Analysis Cam Guthrie

[bulletproof]

We are wasting his marking ability in his current role. He is a very good mark for his size but we don't seem to use him in a role where that will be used.

He might be a player where it all just falls Into place quickly and he goes from good to very good almost overnight.

 

[Seeds]

Are you happy with his input? I was hoping for a consistent 25 touches a week. He might not have racked it up but his opponent certainly did.

He has been touched up a couple of times this year

He doesn't get it a lot but when he does theyre good. The way he is breaking out of contests at the moment is awesome and doing his tagging job well.

 

[Seeds]

Has loads of natural ability but has been thrown around in a lot of different positions and that has hindered his development.

He is already a regular player who would not even be discussed as being dropped. Well ensconced in 22.

That is going well in terms of an AFL career.

I never thought he was the All Australian caliber player most Geelong fans thought he was so I am probably not that suprised by his steady - rather than spectacular - development.

Thurlow is that elite talent, but Guthrie still might play 200 senior games. He is no mug.

Guthrie is better than Thurlow and Thurlow is looking pretty good.

 

[iameviljez]

Has loads of natural ability but has been thrown around in a lot of different positions and that has hindered his development.

I don't know that he is one of those players who has a lot of natural ability - he always hit me as someone who got where he is out of sheer hard work.

Motlop has a lot of natural ability, so does Thurlow and so does Caddy. They're all either quick, powerful, or blessed with excellent hand/eye co-ordination. I don't see that with Guthrie, I just see someone who's trying to make the most of what he's got.

 

[Seeds]

I'm very confident Guthrie will end up being a better player than Duncan. Guthrie is tracking well without being brilliant.

 

[ChookNorris]

Blease - Thats a totally fair assessment... I do think we could have found a spot for him more often than we have considering the injury list. At his age , he should be getting selected before others but he isn't. So is it his form? From the stats , from what I have seen , he has at least as much form as Lux. Is it the non-game stuff. Is it that although he could fill a spot , the clubs sees more upside in other players. Hard to tell atm. But if we lose more than 7 players at years end and he is not kept then there is obviously something that we are not seeing. Certainly the advances of Lang , Gregson etc have not helped him.. and if we brought in another couple of gun mids , it would not be easier.

On Guthrie - not sure why there is any question at all. Surely not based on stats alone. If I was to be critical of him... I think his set shots are a little bit flakey for a mid , occasionally his foot skills are off.... but these are no different to so many players. All have deficiencies. Guthire is in our top 15 MIP , he has leadership , his a little different which is good , he plays for the side , he plays hard yet is not thug ... I could go on but I feel no need to justify his position. Talk about him being dropped is a very unique way of looking at our side imo

drop him for kolo

 

[catempire]

I said this in the autopsy thread but I might as well say it again here: he's not a tagger. They are trying to have him play on guys like Heppell, have him limit the influence of that player and still find the ball and be damaging the other way. It just doesn't work. His best games have not been tagging performances but have been when he has had free reign.

I would be trying someone else as a dedicated tagger and releasing Guthrie. He's being wasted at the moment and it's not helping the team.

 

[Turbocat]

I said this in the autopsy thread but I might as well say it again here: he's not a tagger. They are trying to have him play on guys like Heppell, have him limit the influence of that player and still find the ball and be damaging the other way. It just doesn't work. His best games have not been tagging performances but have been when he has had free reign.

I would be trying someone else as a dedicated tagger and releasing Guthrie. He's being wasted at the moment and it's not helping the team.

Id say his a mid with a defensive mindset... not a tagger..perhaps not. We lack a Rooke type.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

A player we basically got for nothing who can fill a role if we need him for me. Nothing to be upset about, I initially had hopes for him but Gregson/Lang have made that spot their own and that's not a bad thing

True we got him for nothing, I still maintain T.Hunt>>>>>>Blease. If we simply wanted depth then I'd have kept Poodle.

 

[vinum coupe]

True we got him for nothing, I still maintain T.Hunt>>>>>>Blease. If we simply wanted depth then I'd have kept Poodle.

Not wanting to derail a non Hunt thread.
He made his bed when he held off contract talks.

And you could tell he wasn't rated.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Read the Review thread. There have been some comments like that.

He is no..... you do realise he has only played 75 odd games. It would be interesting to see where he sit with those guys in their 5th year .. not sure if someone like Teriyakicat can help with that.

On how good you think he will be again.. Bartel and Corey.. single figure draft picks , Kelly top 20 ... Id say he is tracking fine.. but thats just me.

Stats-wise, Guthrie is tracking similarly to the above players, Turbo. I've just done up a little table to show the comparison between all 4 players in both their 4th years and their 5th years. Guthrie has outtackled the lot of them Unfortunately the stats I have are only the very basic stats from back in the dinosaur days of 2003-2006

 

[JUBJUB]

You always add so much to the forum. Can you please stop stalking me. Cheers

 

[Teriyakicat]

I would say he's being given different roles each week. He was a very versatile player as a junior, and has done the job in a variety of positions at senior level for us. Without knowing exactly what is being asked of him each week, I don't think he's in line for an inquisition. Let's not forget, we've got a few different holes to fill at the moment.

There's a big difference between what is actually expected of him and what each individual supporter expects of him.

I thought he had a few lovely runs through with the ball, one in particular where he kicked a beautiful ball to Motlop's advantage, allowing Mots to take a one-handed mark and kick a sneaky goal through. (It was not a bloody high loopy kick like so many of our players do but, rather, had a much lower trajectory!)

Although I felt that he had a quiet day, he certainly did contribute- made a few mistakes, though, and his overall disposal was poor, according to the stats (55%).
He was on the ground only 77% of the game, which is pretty low for him (he averages about 85% TOG this year).

I agree with your last statement regarding what we expect of him vs what the coaches expect of him. Who knows what his instructions were yesterday? He might have failed miserably in his attempt to follow those instructions or he might have come out of the game with a pat on the back from the coaches. We really don't know.

 

[Vdubs]

Guthrie is better than Thurlow and Thurlow is looking pretty good.

Was Corey better than Ling?
These comparisons are difficult.
I wonder how the MC rates players.
Selwood, Taylor, Blicavs, Hawkins, Lonergan, Motlop, Guthrie, Boris, Caddy I see as automatic INS.
Now, Thurlow, Bews, Lang look like definite must haves as well.
Maybe Gregson too, but surely he'll need some management time, as will Thurlow given the preseason trauma.

 

[Vdubs]

I thought he had a few lovely runs through with the ball, one in particular where he kicked a beautiful ball to Motlop's advantage, allowing Mots to take a one-handed mark and kick a sneaky goal through. (It was not a bloody high loopy kick like so many of our players do but, rather, had a much lower trajectory!)

Although I felt that he had a quiet day, he certainly did contribute- made a few mistakes, though, and his overall disposal was poor, according to the stats (55%).
He was on the ground only 77% of the game, which is pretty low for him (he averages about 85% TOG this year).

I agree with your last statement regarding what we expect of him vs what the coaches expect of him. Who knows what his instructions were yesterday? He might have failed miserably in his attempt to follow those instructions or he might have come out of the game with a pat on the back from the coaches. We really don't know.

Teri, where do you get those important stats, those eff % ones?
Interested in Lang, Thurlow, Mackie
versus
Enright, Caddy
Just from our observation last pm, Boris, and Caddy, who were both very influential, seem to cough it up quite a few times when v little pressure, whereas, Thurlow , Lang look so clean and precise.
Could just be perception.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I said this in the autopsy thread but I might as well say it again here: he's not a tagger. They are trying to have him play on guys like Heppell, have him limit the influence of that player and still find the ball and be damaging the other way. It just doesn't work. His best games have not been tagging performances but have been when he has had free reign.

I would be trying someone else as a dedicated tagger and releasing Guthrie. He's being wasted at the moment and it's not helping the team.

Substitute Duncan's name in there and you have exactly the same things that were said about Duncan earlier this season. And look what happened when Duncan was let off the leash *ignoring the foot problem, obviously

 

[Teriyakicat]

Teri, where do you get those important stats, those eff % ones?
Interested in Lang, Thurlow, Mackie
versus
Enright, Caddy
Just from our observation last pm, Boris, and Caddy, who were both very influential, seem to cough it up quite a few times when v little pressure, whereas, Thurlow , Lang look so clean and precise.
Could just be perception.

They're on footywire or the AFL site, Vdubs. Just last night's game?

Lang 73%
Thurlow 83%
Mackie 87%
Enright 74%
Caddy 55%

People like to compare midfielders' disposal with that of defenders but, in reality, midfielders are usually under a lot more pressure, whereas defenders stats are skewed by the amount of disposals they have into space. A lot of the time, the best thing you can use is your eyes rather than the stats- or look at the stats but remember how the players were using the ball.

 

[Vdubs]

They're on footywire or the AFL site, Vdubs. Just last night's game?

Lang 73%
Thurlow 83%
Mackie 87%
Enright 74%
Caddy 55%

People like to compare midfielders' disposal with that of defenders but, in reality, midfielders are usually under a lot more pressure, whereas defenders stats are skewed by the amount of disposals they have into space. A lot of the time, the best thing you can use is your eyes rather than the stats- or look at the stats but remember how the players were using the ball.

How are the %'s arrived at? A clear clean delivery to a team mate, a goal?
Caddy's don't surprise me. Boris- obviously my bar for him is so high.
Lang appeared better than 73%, but that's pretty clean anyway.
Lots of "hospital handpasses" by both teams last pm.
You are right though- the eyes for me tell me Thurlow and Lang are great under pressure.

 

[Daniel McL]

Guthrie is fine.
Not incredible, not horrible.
I say we let him roam free on the wing, Murdoch is better suited at half forward anyway. Guthrie is behind Selwood, Caddy & Blicavs in the middle (also Bartel & Duncan when fit) but he provides good run so give him a wing & watch him rack up possessions.

 

[Seeds]

Was Corey better than Ling?
These comparisons are difficult.
I wonder how the MC rates players.
Selwood, Taylor, Blicavs, Hawkins, Lonergan, Motlop, Guthrie, Boris, Caddy I see as automatic INS.
Now, Thurlow, Bews, Lang look like definite must haves as well.
Maybe Gregson too, but surely he'll need some management time, as will Thurlow given the preseason trauma.

U don't see Johnson as an automatic? He has been in our best four players for the last five games in a row.

 

[Teriyakicat]

How are the %'s arrived at? A clear clean delivery to a team mate, a goal?
Caddy's don't surprise me. Boris- obviously my bar for him is so high.
Lang appeared better than 73%, but that's pretty clean anyway.
Lots of "hospital handpasses" by both teams last pm.
You are right though- the eyes for me tell me Thurlow and Lang are great under pressure.

I would assume that your assumption is correct, Vdubs. Sorry - I'm not much help, am I?
Someone like SJ or 10lana would be able to tell us exactly what an effective disposal is, I think.

Points are classified as effective kicks, AFAIK, and I think kicks to a contest are also effective kicks.

 

[Vdubs]

U don't see Johnson as an automatic? He has been in our best four players for the last five games in a row.

Omission.
But, I'm not against him wearing the green vest on the odd occasion either.

 

[Lana]

I would assume that your assumption is correct, Vdubs. Sorry - I'm not much help, am I?
Someone like SJ or 10lana would be able to tell us exactly what an effective disposal is, I think.

Points are classified as effective kicks, AFAIK, and I think kicks to a contest are also effective kicks.

I'm not sure about scoring a behind being an effective possession, but kicks over 40 meters to a contest that is 1-1 or better is considered effective. I looked around but I couldn't find an actual definition so I'll have to pass the question.

Champion_Data

What is the definition of an effective disposal and are behinds considered an effective disposal?

 

[Teriyakicat]

I'm not sure about scoring a behind being an effective possession, but kicks over 40 meters to a contest that is 1-1 or better is considered effective. I looked around but I couldn't find an actual definition so I'll have to pass the question.

Champion_Data

What is the definition of an effective disposal and are behinds considered an effective disposal?

thanks 10lana. I also googled around and saw this post from someone on BF in 2007: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/champion-data-gameday-live-afl-com-au-effective-kicks.326506/

 

[Champion_Data]

I'm not sure about scoring a behind being an effective possession, but kicks over 40 meters to a contest that is 1-1 or better is considered effective. I looked around but I couldn't find an actual definition so I'll have to pass the question.

Champion_Data

What is the definition of an effective disposal and are behinds considered an effective disposal?

Long (40m or more) to 50-50 or better.
Short to retention (or dropped mark, fumble by teammate).
Behinds are ineffective unless it wins you the game.