Jeez you're harsh! C- is what I would call disappointing. D is total failure. I didn't bother with D+ or D- people get the picture. You're assessment is correct in my opinion though - total failure across the board. They talked a big game and got nowhere near it. Plus the comp was as weak as it has been for a while. Eels had points taken off them. Knights were a guaranteed two points etc etc.
Blain
Henry, Lousi (in particular) should be given F's if injuries are taken into account. The both lasted about 10 minutes.. Add Lane to that, 10 minutes..
But yeah generally those ratings are there or there about's, I'm sure everyone has their on opinions..
Simon was not in the A level, he made to many errors with the ball at crucial times, and generally offered little in attack. Defence was class as normal. B+ for me.
But yeah generally those ratings are there or there about's, I'm sure everyone has their on opinions..
Simon was not in the A level, he made to many errors with the ball at crucial times, and generally offered little in attack. Defence was class as normal. B+ for me.
Lord Gnome of Howick MBE
We should probably have a thread for this - player ratings, graphs, team ratings per week etc.
Who's a statistical pervert who would get a thrill from doing it?
To break these player ratings down further if we're looking at an academic grading system and C- is a fail then those players identified should come under the most scrutiny when the player reviews are conducted, and even more scrutiny if they occupy a significant portion of the salary cap IMO. So who are these high earners that haven't lived up to their salary.
If we leave out the players that fall into this category because of injury i.e Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and players who have left the club mid season i.e Hurrell, who then are we left with.
Manu Vatuvei - D
Jacob Lillyman - C-
Ben Matulino - D
I can't argue with that, these are the same names that have been coming up all season. Crucially two of them are our senior front rowers and that's an area that you'd imagine will be highlighted in the overall review so I'd expect some decisions to be made right there, not necessarily personnel changes because we're hamstrung by the salary cap and there seems to be a genuine interest from the club in Foran but certainly decisions made around high performance.
If you throw back into the mix the players on big money who have a C or C+ which is really only a pass mark and those that were injured or transferred mid season they together along with those players above occupy up to 70% of our salary cap imo.
Roger Tuivasa-Sheck - D
Konrad Hurrell - D
Shaun Johnson - D
Issac Luke - C+
Sione Lousi - D
Ryan Hoffman - C+
There are only two players that played above themselves this season that are high earners within the club.
Thomas Leuluai - A-
Simon Mannering - A-
If it tells me one thing it's that getting the top end of your roster firing together is crucial to the overall success of the side, after all they're the ones that drive performance over the larger playing group.
If we leave out the players that fall into this category because of injury i.e Roger Tuivasa-Sheck and players who have left the club mid season i.e Hurrell, who then are we left with.
Manu Vatuvei - D
Jacob Lillyman - C-
Ben Matulino - D
I can't argue with that, these are the same names that have been coming up all season. Crucially two of them are our senior front rowers and that's an area that you'd imagine will be highlighted in the overall review so I'd expect some decisions to be made right there, not necessarily personnel changes because we're hamstrung by the salary cap and there seems to be a genuine interest from the club in Foran but certainly decisions made around high performance.
If you throw back into the mix the players on big money who have a C or C+ which is really only a pass mark and those that were injured or transferred mid season they together along with those players above occupy up to 70% of our salary cap imo.
Roger Tuivasa-Sheck - D
Konrad Hurrell - D
Shaun Johnson - D
Issac Luke - C+
Sione Lousi - D
Ryan Hoffman - C+
There are only two players that played above themselves this season that are high earners within the club.
Thomas Leuluai - A-
Simon Mannering - A-
If it tells me one thing it's that getting the top end of your roster firing together is crucial to the overall success of the side, after all they're the ones that drive performance over the larger playing group.
Jay M
Contributor
Not harsh, but after being schooled in the NZ education system - C's get degrees. C- still counts as a pass at university and used to at school (pre-NCEA)...
Reality is - top 4 was a stated expectation with the roster, top 6 was the initial goal, top 8 was the revised goal, and the warriors ended up 10th, with the knights being a basket case and the eels being stripped of 12 points (and flogging us without Norman and Foran). The warriors had a favourable draw (2 games against the Roosters, 2 games against the Knights etc), still managed to lose to the Tigers twice...
There was no real excuse given the injury concerns weren't "major" throughout the season. Losing Roger Tuivasa-Sheck was a blow - but he was hardly setting the world on fire at the time (his defence was average).
They fooled everyone with their mid-season revival then gave it up in the last few weeks. Played abysmally. If they had limped into the finals - they'd probably give up 50 points this week...
No way should the entire organisation be given a pass-mark this season.
Completely agree with your points.
Beastmode
Just another day in paradise
Contributor
Straight C's might get you a degree, but it wont get you a job after you finish your degree.
And I wouldnt know being a straight A student but always thought C - was a fail and min pass was a C.
Last edited:
Jay M
Contributor
C-'s definitely get people through. (I never got one myself but was a tutor and marker at uni for awhile).
Oddly, I know a lot of B and C average students who got jobs. In some cases beating out A average students for jobs.
Unfortunately, just like rugby league - grades don't always reflect players' abilities to get the job done
Beastmode
Just another day in paradise
Contributor
C-'s definitely get people through. (I never got one myself but was a tutor and marker at uni for awhile).
Oddly, I know a lot of B and C average students who got jobs. In some cases beating out A average students for jobs.
Unfortunately, just like rugby league - grades don't always reflect players' abilities to get the job done
Jobs at Macdonalds doesnt count.
Giving grades to players is completely subjective. Its not like a maths test. Performance reviews are usually meet, did not meet, exceed and significantly exceed expectations. At least where i work anyway.
Key word - expectations.
eudebrito
|-|
Contributor
There is a stats thread somewhere, might get told off for creating more ones.… but when almost every player falls somewhere between “he’s alright” and “oh FFS, stop selecting him” it’s not so much fun…
This is plotting performance against games played, we use too many players, last year 31 this year 32.
The Cowboys used 25, the Sharks just 23. If you mapped out those teams, their starting 17 would all in the top right quadrant, with only the (rare) fill ins in the bottom half.
And to have a successful season you would need all your big money players, (shaun, sheck, luke, manu, ben, simon, hoff) to be right up the top right corner. Instead its just Simon managing over 6.5 a game.
InsideBall
Man, that chart rings true...
That's really awesome work, eudebrito
Feel for Tui - any player moved that much in one season is going to suffer performance wise - but if that chart isn't indicative of the general feeling about Manu, nothing is. Time to move on.
That's really awesome work, eudebrito
Feel for Tui - any player moved that much in one season is going to suffer performance wise - but if that chart isn't indicative of the general feeling about Manu, nothing is. Time to move on.
I agree with most of those grades, but isn't Mannering close to the highest paid player at the club? He gives it his all and makes a hell lot of tackles, but doesn't make a lot of yardage. All those tackles hasn't improved our defence. Value for money I would give him a B to b-.
I thought it was a good summation, however without knowing the salaries of the players it's hard to know how that affects the ratings.
Would it be possible for you to post the salaries in broad bands? or even, say, top 5, second 5 etc?
I would find this useful. thanks.
Lord Gnome of Howick MBE
That's awesome.
A couple of things stand out;
1) Manu
2) We have only 14 players in the top right (and some by the skin of their nutsack)
3) Most people would agree with the bottom right quadrant
4) Most of the bottom left have been released
eudebrito
|-|
Contributor
Poor Manu, last year he was safely in the middle of the pack next to the lillymans in ‘at least he’s not a major problem, but could do better’
And a 5.5 is not “good” that’s what Roache gets when he plays 20 minutes and makes a nice run from dummy half, its “fine” you accept that from Ayshford (“fine” is what they got him for) but when your big kahunas are all floating around that level….
And in more depressing viewing: Holdovers from last year, who played enough games
The two who you would think got better, got better.
The rest stayed the same or regressed. And due to age of hoff, vats, lillyman, are they really going to go up again?
I hope they are straight up with the fans with this review “we are paying too much for guys not as good as they were, this is how we will be correcting that” and "the ones who should be in their prime are taking the piss on occasion" you can point to the coach for some of that 2nd one.
Not some crap about how the structure needs tweaking, or they going to be more serious at training. fucking diet plans, wearing number 1s to games.
tajhay
🏉
Awesome work eudebrito! Thats some great analysis.
Lord Gnome of Howick MBE
Its good to see that Ken Maumalo is improving.
Joking aside, that backs up my gut feel after 24 games of shite - Fusitua and Kata have improved, Hoffman, Matulino and Manu have deteriorated, and Wright and Maumalo have always been shite.
Lisone, Lillyman and Lolohea have been consistently uninspiring for two years now also.
Jay M
Contributor
Doesn't make a lot of yardage? 7th on the list for 2016 behind Matulino, Fusitua, Kata, Hoffman, Lillyman, Lolohea. Mannering averaged 80 metres a game and 48.5 tackles per game. Pretty outstanding effort really.
I'm sure he would run more if he wasn't making so many tackles.
Oddly, for me, this season has been one of Mannering's best.
One thing these stats back up is the overarching opinion that the bulk of our most senior players have under performed this season, and one thing I'd be interested to learn from these player reviews is whether all the roster hype over the pre-season had any bearing on the players attitudes around effort and resilience at the start of the season.
From the outside looking in it would seem as if there was a feeling among the group that it would just happen for them because on paper they had a much publicized playing roster. The warm up match against St George and the first round game against the Tigers would appear to back that up. That tells me two things, the senior playing group were not really driving performance standards to the levels required and the coaching staff either didn't pick up on it or were powerless to do anything about it.
From the outside looking in it would seem as if there was a feeling among the group that it would just happen for them because on paper they had a much publicized playing roster. The warm up match against St George and the first round game against the Tigers would appear to back that up. That tells me two things, the senior playing group were not really driving performance standards to the levels required and the coaching staff either didn't pick up on it or were powerless to do anything about it.
Last edited:
Beastmode
Just another day in paradise
Contributor
