Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: The rise.... and RISE of Marc Pittonet (Read 94439 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 10 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #45 –
Quote from: Baggers – on
I think Pitto's struggling a bit. He's a strong presence at the bounce as many have mentioned. He gets to plenty of contests around the game but the ball either falls out of his hands or he doesn't crash the pack. He crashes the pack late in today's game and the ball goes out of bounds. I love his attitude and reckon he'll grow to clean up on some of his short comings.
Yep, Pitto's a work in progress with a long future if he's willing to learn.

That kid Ladhams is one out of the box. Although I've not seen how Ladhams goes against a AA ruck option, you can see why they happily let Ryder go. Hard to see how he slipped through to a rookie draft without some serious shenanigans!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #46 –
So many people have been raving about Pittonets efforts today.

Interesting to note that he actually had his worst day in the ruck, in ruck work that is.

However, he had one of his better games around the ground, which is the area he's needed to improve on.

FWIW, todays ruck stats.

Pittonet
72 ruck contests.
27 hitouts
2 hitouts to advantage
3% CA - hitouts to advantage from ruck contests competed in.

Goldstein
77 ruck contests
41 hitouts
6 hitouts to advantage
8% CA.

But as i mentioned...
Pitt - Gold - stat
11 - 8 - disposals
6 - 3 - clearances
3 - 0 - inside 50's
0 - 3 - clangers

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #47 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
So many people have been raving about Pittonets efforts today.

Interesting to note that he actually had his worst day in the ruck, in ruck work that is.

However, he had one of his better games around the ground, which is the area he's needed to improve on.

FWIW, todays ruck stats.

Pittonet
72 ruck contests.
27 hitouts
2 hitouts to advantage
3% CA - hitouts to advantage from ruck contests competed in.

Goldstein
77 ruck contests
41 hitouts
6 hitouts to advantage
8% CA.

But as i mentioned...
Pitt - Gold - stat
11 - 8 - disposals
6 - 3 - clearances
3 - 0 - inside 50's
0 - 3 - clangers

Goldy had his way with Moore and put the ball wherever he wanted it when they were opposed in the ruck.  I would be interested in comparing the stats when Goldy was opposed to Pitto.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #48 –
Quote from: RiverRat – on
Goldy had his way with Moore and put the ball wherever he wanted it when they were opposed in the ruck.  I would be interested in comparing the stats when Goldy was opposed to Pitto.
Unfortunately i can't access something that specific.

However, i do recall the best hitout of the day was actually Moore against Goldy in the centre square.

* a quick check of the stats *

Apparantly Moore only had 2 hitouts for the day (from 10 contests), but 1 was to advantage and would be the one i was referring too.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #49 –
Just shows how meaningless the stats are when discussing ruck.

Be interesting to see if Pittonet gets an AFLCA vote.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #50 –
Quote from: LP – on
Just shows how meaningless the stats are when discussing ruck.

Be interesting to see if Pittonet gets an AFLCA vote.

Meaningless?

Thats like saying a defender who beats his opponent 25 times, but loses only 3 times, and has 3 goals kicked against him 'shows' he was beaten. And how many times his beat his opponent is a meaningless stat.

What it is saying is that he is 1 of 18 players out there, 22 including the bench, and every one of them will have wins and losses that have an effect on the end result. Its not simply one player, but a combination of all of them.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #51 –
So i've dug up this thread because i am a bit dumbfounded by all the hate re Pittonet vs Grundy.

I watched the match without looking at stats and thought, at worst, Pittonet drew level with Grundy. I was shocked when i saw the hitouts stats of 51 - 21. So i went digging into those stats.

Firstly, some comparison numbers from the night....
Stat - Pittonet - Gundy
Disposals - 8 - 16 (Contested 7 - 10)
Kicks - 7 - 7
Metres gained - 190 - 160
Clangers - 3 - 5
Turnovers - 1 - 2
Deff - 50 - 56.3
So Grundy got it more, but most of them were nothing handballs and Pittonet actually gained more ground despite having half as many touches. Disposal efficiency is a little bit deceptive. Since Pittonet had a higher kick to hb ratio and had more meters gained, it stands to reason his disposals were harder. Only 9 of Grundys 16 disposals were considered effective. He had 9 handballs. So that is like saying for every handball he had that was ineffective, he had 1 kick that was effective.
Marks - 3 - 3
Intercept marks - 2 - 2
Contested Marks - 2 - 1
So marks wise, they had the same, but Pittonet had more contested.
Clearances - 4 - 4
I50's - 3 - 1
Tackles - 2 - 6
Goal assists - 0 - 1
Goals.behinds - 1.1 - 0.0
Pittonet shaded only by tackles here. He managed to hit the scoreboard and pump it inside 50 more by comparison
Ruck contests - 81 - 85
Hitouts - 21 - 51
HO to Adv. - 10 - 18
HO to adv rate - 45.7 - 35.3
Yes, he was smashed in actual hitouts, but in terms of hitouts to advantage, almost half the time he touched it, it went down our throat. Compared with just over one third for Grundy. What does it mean? He is more talented when he gets his hand on the ball. This is the are he lost, but its not anywhere near as bad as the basic stats show.

TBH, i'm not sure why hitouts are still a stat. We should focus on hitouts to advantage.
Players don't get credited with how many times they paddle the ball along the ground, only significant touches count like handballs and kicks. Why don't we focus on the significant touches of the rucks instead of the nothing touches.


So.....tell me exactly why Pittonet is only a second string ruck and Grundy is the greatest thing since sliced bread?
Considering how well the pies mids played by comparison to ours, i'd say Pittonets stats would be half as good as Grundy, not the same or better.

Give the block some credit!

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #52 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
So i've dug up this thread because i am a bit dumbfounded by all the hate re Pittonet vs Grundy.

I watched the match without looking at stats and thought, at worst, Pittonet drew level with Grundy. I was shocked when i saw the hitouts stats of 51 - 21. So i went digging into those stats.

Firstly, some comparison numbers from the night....
Stat - Pittonet - Gundy
Disposals - 8 - 16 (Contested 7 - 10)
Kicks - 7 - 7
Metres gained - 190 - 160
Clangers - 3 - 5
Turnovers - 1 - 2
Deff - 50 - 56.3
So Grundy got it more, but most of them were nothing handballs and Pittonet actually gained more ground despite having half as many touches. Disposal efficiency is a little bit deceptive. Since Pittonet had a higher kick to hb ratio and had more meters gained, it stands to reason his disposals were harder. Only 9 of Grundys 16 disposals were considered effective. He had 9 handballs. So that is like saying for every handball he had that was ineffective, he had 1 kick that was effective.
Marks - 3 - 3
Intercept marks - 2 - 2
Contested Marks - 2 - 1
So marks wise, they had the same, but Pittonet had more contested.
Clearances - 4 - 4
I50's - 3 - 1
Tackles - 2 - 6
Goal assists - 0 - 1
Goals.behinds - 1.1 - 0.0
Pittonet shaded only by tackles here. He managed to hit the scoreboard and pump it inside 50 more by comparison
Ruck contests - 81 - 85
Hitouts - 21 - 51
HO to Adv. - 10 - 18
HO to adv rate - 45.7 - 35.3
Yes, he was smashed in actual hitouts, but in terms of hitouts to advantage, almost half the time he touched it, it went down our throat. Compared with just over one third for Grundy. What does it mean? He is more talented when he gets his hand on the ball. This is the are he lost, but its not anywhere near as bad as the basic stats show.

TBH, i'm not sure why hitouts are still a stat. We should focus on hitouts to advantage.
Players don't get credited with how many times they paddle the ball along the ground, only significant touches count like handballs and kicks. Why don't we focus on the significant touches of the rucks instead of the nothing touches.


So.....tell me exactly why Pittonet is only a second string ruck and Grundy is the greatest thing since sliced bread?
Considering how well the pies mids played by comparison to ours, i'd say Pittonets stats would be half as good as Grundy, not the same or better.

Give the block some credit!
Hitouts to No advantage to either team a stat?....Hitouts to an advantage that result in a goal from the following chain of play a stat....?
Its all relative to what happens afterwards IMHO...

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #53 –
While I thought Grundy had a pretty good game, I thought Pittonet was very competitive and didn't give ground. Pittonet also kicked a goal which always counts in a match.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #54 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Hitouts to No advantage to either team a stat?....Hitouts to an advantage that result in a goal from the following chain of play a stat....?
Its all relative to what happens afterwards IMHO...
Agreed, Grundy in my way of assessing things triggered play that led to several goals with 2nd effort 1%rs and shepherds when our blokes just spectated.

I can't say I saw Grundy tap it to our blokes advantage, but I can say Pittonet tapped it directly to their advantage more than once, of course some of this might be due to our Mids not being where they are supposed to be.

What really irks is when Grundy was out of the contest and Pittonet gave us no advantage from clear uncontested single or double hand taps, and that happened more than once! That would just be a Nul stat, but it tears you a new one everytime!

But then I'd be questioning the Stoppage and Midfield coaches about that!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #55 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Hitouts to No advantage to either team a stat?....Hitouts to an advantage that result in a goal from the following chain of play a stat....?
Its all relative to what happens afterwards IMHO...

No
and
No.

Yes it is all relative, but thats why hitouts to advantage is a better stat than hitouts.

The more hitouts that you have that are NOT to advantage are more likely to be to your disadvantage.

What happens afterwards is key.

As a comparison, Casboult was in 9 rucks contests and got his hand to ZERO of them.
Cripps was in 3 rucks contests and got his hand to zero of them
Cox was in 8 and got his hand to 4.

Pittonet is getting zero help from anyone else and coming up against a million dollar a year player and holding his own.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #56 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
No
and
No.

Yes it is all relative, but thats why hitouts to advantage is a better stat than hitouts.

The more hitouts that you have that are NOT to advantage are more likely to be to your disadvantage.

What happens afterwards is key.

As a comparison, Casboult was in 9 rucks contests and got his hand to ZERO of them.
Cripps was in 3 rucks contests and got his hand to zero of them
Cox was in 8 and got his hand to 4.

Pittonet is getting zero help from anyone else and coming up against a million dollar a year player and holding his own.
We got badly whipped in the midfield so Grundy must have had some influence or we have a very ordinary midfield.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #57 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
We got badly whipped in the midfield so Grundy must have had some influence or we have a very ordinary midfield.
There is not stat for 'heart' but it was pretty clear that they wanted it more. They won the contested ball which is usually our thing.

FWIW, centre clearances we won 17-12
Stoppage clearances was 23-23.

So what did Grundy do with all those hitouts? Clearly didn't benefit the team the way the pure hitouts stat implies.

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #58 –
Pittonet is currently the least of our worries.

Brain fades and poor execution are the #1 priority to fix.

Even our best performers on the weekend failed in these facets on the weekend.

Weitering was possibly the only bloke who barely puts a foot wrong along with Fogarty.

Thats our number 1 concern and what separated the Tigers from the rest.  They hardly ever make errors.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: The rise and RISE of Marc Pittonet

Reply #59 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Pittonet is currently the least of our worries.

I agree, but there are plenty of people complaining about his game and how Grundy flogged him etc etc.

One stat......one stat is all that is based on. Looking deeper into that stat shows how ineffective that stat actually is in terms of the game.

Yes, Grundy got A LOT more hitouts.....but most of them went to a 50-50 (at best). Regardless of where they went, we still won the clearances. So you can ignore that stat. You look at the other stats and Pittonet had his measure. Not bad for a retread up against the million dollar man.