Official Dale Finucane

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
That is a pretty tight cluster, especially if you ignore the bench one, there is really only one low(er) involvement game, and that was with decent ball in play. And we did win it.

Gotta have a bloke who just gets **** done, brings leadership and everyone trusts to work hard as long as he's asked to.

Would have only cost an extra 500k plus whatever else we needed to pay for him to pick us to go up to Tino and had a similar bloke who adds highlights.
Those highlights must fill the hole coming 14th instead of 6th creates
Yep. BTW that lower one was his one game starting at prop. Different role.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,503
Reaction score
6,315
Location
IN A BAR
Yep. BTW that lower one was his one game starting at prop. Different role.
Oh that’s interesting

Still made good quantity of tackles (topped the team).
Him and Royce didn’t run much but bench was Jack Wade Tommy & Tricky so we couldn’t really even use our props normally anyway
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
Oh that’s interesting

Still made good quantity of tackles (topped the team).
Him and Royce didn’t run much but bench was Jack Wade Tommy & Tricky so we couldn’t really even use our props normally anyway
It was also a really weird game from a possession and field position PoV. Royce and Dale had good numbers after their first stints, but in their second stints barely had an opportunity to run. Manly had the ball almost the entire time, and in the possession that the Sharks did get during that period they either dropped it on an early tackle or were coming out of corners with outside backs.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
I also did a bunch of "Cam v Dale" graphs including only the games where they played between 26 and 40 minutes of ball in play (their "normal" deployment).

The results were...

  • They both run a similar amount no matter how long they play
  • They both work as hard in defence no matter how long they play
  • Cam's tackle % is slightly higher at the lower end but is the same as Dale the same when playing 35+
  • Cam takes more runs inside 40 at the lower end, but is equivalent to Dale when playing 35+

People can call him "meh" or say that he doesn't "bring enough impact" or whatever they like, but the fact here is that that there are only three forwards whose performance doesn't drop off in at least one of these categories if they play more than 25 minutes. Dale, Cam, Toby. Those are the best three forwards on the team because they can perform at the same level for long minutes. Jack Williams is 4th, and ahead of the 5th guy by a fair way.
 
Last edited:

Born&bred

Jaws
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
12,956
Reaction score
950
Location
The Bar
I'd be happy to lose him - stats mean jack **** - they only measure involvement, not game changing ability or X factor.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,503
Reaction score
6,315
Location
IN A BAR
People can call him "meh" or say that he doesn't "bring enough impact" or whatever they like, but the fact here is that that there are only three forwards whose performance doesn't drop off in at least one of these categories if they play more than 25 minutes. Dale, Cam, Toby. Those are the best three forwards on the team because they can perform at the same level for long minutes. Jack Williams is 4th, and ahead of the 5th guy by a fair way.
Aren't they just the 'hardest working'? Isn't your system a measure of output/work, not a quality?

Someone could perform at the same high level each game and still be only mediocre in terms of quality of output - presumably if they were bad they wouldn't be getting the minutes to be in the convo.

If you value hard work over anything else the are objectively the best.

I certainly have them right up there for us - as mentioned Dale in particular I am down on for pay packet vs games played (rightly or wrongly). Rudolf went a bit funny via the eye test coming back from toe injury.
But as far as BEST goes it is hard for me to put BHU there when he got ruined by injury again, and someone like Hazelton is probably currently the 'most exciting' IMO, but not (yet) our best overall.

I'd say McInnes, Williams and Hazelton were the forwards who were best (for their role) IMO
 

Wiz

Jaws
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,906
Reaction score
1,514
I also did a bunch of "Cam v Dale" graphs including only the games where they played between 26 and 40 minutes of ball in play (their "normal" deployment).

The results were...

  • They both run a similar amount no matter how long they play
  • They both work as hard in defence no matter how long they play
  • Cam's tackle % is slightly higher at the lower end but is the same as Dale the same when playing 35+
  • Cam takes more runs inside 40 at the lower end, but is equivalent to Dale when playing 35+

People can call him "meh" or say that he doesn't "bring enough impact" or whatever they like, but the fact here is that that there are only three forwards whose performance doesn't drop off in at least one of these categories if they play more than 25 minutes. Dale, Cam, Toby. Those are the best three forwards on the team because they can perform at the same level for long minutes. Jack Williams is 4th, and ahead of the 5th guy by a fair way.
one of those guys is the most paid, the most suspended and also the club captain
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
Aren't they just the 'hardest working'? Isn't your system a measure of output/work, not a quality?
It's involvement with weighting for other positive and negative plays. Old model was involvement only.

Quality is subjective, and as you said below it is determined by what you value.


Someone could perform at the same high level each game and still be only mediocre in terms of quality of output - presumably if they were bad they wouldn't be getting the minutes to be in the convo.
I guess it is possible, but I don't think this player doesn't exist s in the NRL. Some guy who is super fit and takes a million hit-ups, but only ever makes 3m, gets turtled every time, and is only ever the 3rd man in to the tackle? Nobody would pick him.


If you value hard work over anything else the are objectively the best.
Not just hard work.

The biggest part of the work I've done is not the model. It's the individual possession and ball in play numbers. You could invalidate the model but those things are objective facts.

Having that information lets me map it against other factors and state other objective facts. E.g.

"Every middle forward except Toby, Dale and Cam misses more tackles the more minutes they play".

Call me old fashioned, but players making tackles instead of missing them is a fairly heavy criteria for me determining whether someone is "good".

I certainly have them right up there for us - as mentioned Dale in particular I am down on for pay packet vs games played (rightly or wrongly). Rudolf went a bit funny via the eye test coming back from toe injury.
But as far as BEST goes it is hard for me to put BHU there when he got ruined by injury again, and someone like Hazelton is probably currently the 'most exciting' IMO, but not (yet) our best overall.

I'd say McInnes, Williams and Hazelton were the forwards who were best (for their role) IMO
I wouldn't argue with those players being subjectively the best three this season, considering their roles and how many games they played.

I think BHU is a fantastic player, but he didn't show it this year after round 9.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
I'd be happy to lose him - stats mean jack **** - they only measure involvement, not game changing ability or X factor.
"Strike" or "X factor" player has a role on the team, but you fit those guys in to set roles rather than building your team around them.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
8,545
Reaction score
2,848
I also did a bunch of "Cam v Dale" graphs including only the games where they played between 26 and 40 minutes of ball in play (their "normal" deployment).

The results were...

  • They both run a similar amount no matter how long they play
  • They both work as hard in defence no matter how long they play
  • Cam's tackle % is slightly higher at the lower end but is the same as Dale the same when playing 35+
  • Cam takes more runs inside 40 at the lower end, but is equivalent to Dale when playing 35+

People can call him "meh" or say that he doesn't "bring enough impact" or whatever they like, but the fact here is that that there are only three forwards whose performance doesn't drop off in at least one of these categories if they play more than 25 minutes. Dale, Cam, Toby. Those are the best three forwards on the team because they can perform at the same level for long minutes. Jack Williams is 4th, and ahead of the 5th guy by a fair way.
I'm sure you've said it before, but there are a lot of stat posts to go through.

What is the drop off point for Dale/Cam/Toby? And by 25 minutes do you mean in a stint, or over the game?
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,491
Reaction score
2,114
Location
At the Tucky
So Dale is better at being mediocre and involved over longer minutes than other players - nice

We all watch the Sharks games (I assume). If you don't think there is a difference between his early 2022 performances and what we have got from him since then well that's fine but I know what I see. He was really good for us initially and gave us what we recruited him for.

Speaking of the eye test, McInnes and Williams were much better players around those middle and lock roles in 2023 than Dale. They had a real influence on our team. Dale just did what any bloke on half his wage could do just for a bit longer.

I acknowledge he has had time out of the team which doesn't help form and consistency wise but those suspensions are on him. Injury is unlucky but all players face that.

Wouldn't mind seeing his defensive/tackle stats over his Sharks career. His tackle % started out in that Tolman like Goldilocks zone of mid to high 90% but then he was in the mid to high 80% later on. Stats aren't everything and there can be reasons not his fault (like other forwards not aiming up) but seeing as we are talking stats to justify Dale not being meh....

If he were currently playing for another team would we bother to offer him a contract to come here?
We went ok without him thanks to other forwards stepping up
 

Sparkles

Jaws
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
2,934
So Dale is better at being mediocre and involved over longer minutes than other players - nice

We all watch the Sharks games (I assume). If you don't think there is a difference between his early 2022 performances and what we have got from him since then well that's fine but I know what I see. He was really good for us initially and gave us what we recruited him for.

Speaking of the eye test, McInnes and Williams were much better players around those middle and lock roles in 2023 than Dale. They had a real influence on our team. Dale just did what any bloke on half his wage could do just for a bit longer.

I acknowledge he has had time out of the team which doesn't help form and consistency wise but those suspensions are on him. Injury is unlucky but all players face that.

Wouldn't mind seeing his defensive/tackle stats over his Sharks career. His tackle % started out in that Tolman like Goldilocks zone of mid to high 90% but then he was in the mid to high 80% later on. Stats aren't everything and there can be reasons not his fault (like other forwards not aiming up) but seeing as we are talking stats to justify Dale not being meh....

If he were currently playing for another team would we bother to offer him a contract to come here?
I don't know why I feel a bit defensive about Dale... but...
I think "Dale just did what any bloke on half his wage could do just for a bit longer" is exactly why blokes are on half his wage. Consistency seems very undervalued at the moment.

I don't have any qualm with pointing out how little time we've had with Dad Dale on the field and how that's affected the squad. I think he and Fitz have been guilty of trying to get him on the field when he wasn't ready, too. Which is just as disruptive. You can argue about how much of that is his fault, it's probably fair to level criticism at him there. But I'm all but certain that if he had stayed on the field we would have been a better team. He proved he wasn't replaceable. That's not a something you say about a bloke half his wage.
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,491
Reaction score
2,114
Location
At the Tucky
Not saying he can't get better or re find his form, don't care about his age just his performances.

But coming out of a very successful Storm team, has played Origin, is on decent coin - there are expectations around that

He is important to this team on proviso he is playing well. We need him to own that middle ruck area. Even if his hitups arn't always that impactful he can get a quick ptb and not gunna lie and say that hasn't helped get some good outcomes for us.

Leadership is difficult to measure objectively but there are times we really lacked it, that's not on Dale alone, also our other senior players and our 7

Believe me I want him to do well for us, we need him to.
 

Sparkles

Jaws
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
2,934
Not saying he can't get better or re find his form, don't care about his age just his performances.

But coming out of a very successful Storm team, has played Origin, is on decent coin - there are expectations around that

He is important to this team on proviso he is playing well. We need him to own that middle ruck area. Even if his hitups arn't always that impactful he can get a quick ptb and not gunna lie and say that hasn't helped get some good outcomes for us.

Leadership is difficult to measure objectively but there are times we really lacked it, that's not on Dale alone, also our other senior players and our 7

Believe me I want him to do well for us, we need him to.
I believe you mate :)

Just need him on the field. Or one of our other forwards to take up the mantle. I'm cool either way!
 

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
55,477
Reaction score
8,343
Location
Sydney
Yeah the constant disruptions are the annoying part. If he can stay on the field there are no issues for mine.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
I'm sure you've said it before, but there are a lot of stat posts to go through.

What is the drop off point for Dale/Cam/Toby? And by 25 minutes do you mean in a stint, or over the game?
Ball in play.

Toby averages 29. Only game he dropped off was the finals game when he played way too much (no BHU or Dale, Tom injury).

Cam and Dale average 34. Dale rarely plays more than 40. Cam drops off after that in attack but is just as good defensively.

I don't mean to say that I have cracked some secret code here with the model, but in terms of what makes a forward "good", not missing tackles or shirking their job when they are tired is pretty important.

Looking at the two extremes in the team, if you play McInnes and BHU for 15 minutes each they are going to take just as many runs, tackle just as often, and constantly make their way back inside their half to run the ball. If you play them for 30, BHU's defensive workload will drop off by 50%, he'll miss 15% more tackles, and he won't take any runs inside his half. In my opinion both these players are valuable to the team, but the one who can play either role and can maintain his work rate is the better (and more rare) player.
 

Sparkles

Jaws
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
2,934
Cam and Dale average 34. Dale rarely plays more than 40.
Any idea of Dale's average minutes in his later Storm years? Not sure if the 34 mins is how he usually rolls, is affected by injury, etc or part of our plan (if we had a steady run-on side to allow our preferred plan to be in place)?
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
So Dale is better at being mediocre and involved over longer minutes than other players - nice

We all watch the Sharks games (I assume). If you don't think there is a difference between his early 2022 performances and what we have got from him since then well that's fine but I know what I see. He was really good for us initially and gave us what we recruited him for.
Couple of down games in rounds 10 and 11, and his miss on Cam Murray in the finals last year was piss-weak. Outside of that Dale was the same player in 2023 as early 2022.

E.g. 6 tries were scored off Finucane ptb's in round 18 (but one was disallowed).

You probably weren't watching that though.

Speaking of the eye test, McInnes and Williams were much better players around those middle and lock roles in 2023 than Dale. They had a real influence on our team. Dale just did what any bloke on half his wage could do just for a bit longer.
Williams plays a very different role to Finucane. In the Sharks structure I would say Williams almost never plays lock, and when he does it is a little clunky.

I acknowledge he has had time out of the team which doesn't help form and consistency wise but those suspensions are on him. Injury is unlucky but all players face that.

Wouldn't mind seeing his defensive/tackle stats over his Sharks career. His tackle % started out in that Tolman like Goldilocks zone of mid to high 90% but then he was in the mid to high 80% later on. Stats aren't everything and there can be reasons not his fault (like other forwards not aiming up) but seeing as we are talking stats to justify Dale not being meh....
This is Cam and Dale for games with 26-40 mins ball in play. Dale was 92%. Cam 93%.

1700090153869.png

If he were currently playing for another team would we bother to offer him a contract to come here?
We went ok without him thanks to other forwards stepping up
Did we?

Sharks got flogged 5 times this season. 3 were without Dale and one was with him on the bench. The fifth one had nothing to do with the forwards going good or bad. The backs kept dropping it in their own half and giving piggy-back penalties.
 
Last edited:

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
Any idea of Dale's average minutes in his later Storm years? Not sure if the 34 mins is how he usually rolls, is affected by injury, etc or part of our plan (if we had a steady run-on side to allow our preferred plan to be in place)?
34 minutes ball in play is equivalent to 48-52 minutes of actual game time (depending on how the game goes) which is similar to what he played from 2020-2022.
 
Top