Official Oregon Kaufusi

[Sharkfox]

Mutual
adjective

"held in common by two or more parties"

Both parties must agree, club doesnt have to agree

 

[cardshark]

Yeah, but now that Payne Haas exists we widely accept that most middles suck if they are not as good as Haas by their 24th birthday.

where have all the good 28 year old middles that were once 24 year old average middles gone ?

 

[BurgoShark]

where have all the good 28 year old middles that were once 24 year old average middles gone ?

I'll take "song lyrics rejected by Peter Paul and Mary" for $200 Alex.

How about this guy? Was playing mostly centre and second row up until he was 25. Some people rate him now as a middle apparently.

 

[Sharkfox]

So do we wait 4 yrs waiting/hoping for him to blossom at 28, and when can we move him on if he's underperforming or not elevating.

 

[Proud Shark]

Both parties must agree, club doesnt have to agree

Sometimes, this works on a variety of stipulations.

Both agree = Standard price
The club agrees but the player doesn't = higher price
The player agrees but the club doesn't + lower price

So do we wait 4 yrs waiting/hoping for him to blossom at 28, and when can we move him on if he's underperforming or not elevating.

Of course not, we just adjust expectations. If he's up for renewal and hasn't improved, you don't resign him or keep him on a lower contract as depth. Right now, in a fully fit side, is he likely 17th picked? I don't think he's terrible for that position, although at this stage I'd be equally happy with someone on a rookie contract filling that role.

 

[Sharkfox]

Sometimes, this works on a variety of stipulations.

Both agree = Standard price
The club agrees but the player doesn't = higher price
The player agrees but the club doesn't + lower price


Of course not, we just adjust expectations. If he's up for renewal and hasn't improved, you don't resign him or keep him on a lower contract as depth. Right now, in a fully fit side, is he likely 17th picked? I don't think he's terrible for that position, although at this stage I'd be equally happy with someone on a rookie contract filling that role.

When our forwards are all fit, hope Hazelton isnt dropped for Kaufusi .

I'm all for keeping the playing group together, but need to make some changes with our forward pack, with 1 or 2 additions. Next year are we extending Hamlin-Uele, Williams, Rudolf and Calquhoun or let one of them go. Would rather sign these guys, have Calquhoun fill the depth role and let go of Kaufusi if he's underperforming. Go to market and add an impact player for 2025

 

[Proud Shark]

When our forwards are all fit, hope Hazelton isnt dropped for Kaufusi .

I'm all for keeping the playing group together, but need to make some changes with our forward pack, with 1 or 2 additions. Next year are we extending Hamlin-Uele, Williams, Rudolf and Calquhoun or let one of them go. Would rather sign these guys, have Calquhoun fill the depth role and let go of Kaufusi if he's underperforming. Go to market and add an impact player for 2025

I think the best change will be luck with injuries. I think if we had a fully fit pack all year we would be having a very different conversation about all the above players.

I think you'll get that option for 2025. If Kaufusi is underperforming expectations, he'll likely stay one more year on a potentially reduced contract, or be encouraged to look elsewhere. Assuming players like JC improve to demand his jersey.

IMO on this year there is no way Hazleton is dropped for Kaufisi.

I think you can lock in Dale, McInnes, Rudolf, BHU and Williams. Which likely gives us two 'worker' style forwards on the bench. I think you need an impact guy next, and that's Hazleton or Hunt. Personally I'd have them both, but I think on this year if one was to drop off for Kaufusi it would be Hunt.

 

[BurgoShark]

So do we wait 4 yrs waiting/hoping for him to blossom at 28, and when can we move him on if he's underperforming or not elevating.

You can move him on when he's off contract... or beforehand if someone else wants to take him on.

As @Proud Shark said, mutual option doesn't mean "they have to agree". It means they each have an option and depending on who activates (club, player or both) the outcome may vary in terms of money or extra years. E.g. players in the past have had MO's where if both club activates, the PO stays in place for the following year.

Kaufusi's not setting the world on fire, but assuming his contract is affordable a 24yo prop with 90 games of NRL experience is a decent each way bet. If he pans out - great. If he doesn't, you haven't broken the bank on him and he can play out his contract as a depth forward. No harm done. I don't see why "get rid of him" has to be an option. Just keep him as one of your 30 players, and if/when someone else leapfrogs him in the pecking order just play him less or send him to Newtown.

 

[Sparkles]

You can move him on when he's off contract... or beforehand if someone else wants to take him on.

As @Proud Shark said, mutual option doesn't mean "they have to agree". It means they each have an option and depending on who activates (club, player or both) the outcome may vary in terms of money or extra years. E.g. players in the past have had MO's where if both club activates, the PO stays in place for the following year.

Kaufusi's not setting the world on fire, but assuming his contract is affordable a 24yo prop with 90 games of NRL experience is a decent each way bet. If he pans out - great. If he doesn't, you haven't broken the bank on him and he can play out his contract as a depth forward. No harm done. I don't see why "get rid of him" has to be an option. Just keep him as one of your 30 players, and if/when someone else leapfrogs him in the pecking order just play him less or send him to Newtown.

The get rid of argument is a funny one. There's no more certainty around any other player you'd be bringing in at around the same price.
Kaufusi's definitely not stamped his mark on the team, but he's also been switched around a few times throughout the season and has solid foundations to improve.

I'm hoping this year gave Fitz everything he needed to decide on player roles for pre-season training so they can have a solid shot at getting comfortable next to each other, whoever that ends up being.

 

[Sevshark]

You can move him on when he's off contract... or beforehand if someone else wants to take him on.

As @Proud Shark said, mutual option doesn't mean "they have to agree". It means they each have an option and depending on who activates (club, player or both) the outcome may vary in terms of money or extra years. E.g. players in the past have had MO's where if both club activates, the PO stays in place for the following year.

Kaufusi's not setting the world on fire, but assuming his contract is affordable a 24yo prop with 90 games of NRL experience is a decent each way bet. If he pans out - great. If he doesn't, you haven't broken the bank on him and he can play out his contract as a depth forward. No harm done. I don't see why "get rid of him" has to be an option. Just keep him as one of your 30 players, and if/when someone else leapfrogs him in the pecking order just play him less or send him to Newtown.

I swear people were expecting this guy to be Fifita reborn.

 

[BurgoShark]

I swear people were expecting this guy to be Fifita reborn.

Yeah agreed - I think the problem is expectations rather than the player.

 

[Sharkfox]

I swear people were expecting this guy to be Fifita reborn.

Not really expecting that from what we saw while he was at eels. For his size, capabilities and top grade experience, he should be playing with more intensity and bring some impact. He got the opportunity to be always in the 17 and also be a starter, needs to make use or make way for someone thats hungry

 

[Gards]

He is a solid player, intensity is his issue. He needs to find it if he ever wants to be more than dependable and accused of being a plodder

Hazelton being at the same age as Kaufusi with far less NRL experience shows what a talent Tommy is and how much effort he put in this year for us

 

[BurgoShark]

Kaufusi's Full Stats for 2023
In terms of attacking involvement he had a great start.

When Toby went down Oregon stepped in and was heavily involved as a starter in rounds 7 and 8, but once BHU went down too he wasn't able to maintain his level of involvement.

I think what the team has is Kaufusi is a player who fits a "either side of halftime" bench role really well, has a good enough motor to play 30-35 minutes consistently, and can sometimes play a starting role when paired with the right partner... BUT he is not a good fit for the "15 minutes of high impact" role. It's just not his game.

That might be a very long way to say "he's a plodder".




Rather than show Oregon's individual regression graphs, I'll hold off until I can add a comparison of Hazelton, Kaufusi and Williams.

In short, Oregon's linear regression shows that...
- His attacking output is fairly consistent regardless of minutes (15 - 35)
- His defensive output is fairly consistent regardless of minutes
- He doesn't miss more tackles if he plays longer

 

[BurgoShark]

Whoops - just realised I have one more game to be able to do Williams.

... so here is the comparison of Hazelton and Kaufusi.

* Hazelton is much more heavily involved when playing low minutes
* Once they go past the 30 minute mark, the players are comparable in terms of overall attacking involvement
* Once they go past the 15 minute mark, Kaufusi is more involved inside his own 40
* Hazelton does a little more work in defence, even at higher minutes

Based on this data..
* If I had both these players in the 17 I would play Kaufusi for more minutes so I could maximise Tom's output in a shorter stint, BUT
* If I could only have one of these players in my 17 I would choose Tom, because he can be effective in either role



small sample size th

 

[bort]

Based on this data..
* If I had both these players in the 17 I would play Kaufusi for more minutes so I could maximise Tom's output in a shorter stint, BUT
* If I could only have one of these players in my 17 I would choose Tom, because he can be effective in either role

Pre data that would have been my thoughts too

Is that Hazelton dot on tackle % vs Balll in play, bottom left [sub 80% efficiency, only 10 mins ball in play] the r10 dolphins game, or which?

And bottom left for Kaufusi the r12 Knights game?

 

[BurgoShark]

Pre data that would have been my thoughts too

Is that Hazelton dot on tackle % vs Ball in play, bottom left [sub 80% efficiency, only 10 mins ball in play] the r10 dolphins game, or which?

Bulldogs Rd 16.

8 tackles, 2 misses, 1 ineffective.

For the purpose of this graph a miss and an ineffective tackle are the same thing.

And bottom left for Kaufusi the r12 Knights game?

Yep.

 

[bort]

Bulldogs Rd 16.

8 tackles, 2 misses, 1 ineffective.

Missed that one somehow - that is quite shockingly bad in an 18 minute bench stint where we had a big win, and his 8th game of NRL for the season too.
Will take it as an outlier

Oregon's also in a good win, and in a game he played pretty consistent role as previous few weeks. So again, another which is a bit of an outlier.

Interestingly though... both players did not play the week before their worst defensive efforts.
Oregon was sick and missed the win over Manly before his worst defensive effort, Hazelton just was not selected the round before although he also didn't play cup that round (maybe was 19th man for trip to Melbourne)

 

[BurgoShark]

Missed that one somehow - that is quite shockingly bad in an 18 minute bench stint where we had a big win, and his 8th game of NRL for the season too.
Will take it as an outlier

Definitely an outlier. It was still a good defensive work rate, but considering it was only ~4 minutes of actual defence you'd like to see him tighten that up.

Oregon's also in a good win, and in a game he played pretty consistent role as previous few weeks. So again, another which is a bit of an outlier.

Interestingly though... both players did not play the week before their worst defensive efforts.

* Not their worst defensive efforts necessarily. Just their tackle % according to nrl.com.

I'd say the finals game was Tom's worst statistical performance defensively. Keep in mind that the model incorporates missed tackles and other positive/negative defensive plays.

Again though, it's hard to fix your stats in a really low minute performance. If he stays out there another 5 minutes and makes 6-7 more tackles it probably drags him back up to that bunch of games on the right (Rd 10, 11 & 25).



For Oregon I'd say yes. The Knights game in round 12 was definitely his worst from a stats PoV. As you said, he might have been a little underdone coming in to that one. Right on his average for attacking output, but well below average in defence.

Oregon was sick and missed the win over Manly before his worst defensive effort, Hazelton just was not selected the round before although he also didn't play cup that round (maybe was 19th man for trip to Melbourne)

Yep. Tom was 19th man v Melbourne. He was named, but McInnes made an earlier than expected return from the hand injury so he dropped off.

 

[egg]

Needs so.e Face Slapping before he runs out ..Release the MONGREL.