(07-06-2023, 01:14 AM)LP link Wrote:That degrades the debate into one of stoppages only, the real issue is all the other stuff around the ground, the scoring involvements, being part of the chain of play, controlling momentum, 1%ers, being a threat in F50, being an obstacle in D50, etc., etc..
That's the real reason one ruck with a supporting traffic cone doesn't work for us, and for that matter it doesn't work for anybody, the price paid when the traffic cone is in place is just too high! We see it too often in the momentum of play, you might get away with it occasionally, when the opposition have a weakness, but much of the time the teams winning the flags are the teams that have the strong combinations.
Before the naysayers come in a quote Nthmond to the debate, that happened under different rules, 3rd man up, holding the ball, it's over for that option and so it should be, under the current rules even Nthmond see the need to assist Nankervis and the folly of rucking Lynch!
The argument to ruck Pitto solo with a crap support option isn't setting a trend, it's clinging to a redundancy!
The problem with trying to compare non-rucking duties of a ruckmen is you are not comparing apples with apples anymore.
How long does a ruck spend forward, back or in the ruck.
How much TOG does each ruck have overall on top of that.
The ruck stat is a pure stat because you can count exactly how many times they were in a ruck contest.
Anything else is guesswork.
But...playing that game. The TDK boosters point out his around the ground work is far superior.
10 possessions vs 11 possessions. The latter has 8% TOG more by comparison.....and is TDK.
But more specifically...
Score involvements? Both are deemed below average at 3.7 a game.
Score launches Pittonet is elite at 3.1 (maybe because of his high HTA ratio
) TDK is 'below average' with 1.61%ers? Pit 2.8, TDK 3.1 both are 'average'.
So where is this benefit?
Only thing TDK is deemed 'elite' (top 10% of rucks)
is Marks on a lead. In which he takes 0.6 a game....in part because he has played as key forward at times.
He is also 'above average' in tackles inside 50, at 0.6.
But, lets see how we go around the ground with Jack as the 2nd ruck.
He averages 1.2 marks on lead (double TDK)
He is 0.5 tackles inside 50 (down 0.1)
Jack also averages more marks, kicks, disposal efficiency is higher, tackles
Despite attending 1/4 of the ruck contests TDK does, jack only averages slightly less in clearance stats
Stoppages 1.2 vs 1.6
Centre 0.3 vs 1.0
TOTAL 1.5 vs 2.6......again, with only 1/4 of the opportunities by comparison. Normalise that out and he is double effective.
So lets bring this debate full circle to the point where Jack performs much better in the ruck than people give him credit for, and outperforms TDK around the ground.
Meaning....TDK is outperformed as a ruck and outperformed as a backup ruck/forward....and is a luxury we can do without.
Especially since his being there is limited our run, chase, tackling and pressuring (all backed up by stats) as well as the areas highlighted already.
So if TDK cannot perform to Pittonets standard in the ruck
and
Cannot perform to Jacks standard around the ground.....and arguably does not outperform Jack in the ruck either.
Then why are we playing him? Because we HOPE he gets better??