Skills

Quote: Neruda "why do you think i havent seen sufficient of the other contenders? and how would irrelevant skewed stats fix that anyway?

OK tell me how many matches have you seen each play last season?

Also explain why you think that using the number of carries is irrelevant for assessing attacking performance but somehow the same productivity formula is OK when used for average meters per carry or average kicking success rate or even tackle success rate.

It is how averages are worked out. In cricket the stats are called averages and a bowlers economy rate is worked out using the number of overs (not matches) and batsmen have their strike rates recorded based on the number of balls bowled. Nothing skewed about these!

Stats are a record of facts and if taken over a sufficient period will smooth out any anomalies or exceptions. They allow coaches and managers to study and analyse in detail to assist in evaluating performance. But they are not definitive and I have never said they are. They do not record many other factors like, attitude, commitment, strength of opposition, game winning/saving/losing plays etc etc

However in the context of a difference of opinion they can be fairly used to of support or oppose a point of argument. I repeat my use of stats is to support views and opinions previously formed in the usual way ie watching the players on the pitch. I regard Hardaker as very good in defense and returning the ball but lacking in creative play.

Whether you choose to use the totals on the basis of per season, per game or per time with ball in hand, Hardaker is well behind several of the other SL fullbacks (whether full time or part time) with regard to attack success. For last season ZH came 32nd in the try assist table and didn't even make the top 50 for either clean breaks or number of tries scored. Hardaker came 2nd in the Tackle bust table and 3rd for metres made but again did not make the top 50 for average gain. But he was 8th for number of carries (and the leading fullback)

Hardaker was tremendous under the high ball, in physical defense and physical attack with great tackle busts and metres made. Where he has to improve is in the finer points of attack so that his great efforts bring more success.
My eyes told me that and the stats backed it up.

So I have shown that several other fullbacks have much better strike rates than ZH but that does not mean they are better overall and without seeing a lot more of the competition I do not know if any are better or worse than ZH. Escare certainly had a fine season and Hanbury has been consistently good for the past couple of years and a reason for the improvement in what was a bottom of the table side.