Laird

[King_Robbo]

M Boyd, 27 Kicks 7 Handballs, 9 Marks & 0 Tackles at 79% DE - 128SC
R Laird, 11 Kicks 19 Handballs, 8 Marks & 0 Tackles at 83% DE - 74SC

SHAFTED

I can't believe this conversation..
There are so many factors that go into the SC scoring system. It's not a simple matter of player x got 30 touches at 80% efficiency = 100 sc
For example there are things like
- meters gained
- pressure acts
- score involvements
- interpret marks
- contested marks
- contested possessions

In regards to the point above, if you watched the dogs v west coast game Boyd had a lot of 30-40 meter chip kicks that hit targets and turned defensive to attack. These kicks would be rated a lot higher on the points scale as opposed to a cheap handball receive out the back. I'll admit I didn't watch the Adel v Stk game but based on pure numbers 30 touches for Laird, only 5 contested, a lot of handball receives and handballs.. Seems a pretty outside ineffective game.

Not to say that CD don't make mistakes or sometimes my eyebrows are raised at some scores, but to think that it's a simple math like the post above is naive.

If you want a 'simple' fantasy game where the scores are set in stone, go play DT.
However I choose to only play SC because the scoring system is more accurate and rewards the best players. I.e. in DT you can kick it 30 meters straight to the opposition which costs a goal and you still get 3 points. That my friends is a laughable scoring system.

The only reason im bringing up the 'simple' stats is because I'm highlighting the bare minimum of what Laird should have scored for his effective touches. You can't honestly tell me they would give less than 1.5 points for an effective handball, regardless of whether it was cheap out the back or not. Obviously when you factor in the extra things like pressure acts, metres gained, contested touches etc. his score will be greater.

Laird should have got a bare minimum 88 but more likely a 95-100 when you factor in the 'extras'.

A 100 is still rightfully inferior to Boyd's 128, so people need to stop getting upset about that comparison. No one said Laird played a better game than Boyd.

I just looked at your scale chart for how you came up with 88pts.
Where did you pluck these numbers from?
4 pts per kick.. Did he win the ball contested? Was it a short 10 meter side kick which may only count for 2 points? Was it a clanger which led directly to a stk goal?
I'm guessing you're using it as a base line but it's a very gray area.

I'll give you another example..
I'm a Josh Smith owner and watch the first half of the Coll v Port game before the Dogs match..
He went 73 DT 65 SC 21 possessions at 81% efficiency.
He was running around the back, getting a lot if handball receives and kicking it 20-30 meters sideways.
Straight away I knew that even though his efficiency was high he was going to have a low SC game.

Alex Rance is another one. Consistently scores for example a 60 DT and 100 SC.
He might only have 10 kicks 5 handballs and 6 marks. For example.
But if 8 of those 10 kicks have been won from a contested situation or an interception that might be 4-5 pts per kick.
If he has 4 contested marks that might be 5 pts per mark.
If he had 5 or 6 1% ers that are the usual trait of a Rance game, that might another 10pts.

Remember, there's only 3300 pts per game to be rushed out.
I understand maybe Laird was 'ripped off' as some people have out it.
But going by the mindset of 20 kicks = 60pts as I said above, is very naive. To be frank it's actually a little dumb.

[RaisyDaisy]

I was rapt that he only got 74

I won my cash league because of that, and he'll be nice and cheap to bring in after his bye :)

[GoTheEagles]

I was rapt that he only got 74

I won my cash league because of that, and he'll be nice and cheap to bring in after his bye :)

Yep I'm bringing him in after the bye as well.

[hawkboy80]

based on his season so far, I'm now considering not getting him at all, 83.7 avg over the last three isn't screaming must have, in saying that the defenders as a whole have been pretty average once u get past the 1st few

[Holz]

starting to think maybe pittard is the guy to go.

in saying that he has only gone 64 81 98 81 the last 4 weeks.

[Spite]

HS released an article earlier this year with a further breakdown of the scoring system and effective kicks were NOT 4 points. Think it was like 1 point for a sideways or backwards kick, 3 for a forward kick and 4 for a kick over 40m.

That significantly changes the "minimum" he should have scored. It wasn't an error and it's not broken.

[GoLions]

Also there isn't really a "minimum" score that you can get. If everyone on the ground gets 40 kicks at 100% efficiency, they're not gonna all score 150+, because they've all had an equal impact on the game. That's what the 3300 total score is in place for.

[Holz]

HS released an article earlier this year with a further breakdown of the scoring system and effective kicks were NOT 4 points. Think it was like 1 point for a sideways or backwards kick, 3 for a forward kick and 4 for a kick over 40m.

That significantly changes the "minimum" he should have scored. It wasn't an error and it's not broken.

thats a little questionable. So bomb it to a pack you get 4 points. Switch kick it to the opposite side to set up an attack 1 point.

understand is to punish just time wasting but needs to be looked at.

[MontyJnr]

M Boyd, 27 Kicks 7 Handballs, 9 Marks & 0 Tackles at 79% DE - 128SC
R Laird, 11 Kicks 19 Handballs, 8 Marks & 0 Tackles at 83% DE - 74SC

SHAFTED

I can't believe this conversation..
There are so many factors that go into the SC scoring system. It's not a simple matter of player x got 30 touches at 80% efficiency = 100 sc
For example there are things like
- meters gained
- pressure acts
- score involvements
- interpret marks
- contested marks
- contested possessions

In regards to the point above, if you watched the dogs v west coast game Boyd had a lot of 30-40 meter chip kicks that hit targets and turned defensive to attack. These kicks would be rated a lot higher on the points scale as opposed to a cheap handball receive out the back. I'll admit I didn't watch the Adel v Stk game but based on pure numbers 30 touches for Laird, only 5 contested, a lot of handball receives and handballs.. Seems a pretty outside ineffective game.

Not to say that CD don't make mistakes or sometimes my eyebrows are raised at some scores, but to think that it's a simple math like the post above is naive.

If you want a 'simple' fantasy game where the scores are set in stone, go play DT.
However I choose to only play SC because the scoring system is more accurate and rewards the best players. I.e. in DT you can kick it 30 meters straight to the opposition which costs a goal and you still get 3 points. That my friends is a laughable scoring system.

The only reason im bringing up the 'simple' stats is because I'm highlighting the bare minimum of what Laird should have scored for his effective touches. You can't honestly tell me they would give less than 1.5 points for an effective handball, regardless of whether it was cheap out the back or not. Obviously when you factor in the extra things like pressure acts, metres gained, contested touches etc. his score will be greater.

Laird should have got a bare minimum 88 but more likely a 95-100 when you factor in the 'extras'.

A 100 is still rightfully inferior to Boyd's 128, so people need to stop getting upset about that comparison. No one said Laird played a better game than Boyd.

I just looked at your scale chart for how you came up with 88pts.
Where did you pluck these numbers from?
4 pts per kick.. Did he win the ball contested? Was it a short 10 meter side kick which may only count for 2 points? Was it a clanger which led directly to a stk goal?
I'm guessing you're using it as a base line but it's a very gray area.

I'll give you another example..
I'm a Josh Smith owner and watch the first half of the Coll v Port game before the Dogs match..
He went 73 DT 65 SC 21 possessions at 81% efficiency.
He was running around the back, getting a lot if handball receives and kicking it 20-30 meters sideways.
Straight away I knew that even though his efficiency was high he was going to have a low SC game.

Alex Rance is another one. Consistently scores for example a 60 DT and 100 SC.
He might only have 10 kicks 5 handballs and 6 marks. For example.
But if 8 of those 10 kicks have been won from a contested situation or an interception that might be 4-5 pts per kick.
If he has 4 contested marks that might be 5 pts per mark.
If he had 5 or 6 1% ers that are the usual trait of a Rance game, that might another 10pts.

Remember, there's only 3300 pts per game to be rushed out.
I understand maybe Laird was 'ripped off' as some people have out it.
But going by the mindset of 20 kicks = 60pts as I said above, is very naive. To be frank it's actually a little dumb.

I gave him 4 points per kick because that is what a player receives for an uncontested kick. Some would've been contested and thus more points, but I didn't factor that in. Some would've possibly been backwards and thus less points, also didn't factor that it. I think these two issues cancel out.

Josh Smith has 21 cheap stats for 65 SC? Great, another 9 touches (like Laird) would've likely got him to 90.

You don't have to give me a lecture on the value of possession, I understand how the game works. However there is always a point reached where it doesn't matter how a player used it (especially if they are effective), the sheer amount of touches should guarantee a good score. I think 30 possessions at 70%+ is a fair benchmark.

Anyway as I mentioned in an earlier post, the Supercoach website crashed on Sunday due to a data outage in Sydney. I couldn't see any scores until quarter time, when this website finally showed that Laird had been allocated 13SC from his 11 first quarter touches  :o Just a really unfortunate mistake from CD, considering i'm on the edge of the top 100.

[MontyJnr]

Also there isn't really a "minimum" score that you can get. If everyone on the ground gets 40 kicks at 100% efficiency, they're not gonna all score 150+, because they've all had an equal impact on the game. That's what the 3300 total score is in place for.

Yeah except obviously everyone didn't get 40 kicks at 100%, otherwise Champion Data might have a leg to stand on.

[MontyJnr]

HS released an article earlier this year with a further breakdown of the scoring system and effective kicks were NOT 4 points. Think it was like 1 point for a sideways or backwards kick, 3 for a forward kick and 4 for a kick over 40m.

That significantly changes the "minimum" he should have scored. It wasn't an error and it's not broken.

Champion Data could just make everything up and you'd still lap it up ::). I think people need to hold them accountable and there should be more transparency with the scoring.

11 touches for 13 supercoach at quarter time? How is that possible when you are mostly effective and aren't giving away frees or clangers?

[Spite]

HS released an article earlier this year with a further breakdown of the scoring system and effective kicks were NOT 4 points. Think it was like 1 point for a sideways or backwards kick, 3 for a forward kick and 4 for a kick over 40m.

That significantly changes the "minimum" he should have scored. It wasn't an error and it's not broken.

thats a little questionable. So bomb it to a pack you get 4 points. Switch kick it to the opposite side to set up an attack 1 point.

understand is to punish just time wasting but needs to be looked at.

Effective kick Holz. There were plenty of different types of kicks and all had different scoring associated with it. Think a 50m pass on the chest of running lead was worth 6 or something as well.


@montyjnr, you can't keep claiming you understand how the system works when you obviously do not.

You could get 40 touches and kick it backwards and get 40 points. You understand that right?

There's a good chance that laird kicked it sideways and backwards often.

Laird...8 unconstested marks x2 = 16
11 kicks, 5 of them forward, 6 sideways: 5x3, 6x1 = 21
19 handballs X 1.5 = 28.5

65.5 points, not including all the other stuff or his -5 for a clanger

[GoLions]

Actually, looking at the stats of the other Crows players, I think it's pretty clear why Laird only got what he did.

Brown - 24 touches, 9 contested, 95%
Lyons - 28 touches, 9 contested, 71%, and a goal
Seedsman - 22 touches, 90%, and a goal
Lever - 30 touches (19 kicks), 13 marks, 6 contested, 90%
Talia - 26 touches (18 kicks), 17 marks, 92%
Walker - 21 touches, 10 marks, 9 contested, 71%, and 3 goals
Crouch - 36 touches, 16 contested, 9 clearances, 77%
Sloane - 32 touches, 8 tackles, 15 contested, 78%, and a goal
Jacobs - 24 touches (16 kicks), 27 HO (not sure how many to advantage, assume a fair few), 7 contested, 70%, and a goal
Jenkins -  24 touches, 13 marks, 8 contested, 83%, and 7 goals

There is no chance that Laird scores more than any of these players. So apart from Smith, and maybe Hartigan, Laird is placed exactly where he should be for the Crows. The Saints also had Savage, Steven, and Armitage who all had better games looking at the stats. So that makes Laird at best the 14th best player on the ground. Considering the huge amount of points collected by the top 5 Crows (and rightfully so), it's no surprise that Laird only got mid 70s.

[Spite]

I'm also being generous, assuming that his kicks and handballs hit targets. If they didn't (which going at 83% efficiency they clearly did not), they would be worth zero. So 5 of those possessions that I have points to are worth nothing.

Let's say it's 2 kicks and 3 handballs, that's another 7 points lost.

He's sitting at 58.5.

0 tackles. 1 intercept mark. That's worth 6. Up to 64.5. Clanger. Down to 59.5.

Maybe 74 was generous...

[MontyJnr]

HS released an article earlier this year with a further breakdown of the scoring system and effective kicks were NOT 4 points. Think it was like 1 point for a sideways or backwards kick, 3 for a forward kick and 4 for a kick over 40m.

That significantly changes the "minimum" he should have scored. It wasn't an error and it's not broken.

thats a little questionable. So bomb it to a pack you get 4 points. Switch kick it to the opposite side to set up an attack 1 point.

understand is to punish just time wasting but needs to be looked at.

Effective kick Holz. There were plenty of different types of kicks and all had different scoring associated with it. Think a 50m pass on the chest of running lead was worth 6 or something as well.


@montyjnr, you can't keep claiming you understand how the system works when you obviously do not.

You could get 40 touches and kick it backwards and get 40 points. You understand that right?

There's a good chance that laird kicked it sideways and backwards often.

Laird...8 unconstested marks x2 = 16
11 kicks, 5 of them forward, 6 sideways: 5x3, 6x1 = 21
19 handballs X 1.5 = 28.5

65.5 points, not including all the other stuff or his -5 for a clanger

Unlike you I actually watched the game though and I can barely recall a touch that wasn't moving the ball forward.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the measly +3's from Simpson & Docherty next weekend every time they kick and mark the ball to each other in the backline #yeahright ::)

edit: and fwiw i'm a Simpson owner