Judging Players on Yardage

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

bigswifty

Member
I see people quoting player's yardage figures all the time when judging their performance. Can anyone tell me whether yardage figures are adjusted for the following:

1. How long the player is on the field?
2. How long the team had possession?
3. Whether a player's meters gained were easy gallops upfield when the team has a roll on or whether they were a tough slogging barge when pinned down in our own 20m zone having gone nowhere on the preceding plays?

I'll stand to be corrected, but until I'm told that such things are factored in, it seems like yardage is an invalid and frankly pretty lazy way to assess a player's performance.
 
I see people quoting player's yardage figures all the time when judging their performance. Can anyone tell me whether yardage figures are adjusted for the following:

1. How long the player is on the field?
2. How long the team had possession?
3. Whether a player's meters gained were easy gallops upfield when the team has a roll on or whether they were a tough slogging barge when pinned down in our own 20m zone having gone nowhere on the preceding plays?

I'll stand to be corrected, but until I'm told that such things are factored in, it seems like yardage is an invalid and frankly pretty lazy way to assess a player's performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bigswifty said:
I see people quoting player's yardage figures all the time when judging their performance. Can anyone tell me whether yardage figures are adjusted for the following:

1. How long the player is on the field?
2. How long the team had possession?
3. Whether a player's meters gained were easy gallops upfield when the team has a roll on or whether they were a tough slogging barge when pinned down in our own 20m zone having gone nowhere on the preceding plays?

I'll stand to be corrected, but until I'm told that such things are factored in, it seems like yardage is an invalid and frankly pretty lazy way to assess a player's performance.

I see your point, but I think it gives an indication of performance, when used along side other stats, rather than just on its own. Tackle counts have long been used as a measure, but we don't differentiate one on one tackles or tackles where a player just flops on the player as the third man in. Whether the tackle prevented a try, or if the attacker submitted to the tackle.

Likewise in cricket, which is heavily dominated by statistics, plenty of factors aren't, or can't, be taken into account. Quality of opposition, quality of the pitch, weather conditions, whether a batsman (or bowler) has been 'assisted' by a run of 50/50 decisions going there way, how many times a batsman was dropped, or a bowler had catches dropped of their bowling.

Like any statistic, if you use it in conjunction with others, and always keep in mind that still may not give the whole picture. It can give an indication of player performance.
 
1. No
2. No
3. No

Exactly, taking 10 hit ups from your own line may net you 90m which is a great return whereas a back can be put in the clear from one of your offloads and make 90 in one run.

But how complicated do you want to make stats.
 
The only weird thing about it is that the meters only count if you are tackled or if you score. If you run 10 and pass it before being held or score, then you get zero meters.
 
I actually think this is a really good topic. Some players can make 10m and it's just a stock standard 10m. Another (say JWH the other night) may make 10m, bowl over the defensive line, take 4 players to pull him down and really unsettle the defense with his aggression.

I do however admit it's near impossible to measure this properly.
 
Same as tackle counts, it is just a guide and doesn't tell the whole story. Which does not mean it is a useless stat. The usefulness depends on the smarts of the person interpreting it.
 
Good points, and I feel exactly the same about cricket stats - is a great batsman one who can nudge and deflect for 2 days on a flat track for a double hundred for no result, or one who digs in on a lively "away" pitch for two days to save the game and be not out on 50 or 60?

mosto said:
bigswifty said:
I see people quoting player's yardage figures all the time when judging their performance. Can anyone tell me whether yardage figures are adjusted for the following:

1. How long the player is on the field?
2. How long the team had possession?
3. Whether a player's meters gained were easy gallops upfield when the team has a roll on or whether they were a tough slogging barge when pinned down in our own 20m zone having gone nowhere on the preceding plays?

I'll stand to be corrected, but until I'm told that such things are factored in, it seems like yardage is an invalid and frankly pretty lazy way to assess a player's performance.

I see your point, but I think it gives an indication of performance, when used along side other stats, rather than just on its own. Tackle counts have long been used as a measure, but we don't differentiate one on one tackles or tackles where a player just flops on the player as the third man in. Whether the tackle prevented a try, or if the attacker submitted to the tackle.

Likewise in cricket, which is heavily dominated by statistics, plenty of factors aren't, or can't, be taken into account. Quality of opposition, quality of the pitch, weather conditions, whether a batsman (or bowler) has been 'assisted' by a run of 50/50 decisions going there way, how many times a batsman was dropped, or a bowler had catches dropped of their bowling.

Like any statistic, if you use it in conjunction with others, and always keep in mind that still may not give the whole picture. It can give an indication of player performance.


Agreed, it needs to be *interpreted* rather than simply trotted out to "prove" who played well and who didn't.

SeaEagleRock8 said:
Same as tackle counts, it is just a guide and doesn't tell the whole story. Which does not mean it is a useless stat. The usefulness depends on the smarts of the person interpreting it.
 
Clubs do a lot more analysis of this rather than just the total yards made. They go into greater depth about where the yards were made and when, ie early in the tackle count, coming off their own line, a players first stint or second stint etc. I know they measure things like play ball speed and yards made by the next ball carrier off that play the ball and how many yards in that set are made. That being said, it still isn't a bad indicator of performance, you just need to factor in a few other things as well.
 
Yes, for example, which forward makes most metres in the 2nd half on the second tackle of sets started inside his own 20m zone immediately after defending two repeat sets, in night matches in July when it's raining?
 
Jatz Crackers said:
Silvertails. Judging posters on verbiage.

Meh, I'm more of a lettuce man myself.







(hey everyone, type do a barrel roll into google and check out what happens!!)
 
What gets me is effectiveness.

Gallen might make 200m in a match and Choc 150. Choc's hit ups are much more effective and play the ball is quicker.
 
I would suggest the reason almost every club keeps their own stats is for this reason - they have a mixture of things they think is relevant rather than the numbers punters tend to see
 
lsz said:
I would suggest the reason almost every club keeps their own stats is for this reason - they have a mixture of things they think is relevant rather than the numbers punters tend to see

You're right. The stats sheets the players receive are alot more in depth than what we see.
 
....NSW coach Laurie Daley claimed McManus was always in his thoughts, claiming the Contribution Value Rating (CVR) - a system used to determine a player's effectiveness in games - had only added to his selection push.
 
globaleagle said:
....NSW coach Laurie Daley claimed McManus was always in his thoughts, claiming the Contribution Value Rating (CVR) - a system used to determine a player's effectiveness in games - had only added to his selection push.

Yes, his CVR may be good - but he plays left wing for the Knights.
What is his CVR when playing right wing?
He'll be on the right for NSW if he gets a start.
 
I dunno man, I was just like totally posting something in case the man didn't know there was a cvr.

Peace I say, fight the power and judge on the inside, not what the machine says we do on the outside!

Groovy!
 

Members online

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom