Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet (Read 40790 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #525 –
Quote from: Thryleon on
Sample size is too small to assert anything of value here really.

Pittonet has played 45 games for Carlton in 4 seasons.

Tdk has played 50 over the journey.

Given both of them have likely been in the same team about half that, then it means the team hasn't really adjusted to having both in the same team because it seems to happen once every few weeks only.



About half is right...around the 20 game mark together.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #526 –
Quote from: kruddler on
But since 98% of the game is played outside of a ruck contest, i'd much prefer we focus on winning THAT then breaking even in half of the remaining 2%.
TDK contributes in a good chunk of the 98% around the ground, Pitto not so much, Pitto is mostly a 2% man! ;)
The Force Awakens!

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #527 –
Quote from: LP on
You can't have it both ways, in one context you have argued TDK isn't worth money because he's not durable / reliable, you can't argue that durability and reliability doesn't matter for Pitto when it comes to accounting for game time!

It all matters, you can't pick and choose!

Now you are putting words into my mouth.

TDKs worth has nothing to do with durability, its got to do with output. This whole debate is about output. Both from the individual and from the team. TDK output doesn't justify him a position in OUR side.
I'd happily pick him up if i was another club though, because he can offer other clubs something.
BUT, we do not require him in our best 22.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #528 –
Quote from: kruddler on
TDKs worth has nothing to do with durability, its got to do with output. This whole debate is about output. Both from the individual and from the team. TDK output doesn't justify him a position in OUR side.
Isn't ToG yet another measure of output?

TDK 76%
Pitto 68%
The Force Awakens!

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #529 –
Quote from: LP on
TDK contributes in a good chunk of the 98% around the ground, Pitto not so much, Pitto is mostly a 2% man! ;)

Are the fallacy of how much TDK helps around the ground (with some pathetic attempt at point scoring in a childish manner)

Let me bust some myths for you...
Disposals (2023)
Pittonet averages 10 possessions a game*
TDK averages 11 possessions a game

*and this includes a game where he got injured in the first quarter where he only played 14% game time...which is why his average game time is lower than TDK.....not that you knew that by previous posts.

Clearances (2023)
Pit - 3
TDK - 2.5

Clangers (2023)
Pit - 2.8
TDK - 3.9

Marks (2023)
Pit - 1.8
TDK - 3

Should i continue?

Lucky TDK dominates all over the ground, unlike Pittonet who is useless by comparison.

All hail the king? lol

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #530 –
Quote from: LP on
Isn't ToG yet another measure of output?

TDK 76%
Pitto 68%

Lets play your game, and ignore the fact that Pittonet played 14% game time in 1 game.

With 8% less game time, he averages 1 possession less.

Output.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #531 –
Today was a good indication of how 'good/bad' our backup ruck options were.

Player - RC - HO - HTA - RC-HTA% - TOG% - Disposals
Silvagni - 36 - 12 -  7  -  19.4%  -  77% - 17 -
Young   - 61 - 14 -  1  -  1.6%  -  77%  - 13  -
McKay    - 5  - 1  -  1  -  20%  - 92% - 19  -
-------
Meek - 61 - 32 -  6  -  9.8% -  73% - 7 -
Reeves - 43  - 29 -  6  - 14% -  50% - 5 -

Centre clearances
Hawks - 12
Blues - 11

Total Clearances -
Hawks - 34
Blues - 39

End result?
Silvagni got elite RC-HTA% numbers - (Technically, as did Harry, but he only attended 5 contests, so data is insignificant)
Young, despite the extra size, is not a ruckman with only 1 hitout from 61 ruck contests attended.

Around the ground, Silvagni got more of the ball than Young (and more than TDK and Pittonet average 11-10 respectively) as well as hitting the scoreboard.

Now i keep pointing out that IDGAF who plays as our 2nd ruck as long as they can hold their own and play around the ground.
People accuse me of being a Silvagni booster because of his name, but the stats cannot be argued with. He is thrust into the ruck because he is by far our best 'non-ruck' option.....who performs on a par with our 2nd ruck option, but surpasses their output around the ground.

FWIW, Silvagni had 10 score involvements today.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #532 –
Going to be a real test next week..Darcy and Jackson vs who ever we throw on the park.Jack was good today but we are asking a lot of him to take on a combo like that. Young is purely backup and I prefer Jack to be honest...

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #533 –
If ever there was an example of how midfield dominance translates to ruck dominance this is it.

"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #534 –
Quote from: Thryleon on
If ever there was an example of how midfield dominance translates to ruck dominance this is it.

It shows a couple of things.

Firstly, Hawks are just trash. Their mids, and their rucks, are simply not very good.

Secondly, it shows that you can very much win a game by getting 'dominated' in the ruck. Which by extension, playing a 'sub-par' second ruck is something you can get away with very easily.

Thirdly, it shows that the numbers put up by Pittonet, that is hitouts to advantage, are very much by him and not the midfield making him look good. Youngs efforts in the ruck did NOT translate to hitouts to advantage despite having the same midfield that Pittonet rucks too. (Which also puts to bed whatever shred of hope the pro-TDK rucking to a seconds midfield conspiracy theory).

Pittonets numbers are legit.
Our midfield does not carry him.
Jack is underrated as a backup option.
Playing 2 rucks is folly.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #535 –
No matter how you want to spin today's game figures it won't win over anybody who actually watched, and certainly not anybody who was there.

Our rucks were smashed, their Mids were smashed, we got some hit outs to advantage because the Dawk kiddies couldn't arrest the front position from the big bodies of Cripps, Cerra, Walsh and Kennedy. Pretty much as @ElwoodBlues1‍ predicted, it was infants against men, in the end Cripps and Cerra were waltzing through the Dawks Midfield like Titanic passing through a duck pond.
The Force Awakens!

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #536 –
Quote from: LP on
No matter how you want to spin today's game a figures it won't win over anybody who actually watched, and certainly not anybody who was there.

Our rucks were smashed, their Mids were smashed, we got some hit outs to advantage because the Dawk kiddies couldn't arrest the front position from the big bodies of Cripps, Cerra, Walsh and Kennedy. Pretty much as @ElwoodBlues1‍ predicted, it was infants against men, in the end Cripps and Cerra were waltzing through the Dawks Midfield like Titanic passing through a duck pond.

Before you get your back up and start arguing, i suggest you read what you are arguing against first. It just makes you look silly otherwise.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #537 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Before you get your back up and start arguing, i suggest you read what you are arguing against first. It just makes you look silly otherwise.
The stats say exactly what we've been telling you, HTA is the most bogus over-rated stat in the AFL, if clubs were smart they'd stop paying for it to be collected!
The Force Awakens!

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #538 –
Quote from: LP on
The stats say exactly what we've been telling you, HTA is the most bogus over-rated stat in the AFL, if clubs were smart they'd stop paying for it to be collected!

So great, haven't read anything.
Thanks for confirming.
 

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #539 –
People at the game saw Reeves and Meek win clear hitout after hitout, palming the ball exactly to where they wanted it for almost the 1st-1/2 of the game, with Carlton Mids brushing the Dawks aside and clearing the footy. That's why the HTA stat is bogus, because it's counting is completely dependant on what happens in the moment after the ball is tapped, it's not dependant on how skilful the ruck is.

Secondly, those of us at the game would have seen Reeves limping around just after 1/2-time, with SoJ able to jump over him for a brief period before Meek returned to ruck out the game, I'd assert it was that short period when SoJ would have earned most of his HtA.

Around that time Young was doubling up in the backline, a tactic that outside of our opponents getting an injury won't fly against Darcy and Jackson next week.

If we'd gone into today's game with two competitive rucks, in combination with the dominant Mids, we might have kicked a percentage booster.

The Dawks were so powerless to stop our Mids, for one brief period they tried to ruck Nash to have an extra Mid around the footy, but that only made thing worse for them and they went back to Meek winning the taps.
The Force Awakens!