VOTE PAYNE HAAS IS BHQ'S Player of Round 22

[Huge]

This is where I think people find you frustrating, Huge. I respect that you try to shed light on people’s bias toward certain players but in doing so you seem to swing too far the other direction and stubbornly twist reality to fit your own bias.

According to your judgement, apparently based solely on the night Haas was average and Kennedy was “solid with one error”.

Haas:
59 minutes
11 runs
109m
52pcm
4tb
2lb
26 tackles
No misses
No errors
- 1 tackle break was a huge run that almost resulted in a try.
- He then capitalised on that break 2 plays later by another massive effort to reach out and score the first try of the game.
- He made a try saving tackle when one of the best backs in the game made a 20m+ line break. This is another massive effort from a prop.
- Provided quick play the balls

Kennedy:
42 minutes
11 runs
77 metres
31 pcm
3 tb
0lb
1 offload
34 tackles
1 missed
1 error
- 1 error was a Rookie blunder at a critical point in the game

I agree with you that Haas’ impact appears to be somewhat blunted but that is still a far above average game he provided with 3 massive moments that few props would’ve been able to do.

On the other hand Kennedy’s performance is below average for a prop - if you ignore his price and go off of the game alone it was nothing to celebrate and then add the most basic of errors at the critical moment and it is bordering on poor. 7m per hit up for a guy his size is definitely not solid. It’s the kind of meters you’d expect from a ball playing forward which Kennedy has shown none of.

I don’t really care if you want to praise or defend Kennedy, or if you want to bag Haas but to do both at the same time shows an obvious bias.

Weird. You use stats to support your view but are dismissive when I do the same saying stats don't tell you the story.

Haas has made increasing fewer metres each week for the last month. You are acting as if there was some distinction between my description of their respective games.
I'll simplify it for you Haas average Kennedy average( both had solid games)
That better?
Oh, btw. Doesn't Kennedy also have offloads in his game? I thought that was ball playing? Creating chances?
You say RK was below average, ironically again using stats. They make a distinction between all runs and hitups for a reason.

RK played for only 40 minutes yet made 77 metres with 31 pcm. Btw, I don't dislike stats! Obviously with less field time comes less metres but if RK played 60 he'd have similar numbers as Haas. So. Leaving out that the stats are similar it must be what Haas did on the night.

He scored a try, so did one of their gorillas in much the same way. Aside from that though there was nothing spectacular.
Just like Haas did last week, RK had a 'rookie' error, whatever the **** that is. If dropping a pass is a rookie error then the worlds greatest players have rookie errors in them, yes?

I have never seen a player who hasn't dropped a pass. To me a rookie error is being 15 metres infield, able to choose anywhere to contact the oncoming defence and being one of the worlds best props...and then running into touch on the first hit up in your own territory!!!

Now THAT'S A ROOKIE ERROR! Not a word said though hey? You say you have a problem with my position on fairness and honesty. I say I have a problem with people glossing over stupid blunders just because the player normally performs to a high standard. If posters were fairly critical I'd have no issue.

Anyway , enough already.

 

[theshed]

Weird. You use stats to support your view but are dismissive when I do the same saying stats don't tell you the story.

Haas has made increasing fewer metres each week for the last month. You are acting as if there was some distinction between my description of their respective games.
I'll simplify it for you Haas average Kennedy average( both had solid games)
That better?
Oh, btw. Doesn't Kennedy also have offloads in his game? I thought that was ball playing? Creating chances?
You say RK was below average, ironically again using stats. They make a distinction between all runs and hitups for a reason.

RK played for only 40 minutes yet made 77 metres with 31 pcm. Btw, I don't dislike stats! Obviously with less field time comes less metres but if RK played 60 he'd have similar numbers as Haas. So. Leaving out that the stats are similar it must be what Haas did on the night.

He scored a try, so did one of their gorillas in much the same way. Aside from that though there was nothing spectacular.
Just like Haas did last week, RK had a 'rookie' error, whatever the **** that is. If dropping a pass is a rookie error then the worlds greatest players have rookie errors in them, yes?

I have never seen a player who hasn't dropped a pass. To me a rookie error is being 15 metres infield, able to choose anywhere to contact the oncoming defence and being one of the worlds best props...and then running into touch on the first hit up in your own territory!!!

Now THAT'S A ROOKIE ERROR! Not a word said though hey? You say you have a problem with my position on fairness and honesty. I say I have a problem with people glossing over stupid blunders just because the player normally performs to a high standard. If posters were fairly critical I'd have no issue.

Anyway , enough already.

You live in a fantasy land.
I’m not dismissive of stats, I don’t think tackle efficiency is a good measure of defensive quality. Secondly, I know you like stats which is why I chose to use them. Less game time, if anything, should result in higher average metres per hit up, not less.

The difference between the 2 “gorilla’s” tries is that Haas created the opportunity for his with his previous run. A run that only Flegler matched in that game. Again, we are meant to be talking about this game only when choosing the best 3 players, so what Haas did last week is irrelevant and if he didn’t get a mention in the top 3 it would probably be justified. This week was Kennedy’s turn to make the error and it contributed to his below average performance - this week.

Posters were critical of Haas for that but if someone always does an amazing job and makes 1 terrible error is it wrong to be less critical of them than of a guy who does the bare minimum a bench prop is expected to do (granted at a bargain price) who makes an equally dumb mistake? I don’t think it is.

The mistakes are as bad as each other except Haas’ mistake is wrapped in excellence and Kennedy’s mistake is wrapped in mediocrity. Would you be more critical of Milf making an error than you you would of JT making the same error? I’d hope so.

 

[Huge]

You live in a fantasy land.
I’m not dismissive of stats, I don’t think tackle efficiency is a good measure of defensive quality. Secondly, I know you like stats which is why I chose to use them. Less game time, if anything, should result in higher average metres per hit up, not less.

The difference between the 2 “gorilla’s” tries is that Haas created the opportunity for his with his previous run. A run that only Flegler matched in that game. Again, we are meant to be talking about this game only when choosing the best 3 players, so what Haas did last week is irrelevant and if he didn’t get a mention in the top 3 it would probably be justified. This week was Kennedy’s turn to make the error and it contributed to his below average performance - this week.

Posters were critical of Haas for that but if someone always does an amazing job and makes 1 terrible error is it wrong to be less critical of them than of a guy who does the bare minimum a bench prop is expected to do (granted at a bargain price) who makes an equally dumb mistake? I don’t think it is.

The mistakes are as bad as each other except Haas’ mistake is wrapped in excellence and Kennedy’s mistake is wrapped in mediocrity. Would you be more critical of Milf making an error than you you would of JT making the same error? I’d hope so.

Last word. You pay a premium for excellence, you pay a pittance for mediocrity. You rightfully should expect to get what you pay for.

 

[Sproj]

Last word. You pay a premium for excellence, you pay a pittance for mediocrity. You rightfully should expect to get what you pay for.

Unless you decide to make Anthony Milford your marquee of course.

 

[Huge]

Unless you decide to make Anthony Milford your marquee of course.

You might notice I am seldom a supporter of guys on big money. Unlike many I do believe expectations should be met. My expectations of Milford were stellar performance on at least 50% of occasions and good performance at other times and allowance made for one, maybe two poor performances ( that's the outside influence excuse)

For journeymen on base wage I'm happy with steady unspectacular reliable effort with the odd couple of poor performance.

I firmly believe you get what you pay for. That being said when I get what I ( the club in this case) paid for 'I no complain'.

 

[theshed]

You might notice I am seldom a supporter of guys on big money. Unlike many I do believe expectations should be met. My expectations of Milford were stellar performance on at least 50% of occasions and good performance at other times and allowance made for one, maybe two poor performances ( that's the outside influence excuse)

For journeymen on base wage I'm happy with steady unspectacular reliable effort with the odd couple of poor performance.

I firmly believe you get what you pay for. That being said when I get what I ( the club in this case) paid for 'I no complain'.

Did you get what you paid for when you bought those fake tickets?

Could be a good analogy for Milford there somewhere.

 

[Huge]

Did you get what you paid for when you bought those fake tickets?

Could be a good analogy for Milford there somewhere.

Mmmmmmm, food for thought. I'll reply after consideration!