Laird

[shaker]

Hahaha you guys still aren't banging on about Laird's score , time to move on  :P

[MontyJnr]

Hahaha you guys still aren't banging on about Laird's score , time to move on  :P

It has dragged out a bit your right, but its a fair discussion. Hypothetically, say Rockliff was given an 80 for his game on the weekend? Would there be any consequence? Or would everyone just have to move on as usual?

It just seems to me like there is zero accountability on Champion Data's behalf.

[js19]

Hahaha you guys still aren't banging on about Laird's score , time to move on  :P

It has dragged out a bit your right, but its a fair discussion. Hypothetically, say Rockliff was given an 80 for his game on the weekend? Would there be any consequence? Or would everyone just have to move on as usual?

It just seems to me like there is zero accountability on Champion Data's behalf.

Tbh, this is like complaining about the neutrality of the Facebook news feed...

No, it's not a public service, it's a business, and as long as they have their 'secret' weightings and formulas there will always be potential for controversy of people don't agree.

Other big factors in the score includes scoring chain involvements and whether the game is in the balance/junk time etc, so we'll never be able to use straight maths to work out scores based on kicks and handballs, that's what AFL Fantasy is for.

[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

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

You can keep trying to spin it whatever way you want mate. Fact is, he had 314m gained. That's not that much from a 30 possession game. They had to be sideways or backwards for him to only record 314m. It's not some conspiracy against Laird or some secret scoring crisis from Champion Data, the facts are there for all to see and you're way too stubborn to see that.

If you really really don't believe me, have a Google search for the scoring system explain articles from HS this year, think it was a 3 or 4 part series. Sure, there is some stuff that isn't mentioned, but you can easily work out how players score their score based on the information that was given to us previously. They don't need to be held accountable for their scores, people like you who are blatantly ignoring facts provided to you by myself and GoLions need to just listen to reason

[Ringo]

I think there has been enough of this argument about Laird being hard done by and boths ides have had there say so think it is time to put it to bed and just discuss laird in general.

[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

You can keep trying to spin it whatever way you want mate. Fact is, he had 314m gained. That's not that much from a 30 possession game. They had to be sideways or backwards for him to only record 314m. It's not some conspiracy against Laird or some secret scoring crisis from Champion Data, the facts are there for all to see and you're way too stubborn to see that.

If you really really don't believe me, have a Google search for the scoring system explain articles from HS this year, think it was a 3 or 4 part series. Sure, there is some stuff that isn't mentioned, but you can easily work out how players score their score based on the information that was given to us previously. They don't need to be held accountable for their scores, people like you who are blatantly ignoring facts provided to you by myself and GoLions need to just listen to reason

Haha i'm trying to spin? That's a bit hypocritical. 314m gained could easily be explained by his 19 handballs.

How about you watch the game before you get all high and mighty. They are replaying it at 10am tomorrow on Fox Footy. Record/watch and then maybe you can talk about the 'facts' ::)

[Holz]

the game was over 2 days ago. lets forget about what he scored on the weekend and talk about what he will score the rest of the year.

Seriously looking at bringing him in this week.

only 1 score of 100 is abit of a concern to be honest

Enright is 13k cheaper and is coming off 4/5 95+ scores.
Gibson is 7k more $$$  and is coming off 4/5 99+ scores

actually looking at gibson over him.

[_wato]

Mhm Gibbo prone to shockers.

Boris older and Round 15 bye. Laird is the man

[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

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

You can keep trying to spin it whatever way you want mate. Fact is, he had 314m gained. That's not that much from a 30 possession game. They had to be sideways or backwards for him to only record 314m. It's not some conspiracy against Laird or some secret scoring crisis from Champion Data, the facts are there for all to see and you're way too stubborn to see that.

If you really really don't believe me, have a Google search for the scoring system explain articles from HS this year, think it was a 3 or 4 part series. Sure, there is some stuff that isn't mentioned, but you can easily work out how players score their score based on the information that was given to us previously. They don't need to be held accountable for their scores, people like you who are blatantly ignoring facts provided to you by myself and GoLions need to just listen to reason

Haha i'm trying to spin? That's a bit hypocritical. 314m gained could easily be explained by his 19 handballs.

How about you watch the game before you get all high and mighty. They are replaying it at 10am tomorrow on Fox Footy. Record/watch and then maybe you can talk about the 'facts' ::)

Lol, I watched the match, I just didn't focus on Laird and where he was kicking. He certainly did do at least some kicks that weren't forward. It is not unreasonable to think that 5 of his kicks went sideways or backwards, even if you decreased that number to 2 kicks, that is only an extra 6 points. So now we are at a total of 71.5 points for him. Anyway, surely you can see that 74 is a somewhat reasonable number considering all of the evidence provided?!?

the game was over 2 days ago. lets forget about what he scored on the weekend and talk about what he will score the rest of the year.

Seriously looking at bringing him in this week.

only 1 score of 100 is abit of a concern to be honest

Enright is 13k cheaper and is coming off 4/5 95+ scores.
Gibson is 7k more $$$  and is coming off 4/5 99+ scores

actually looking at gibson over him.

The risk with Gibbo is if they do not bring in another tall down back, he may be used in a less fantasy friendly spot.

Enright depends on your bye structure (as well as Gibbo)

Suckling is 80k cheaper and been quite consistent this year, definitely a great value pick (would rather him than Pittard).

Rance has a high floor and is only a little bit more expensive than Laird, same bye.

Lairds draw opens up now over the rest of the season, also has a great high floor for a backman and is kindly priced.

Rosa at 357k is a great option for loopholing purposes as he goes 100+ relatively often, riddled by average scores and GC draw opens right up after Round 14.

IMO, excluding the 500K+ options

Laird > Rance > Suckling (value) > Enright > Gibbo > Pittard > Rosa

[Torpedo10]

Disagree with your opinion on Pittard Spite, he had a horrible game on Sunday and still scored 81.

His absolute floor is 80 I'd say, and he can go 120-130 as he seems the fittest of the Port defenders, especially towards the latter end of the season.

If he avoids injuries, he's a must as a D6. Or D7 if you're lucky.

[Holz]

Disagree with your opinion on Pittard Spite, he had a horrible game on Sunday and still scored 81.

His absolute floor is 80 I'd say, and he can go 120-130 as he seems the fittest of the Port defenders, especially towards the latter end of the season.

If he avoids injuries, he's a must as a D6. Or D7 if you're lucky.

Thanks Torp,

im now confident i should avoid pittard. :P

[Torpedo10]

Disagree with your opinion on Pittard Spite, he had a horrible game on Sunday and still scored 81.

His absolute floor is 80 I'd say, and he can go 120-130 as he seems the fittest of the Port defenders, especially towards the latter end of the season.

If he avoids injuries, he's a must as a D6. Or D7 if you're lucky.

Thanks Torp,

im now confident i should avoid pittard. :P

Who said I had him?

;)

[Spite]

Disagree with your opinion on Pittard Spite, he had a horrible game on Sunday and still scored 81.

His absolute floor is 80 I'd say, and he can go 120-130 as he seems the fittest of the Port defenders, especially towards the latter end of the season.

If he avoids injuries, he's a must as a D6. Or D7 if you're lucky.

Can understand where you are coming from, you're right about his floor being about 80. Not sure he can get that high though, only 2 scores above 100, 110 and 118. 5 scores between 80-90 is great for consistency for sure.
Port have had an easy draw though so it is hard to predict how he will go against the good teams.

They play WB, Hawks, NM and GWS in the next 6 and Swans and Crows after that near the end of the year. He probably is still a safe 90 average, but I'd argue that so were all the other players I mentioned that were ahead of him. Could see that he is probably right there with Gibbo and Enright though, maybe ahead of them taking into consideration price, all very close.

[LF]

I think there has been enough of this argument about Laird being hard done by and boths ides have had there say so think it is time to put it to bed and just discuss laird in general.

Ringo has asked for the Laird SC score conversation to cease before it gets more personal,yet some of you want to continue on with it,it stops now or the thread will be locked permanently.

[Big Mac]

Disagree with your opinion on Pittard Spite, he had a horrible game on Sunday and still scored 81.

His absolute floor is 80 I'd say, and he can go 120-130 as he seems the fittest of the Port defenders, especially towards the latter end of the season.

If he avoids injuries, he's a must as a D6. Or D7 if you're lucky.

Thanks Torp,

im now confident i should avoid pittard. :P

Who said I had him?

;)

You did

I've gone Bennedy -> Hickey which allows me to go Mitch Brown->Pittard with 70k to spare.

;)