunk of it. Gibbs hasn't played midfield consistently yet, so certainly has upside from that perspective.

As I said earlier, Pendlebury's a little cleaner inside, and his ability to set others up with his handball is absolutely elite. Gibbs is a little quicker off the mark, and his kicking has better penetration. Neither miss targets, neither has much advantage in any other category. Trying to prove one will be better than the other is moronic when they're similar players of a similar age and each have 10 years ahead of them in which to differentiate themselves.

 

[BlueDW]

This is sufficient. 10.5 points is a large margin in CD points - and it's useful because it incorporates stats which are actually meaningful, not just simple possessions or marks.

Pendlebury had the better 2008, and he was playing injured for a good chunk of it. Gibbs hasn't played midfield consistently yet, so certainly has upside from that perspective.

As I said earlier, Pendlebury's a little cleaner inside, and his ability to set others up with his handball is absolutely elite. Gibbs is a little quicker off the mark, and his kicking has better penetration. Neither miss targets, neither has much advantage in any other category. Trying to prove one will be better than the other is moronic when they're similar players of a similar age and each have 10 years ahead of them in which to differentiate themselves.

I reckon these comparisons are right on the money...one thing that isnt mentioned as I put in another post, Gibbs carries the footy more, so the hurt factor is greater. That to me sets these 2 apart. With Gibbs run and carry coupled with his depth and accuracy of foot, makes him the better player, now and in the future. Would like both in my team however.

 

[hellfire]

I reckon these comparisons are right on the money...one thing that isnt mentioned as I put in another post, Gibbs carries the footy more, so the hurt factor is greater. That to me sets these 2 apart. With Gibbs run and carry coupled with his depth and accuracy of foot, makes him the better player, now and in the future. Would like both in my team however.

It's easier to run and carry when you play in the backline more. Yes, I know he spends time in the midfield, but he did spend a lot of time down back in 2008. That's why guys like Heath Shaw and Harry O'Brien provide loads of run and carry for us (who both had more running bounces than Gibbs in 2008). Dale Thomas provides more run and carry than anyone in our team (over twice the running bounces of Gibbs, and 5 times that of Pendlebury), and he plays in the forward half, I guess that makes him better than all of them! FWIW, Simpson and Scotland both had far more bounces than Gibbs!

But in all seriousness, run and carry is good for outside players. Pendlebury plays more of an inside role for us given our lacking in their regard, his creativity in traffic and ability to find a target with the handball where very few others could is what makes him so damaging, not to mention his elite disposal by foot. In other words, bounces are not a requisite for damaging. Didak only had 11, does that make Dale Thomas (with 77) 7 times as damaging? Each to their own.

 

[BlueDW]

It's easier to run and carry when you play in the backline more. Yes, I know he spends time in the midfield, but he did spend a lot of time down back in 2008. That's why guys like Heath Shaw and Harry O'Brien provide loads of run and carry for us (who both had more running bounces than Gibbs in 2008). Dale Thomas provides more run and carry than anyone in our team (over twice the running bounces of Gibbs, and 5 times that of Pendlebury), and he plays in the forward half, I guess that makes him better than all of them! FWIW, Simpson and Scotland both had far more bounces than Gibbs!

But in all seriousness, run and carry is good for outside players. Pendlebury plays more of an inside role for us given our lacking in their regard, his creativity in traffic and ability to find a target with the handball where very few others could is what makes him so damaging, not to mention his elite disposal by foot. In other words, bounces are not a requisite for damaging. Didak only had 11, does that make Dale Thomas (with 77) 7 times as damaging? Each to their own.

Thomas doesnt get enough of it to be truly damaging though, and his kicking doesnt compare to Gibbs in terms of penetration and effectiveness. I cant disagree what you said about Pendlebury being good in traffic,no question there, but I stand by the fact that Gibbs directly hurts the opposition more, therefore is a better player. You might disagree, as would plenty more, but that is my argument.

 

[detox]

Pendlebury is getting undersold in here.

Gibbs, whilst very talented and full of potential is grossly over-hyped. He has improved but i would still put Pendles slightly ahead at present. People forget how good he was in the september 07, he was sublime. All this talk about who's better in traffic, Pendles is superb in traffic, and yes i watch Gibbs.

I think Pendles is better at present. I think Gibbs may be rated better at careers end though

 

[gaz15]

I have watched a fair bit of both players and am not surprised to see both plyers rated so high by own supporters. But IMO you can not rate Gibbs ahead at this stage of there careers.
Gibbs really had his breakout year last year and as good as it was, it was nothing overly special. Yes he showed that he can play mid, has great skills and makes good decisions. He will be a very good player, but he is not yet.
On the other hand, pendlebury has been doing it at a higher level for 3 years now. He has had more influence on games in general, has played well in big finals and is prob Coll nomber 1 mid.
I think that Gibbs may become the better player in the future, but for now i have to go with Pendles.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

1st quarter and 7.35 seconds to go.

Pendlebury went into preservation mode .

 

[Silvagnis]

1st quarter and 7.35 seconds to go.

Pendlebury went into preservation mode .

Glad I wasn't the only one that noticed it.

Pendlebury shat himself and coughed up the handball when he saw Jackson bearing down on him.

That's the second time Pendlebury has squibbed it on national TV.

Pendlebury is a Houlihan...

Looks classy, but disappears for half of the game and chooses when he goes.

Laughable to compare Pendlebury's football to Gibbs.

Or Murphy.

Pendlebury has no right foot and mongreled a shot from 40 out that didn't even make the distance.

 

[smiddaz123]

As opposed to Murphy who pretty much has no left OR right foot on him?

 

[pieman123]

pendlebury kicked a behind from 50 out on his opposite foot which is a better effort than murphy could produce on his right foot

 

[DoubleO7]

Pendlebury is a Houlihan...

Nice way to degrade Pendlebury

Looks classy, but disappears for half of the game and chooses when he goes.

He is actually benched for long periods of the game.

Laughable to compare Pendlebury's football to Gibbs.

Or Murphy.

Exactly! Pendlebury is so far ahead them you could just laugh.

Pendlebury has no right foot and mongreled a shot from 40 out that didn't even make the distance.

He actually has a right foot unlike Murphy who has no foot.

You can't take one example and say he has no right foot when he has shown numerous times that he has. It looks so natural you take no notice of it.

 

[Merv]

Even though thegeneral reintroduced Murphy into the thread, surprise surprise, please stick to the topic.

Pendlebury or Gibbs?

 

[Marc Shmurf 3]

Pendlebury is a good honest player...

i just wish he could kick the ball further than 30 metres...

plays way to safe for mine.

Gibbs is all class

 

[DoubleO7]

i just wish he could kick the ball further than 30 metres...

I take it you missed his 50 meter goal or his 40 meter behind on his opposite foot.

Or maybe the best option to take is in the 30 meter vicinity?