Position Midfielder Discussion

[pizza safety]

If Tom Mitchell keeps giving interviews, eventually he's going to be such a POD that I'll be forced to pick him...

This is Titch if he’s named round one:

 

[Toothless Tigers]

This is Titch if he’s named round one:

 

[OnTopBar]

I dunno, but what are peeps thoughts on Cripps, yes, he can go large but last season it was frustrating having 1 big score followed by a crap score, he was up and down like a brides nightie.



I've not got him in at mo cos of it

*Edit....might have been cos I had him in Fantasy too.

 

[Diabolical]

This is Titch if he’s named round one:

 

[Feerits Elf]

I dunno, but what are peeps thoughts on Cripps, yes, he can go large but last season it was frustrating having 1 big score followed by a crap score, he was up and down like a brides nightie.

View attachment 14946

I've not got him in at mo cos of it

*Edit....might have been cos I had him in Fantasy too.

de Boer and Dylan Clarke each did a number on him
Against the Dogs, Curnow ran with Bont and Cripps had his hands full with Macrae and Dunkley who both ran riot
Had a mare against Gold Coast (5 frees against) and copped an ankle knock
Beaten by Yeo versus WCE
He had an ear infection and almost missed his 100th against the Saints, then copped the Steele tag

Bit of selective editing by yourself as well, as he went at 128ppg over the first seven with one score under 100.

Here's what I posted in response to a suggestion that Cripps not be picked in 2018:

Still not completely sold on Cripps. 107.6 in his best year and only 97.7 last year (102.9 if you remove R16 when he was injured). Seems to be in 9/10 teams here. What do people see him averaging? ​

​

OK I'll bite.​

​

Posted earlier in this thread that there are actually two 2017 scores to be omitted:​

• His opening round 50 after he came off an interrupted preseason with a stuffed back (lowest score since his debut year; lowest CP count since he stuffed his back Rd 1 2015 and got 53)
• The Rd 16 game where he broke his leg.

Omitting those games he averaged 26.6 disposals (56% contested), 6.2 tackles, 7.1 clearances, three inside 50s and 107 SC points over 13 games which aligns with 2016 where he averaged 26.9 disposals (62% contested), 6.6 tackles, 8.8 clearances, three inside 50s and 107.6 SC points over 21 games.​

​

107.6 isn't too shabby when you consider it was his second full season at age 21 - it's on par with Oliver 2017 (111.5 in his second full season at 19), Fyfe 2011 (108 in his second full season at 19) and Rockliff 2011 (113.6 in his second full season at 21).​

​

It's foolish to rely on statistics alone as the measure of a player, but when it comes to SuperCoach numbers don't lie. Of those players to have averaged 105+ at age 21 or younger, none has bettered Cripps 2016 in terms of average contested possessions or clearances and he's third behind Liberatore 2014 and Oliver 2017 for average tackles.​

​

The 2016 season came when Murphy was restricted to 10 games through injury so Cripps won a quarter of Carlton's clearances for the year and a full eighth of their contested ball. We now have Murphy at 30 years old and Gibbs having departed for Adelaide; barring injury Cripps must and will assume responsibility for the bulk of Carlton's inside work in 2018.​

​

His preseason campaign and JLT series have shown he's made a satisfactory recovery from his broken fibula (which didn't require surgery).​

​

Cripps is now 23. I count 38 23-year-old midfielders to have cracked the ton, including a dozen over 110, four over 120 (Pendles 2011, Bartel 2007 (Brownlow), Fyfe 2015 (Brownlow), JPK 2012) and one over 130 (Ablett 2008 (robbed of the Brownlow)).​

​

Cripps is at least $50k underpriced, by rights he should be sitting around that $590k mark. For the price you'd take 105-109 in a heartbeat but a contested midfielder of his calibre and at this stage of his career really should be returning 110-120.​

​

Demands selection. ​

And of course he got 119.4.

You might argue Cripps is marginally underpriced again, omit the mare/injury game against the Suns (against whom he scored 169 earlier in the year) and he's at 119.4 once more. And just as clubs develop techniques to try to combat Cripps's influence, so too does Carlton develop tactics to combat those.

At 25 he's just coming into his peak seasons. I view Cripps as a 120ppg player who's found a way to miss out on a 120 average (playing 20+ matches a year doesn't help - hi Nathan). Very brave to bet against him.

 

[chels]

de Boer and Dylan Clarke each did a number on him
Against the Dogs, Curnow ran with Bont and Cripps had his hands full with Macrae and Dunkley who both ran riot
Had a mare against Gold Coast (5 frees against) and copped an ankle knock
Beaten by Yeo versus WCE
He had an ear infection and almost missed his 100th against the Saints, then copped the Steele tag

Bit of selective editing by yourself as well, as he went at 128ppg over the first seven with one score under 100.

Here's what I posted in response to a suggestion that Cripps not be picked in 2018:

Still not completely sold on Cripps. 107.6 in his best year and only 97.7 last year (102.9 if you remove R16 when he was injured). Seems to be in 9/10 teams here. What do people see him averaging? ​

​

OK I'll bite.​

​

Posted earlier in this thread that there are actually two 2017 scores to be omitted:​

• His opening round 50 after he came off an interrupted preseason with a stuffed back (lowest score since his debut year; lowest CP count since he stuffed his back Rd 1 2015 and got 53)
• The Rd 16 game where he broke his leg.

Omitting those games he averaged 26.6 disposals (56% contested), 6.2 tackles, 7.1 clearances, three inside 50s and 107 SC points over 13 games which aligns with 2016 where he averaged 26.9 disposals (62% contested), 6.6 tackles, 8.8 clearances, three inside 50s and 107.6 SC points over 21 games.​

​

107.6 isn't too shabby when you consider it was his second full season at age 21 - it's on par with Oliver 2017 (111.5 in his second full season at 19), Fyfe 2011 (108 in his second full season at 19) and Rockliff 2011 (113.6 in his second full season at 21).​

​

It's foolish to rely on statistics alone as the measure of a player, but when it comes to SuperCoach numbers don't lie. Of those players to have averaged 105+ at age 21 or younger, none has bettered Cripps 2016 in terms of average contested possessions or clearances and he's third behind Liberatore 2014 and Oliver 2017 for average tackles.​

​

The 2016 season came when Murphy was restricted to 10 games through injury so Cripps won a quarter of Carlton's clearances for the year and a full eighth of their contested ball. We now have Murphy at 30 years old and Gibbs having departed for Adelaide; barring injury Cripps must and will assume responsibility for the bulk of Carlton's inside work in 2018.​

​

His preseason campaign and JLT series have shown he's made a satisfactory recovery from his broken fibula (which didn't require surgery).​

​

Cripps is now 23. I count 38 23-year-old midfielders to have cracked the ton, including a dozen over 110, four over 120 (Pendles 2011, Bartel 2007 (Brownlow), Fyfe 2015 (Brownlow), JPK 2012) and one over 130 (Ablett 2008 (robbed of the Brownlow)).​

​

Cripps is at least $50k underpriced, by rights he should be sitting around that $590k mark. For the price you'd take 105-109 in a heartbeat but a contested midfielder of his calibre and at this stage of his career really should be returning 110-120.​

​

Demands selection. ​

And of course he got 119.4.

You might argue Cripps is marginally underpriced again, omit the mare/injury game against the Suns (against whom he scored 169 earlier in the year) and he's at 119.4 once more. And just as clubs develop techniques to try to combat Cripps's influence, so too does Carlton develop tactics to combat those.

At 25 he's just coming into his peak seasons. I view Cripps as a 120ppg player who's found a way to miss out on a 120 average (playing 20+ matches a year doesn't help - hi Nathan). Very brave to bet against him.

For strong theoretical reasons I am opposed to removing or omitting scores from a population on a whim. You seem to want to delete some observations - perhaps because you feel they are "outliers." To a statistican outliers typically arise because of measurement errors or an observation belongs to a different population from the rest of the sample set. Those are the observations a statistician may chose to censor.

I suggest your approach does not involve outliers. Hence, your corrected data does not hold up theoretically. Hence, you cannot draw conclusions from it with confidence. At season's end you may well be correct - but that outcome is as a result of luck. It has no theoretical foundation.

 

[Hazza]

I dunno, but what are peeps thoughts on Cripps, yes, he can go large but last season it was frustrating having 1 big score followed by a crap score, he was up and down like a brides nightie.

View attachment 14946

I've not got him in at mo cos of it

*Edit....might have been cos I had him in Fantasy too.

Don't care how frustrating he is he put up the 5th most points on average of any mid and is one of the absolute best players in the comp that'll be competing for brownlow medals and all australians on the regular over the next 5 years must have no matter how you look at the numbers imo

 

[Spots]

For strong theoretical reasons I am opposed to removing or omitting scores from a population on a whim. You seem to want to delete some observations - perhaps because you feel they are "outliers." To a statistican outliers typically arise because of measurement errors or an observation belongs to a different population from the rest of the sample set. Those are the observations a statistician may chose to censor.

I suggest your approach does not involve outliers. Hence, your corrected data does not hold up theoretically. Hence, you cannot draw conclusions from it with confidence. At season's end you may well be correct - but that outcome is as a result of luck. It has no theoretical foundation.

While I understand the 'theoretical' part of your comments, we aren't statisticians so don't need to 'play by the rules!'

The purpose is to find value or reason as to why a players average was impacted negatively and why it is more than likely their average will be higher this year.... say the timing of an injury in a match is relevant (not the injury itself as that may provide an idea of the likelihood of the player missing games throughout the season), or something like an ear infection which he shouldn't have played if he was that bad... That said, getting beaten by a tag or 'having a mare' shouldn't be considered I agree

 

[Feerits Elf]

For strong theoretical reasons I am opposed to removing or omitting scores from a population on a whim. You seem to want to delete some observations - perhaps because you feel they are "outliers." To a statistican outliers typically arise because of measurement errors or an observation belongs to a different population from the rest of the sample set. Those are the observations a statistician may chose to censor.

I suggest your approach does not involve outliers. Hence, your corrected data does not hold up theoretically. Hence, you cannot draw conclusions from it with confidence. At season's end you may well be correct - but that outcome is as a result of luck. It has no theoretical foundation.

OK fam

 

[Toothless Tigers]

This is Titch if he’s named round one:

 

[freowho]

While I understand the 'theoretical' part of your comments, we aren't statisticians so don't need to 'play by the rules!'

The purpose is to find value or reason as to why a players average was impacted negatively and why it is more than likely their average will be higher this year.... say the timing of an injury in a match is relevant (not the injury itself as that may provide an idea of the likelihood of the player missing games throughout the season), or something like an ear infection which he shouldn't have played if he was that bad... That said, getting beaten by a tag or 'having a mare' shouldn't be considered I agree

Why don't people take out games where a player might have been impacted positively? The opposition copped injuries or illness or they weren't tagged?

 

[Spots]

Why don't people take out games where a player might have been impacted positively? The opposition copped injuries or illness or they weren't tagged?

or the old 'goal after siren for 60 points' scenario....

 

[randomcliche]

Why don't people take out games where a player might have been impacted positively? The opposition copped injuries or illness or they weren't tagged?

Josh Kelly 205... GWS had no else who could play only 17 at one point!!! Definitely removing that score

Just kidding, it's valid, just how much of the score of take out, or the whole score.... Much more difficult to track... Potentially taggers low TOG as a starting point reference? Or perhaps games with 85pt+ margins (unless GC games, sorry GC fans)... hmm

 

[Ricky Bobby]

This is a general question - Given that GWS and Richmond played in the GF, is anyone worried about their big name players getting off to a slow start to the season due to delayed start to preseason etc?

 

[BigRuss]

Why don't people take out games where a player might have been impacted positively? The opposition copped injuries or illness or they weren't tagged?

Fairly common practice for statistical analysis is to remove the top and bottom 10 percent in the range of values to find the truncated mean or average. Generally provides a much clearer picture.

 

[Spots]

This is a general question - Given that GWS and Richmond played in the GF, is anyone worried about their big name players getting off to a slow start to the season due to delayed start to preseason etc?

Probably if any had surgeries to recover from.. otherwise it probably shouldn't matter too much should it?

 

[Professor]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1220579693184737280

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Probably if any had surgeries to recover from.. otherwise it probably shouldn't matter too much should it?

It might matter. My recollection is that GF players sometimes take a while to get going... may be nothing, may be something.

 

[Darkie]

This is a general question - Given that GWS and Richmond played in the GF, is anyone worried about their big name players getting off to a slow start to the season due to delayed start to preseason etc?

Personally I’m usually more worried about winning grand finalists (potential for massive benders, reduced motivation), whereas I’ve never noticed an issue with losing grand finalists (who should actually be more motivated). Not sure if the latter is demonstrable in reality, but players like perhaps Libba and Dusty don’t seem to have been as consistently hungry after their flags. It’s the main risk with Dusty this year as I see it.

 

[Toothless Tigers]

Personally I’m usually more worried about winning grand finalists (potential for massive benders, reduced motivation), whereas I’ve never noticed an issue with losing grand finalists (who should actually be more motivated). Not sure if the latter is demonstrable in reality, but players like perhaps Libba and Dusty don’t seem to have been as consistently hungry after their flags. It’s the main risk with Dusty this year as I see it.

After having such a successful year in 2017 winning the premiership and the Brownlow Medal as the league's best player, Martin told the Herald Sun he felt 'weird' in 2018.

The 27-year-old AFL star said he had learned a lot from the past year.

'2018 was a weird feeling (for me). Early in the year. I was like, ''I don't know what is next'',' Martin said.

Although he felt like he lacked motivation and struggled throughout the year, he also realised what was important to him.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...n-season-bikie-associate-father-deported.html


It wont be an issue in 2020 as he played okay in 2019.