Even better - read the book; I'm part way through it having arrived there from 'The Big Short' (same author) and it's fascinating stuff.
I'm certain that the same principles could be applied to RL, if someone had the temerity, time and analytic expertise to do the work; the starting premise for it in baseball was that runs wins games and that defence was largely irrelevant - from that point, a failed player and a Harvard graduate with no background in the game completely revolutionised their recruitment and consistently stuck it up their big money rivals - who have since adopted the same methods.
Joined: Oct 13 2004 Posts: 36099 Location: Poodle Power!
PopTart wrote:So anyway,
I've changed my mind on Hall and Johnstone. I was one who said they probably shouldn't be together but after Johnstone's last couple of games and Hall's comeback I think it could be a really good attacking weapon for us. I can't say BJB has really hit his stride yet at full back, without actually doing too much wrong. Although Hall had a good game at full back, I'd still like to see him at centre and BJB at full back to see how they all go together.
Other centre is a dilemma as Gibson was the new signing but Arundal, though not flash, is the one consistent player who is decent in defence and doesn't make mistakes (though I haven't checked the stats to prove that)
I reckon you will see more of Gibson, Owen and perhap Morris as the pitches firm up.
Arundal is a sturdy lad, a bit of a trundler but ideal for heavy and greasy pitches.
I have a feeling that come June the back line may look a bit more like BJB, Johnstone, Hall/Gibson, Tupou/Lyne, Morris/Owen. There is some pace on a dry pitch in that line up. I'm not saying Arundal will be out of the picture but there will be more competition.
vastman wrote:I reckon you will see more of Gibson, Owen and perhap Morris as the pitches firm up.
Arundal is a sturdy lad, a bit of a trundler but ideal for heavy and greasy pitches.
I have a feeling that come June the back line may look a bit more like BJB, Johnstone, Hall/Gibson, Tupou/Lyne, Morris/Owen. There is some pace on a dry pitch in that line up. I'm not saying Arundal will be out of the picture but there will be more competition.
Out of interest, what's your opinion on Arundel? (You'll also notice how I haven't replied to the other comments because that would be the childish thing to do... or is putting this as an aside classed as 'childish' too? Who knows? )
PopTart wrote:It's all Moneyball. Look up the film (Brad Pitt), it's really good.
I'm all about the stats. Any coach these days that doesn't have a stat man (or team) is well behind the rest.
It's interesting that you should bring up 'Moneyball'. Wasn't Agar talking about this when he was in charge a couple of 3 years ago? Maybe this is how he picked up decent players like Aiton and to a lesser extent Issac John.
Joined: Oct 04 2008 Posts: 21007 Location: wakefield
From what I've heard Agar is very good at that. For that reason he makes a great number 2. T Smith has commented that Agar has improved the team at Warrington.
He just didn't have the man management side unfortunately.
A dog is not considered a good dog because he is a good barker. A man is not considered a good man because he is a good talker - Buddha
Adam_Harrison9 wrote:Out of interest, what's your opinion on Arundel? (You'll also notice how I haven't replied to the other comments because that would be the childish thing to do... or is putting this as an aside classed as 'childish' too? Who knows? )
While not being an authority on all things vastman and neither am I is agent, but I'm fairly confident that it's unlikely he gives a toss as to whether you've replied to other comments regarding a petty squabble fuelled by your immaturity to accept other peoples point of view, the only thing what is childish is your effort to include vasty by asking him his opinion on a matter he's already gave his opinion on therefore trying very poorly imo to tenuously link the two individual posts together in a vain effort to be sarcastic, is that classed as childish as well who knows
Adam_Harrison9 wrote:Out of interest, what's your opinion on Arundel? (You'll also notice how I haven't replied to the other comments because that would be the childish thing to do... or is putting this as an aside classed as 'childish' too? Who knows? )
Though not part of your recent comments and responses to them, I will give you my opinion of Arundel. He is a steady player and should be viewed as a good back up to others - unless he hits some attacking form.
A club like ours has to survive in part due to picking up players cheaply and then selling them on at a profit.
We have done it many times in the past with likes of Brough, Solomon a, Atkins and A it on to name just a few being sold on for a big profit. I have no problem with us doing this as it helps the club survive.
As for Agar, I personally think he was good at spotting a player but just lake that final 5 percent to make a top coach, that being said I personally think he did a good job.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
)
