PODCAST Thread

benxpomeroy

Bronze Whaler
Joined
Jul 25, 2023
Messages
62
Reaction score
38
The player ratings needed to be scaled down a lot on sharkcast. The ratings that were given are that of a premiership winning side.
 

Blair

Bull Shark
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
119
Sam is definitely a glass half full man.
I enjoy his guest's insights - especially the guys who have worked for the club, or are currently employed by the club.

I was listening to both Sharkcast and Fins Up, but stopped due to one being too peachy and the other being a trash fire (was like listening to my ex- wife whinge for an hour).
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,191
Reaction score
3,529
The player ratings needed to be scaled down a lot on sharkcast. The ratings that were given are that of a premiership winning side.
It’s just one fan’s opinion (well two, since he had his mate Josh on).

Any time someone starts scoring players it is going to be subjective, and there is always the question of whether the score is “overall” or relative to their role and/or opportunities. E.g. Does JC get rated as an “extra” who played one ok game at second row, or based on how well he played as a 10-15 minutes bench middle? For me, that’s the difference between a 5 and whatever Jack Williams gets (JC was equally as effective as a 15 minute player as Jack was as a 30 minute player).

Without getting hung up on the number/scores, I agreed with a lot of what they said about the players. I just thought their was a little recency bias (the players were moreso rated on their performance in the final 2-3 months). E.g. McInnes was hooked in round 3, but most don’t remember that 25 weeks down the track.
 
Last edited:

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
54,152
Reaction score
6,944
Location
Sydney
I enjoy his guest's insights - especially the guys who have worked for the club, or are currently employed by the club.

I was listening to both Sharkcast and Fins Up, but stopped due to one being too peachy and the other being a trash fire (was like listening to my ex- wife whinge for an hour).
I like Sharkcast but agree on the other one. I have given it a go but it's not for me.
 

Blair

Bull Shark
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
119
I like Sharkcast but agree on the other one. I have given it a go but it's not for me.
To be fair I still listen to most sharkcast - just not when its Sam on his own. Seems like a good dude, but a podcast needs to be a conversation.
 

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
54,152
Reaction score
6,944
Location
Sydney
To be fair I still listen to most sharkcast - just not when its Sam on his own. Seems like a good dude, but a podcast needs to be a conversation.
100% agree with that, much better with two people.
 

benxpomeroy

Bronze Whaler
Joined
Jul 25, 2023
Messages
62
Reaction score
38
It’s just one fan’s opinion (well two, since he had his mate Josh on).

Any time someone starts scoring players it is going to be subjective, and there is always the question of whether the score is “overall” or relative to their role and/or opportunities. E.g. Does JC get rated as an “extra” who played one ok game at second row, or based on how well he played as a 10-15 minutes bench middle? For me, that’s the difference between a 5 and whatever Jack Williams gets (JC was equally as effective as a 15 minute player as Jack was as a 30 minute player).

Without getting hung up on the number/scores, I agreed with a lot of what they said about the players. I just thought their was a little recency bias (the players were moreso rated on their performance in the final 2-3 months). E.g. McInnes was hooked in round 3, but most don’t remember that 25 weeks down the track.

Yeah i see what you are saying, the analysis was great and mostly on the money. Its just way too high scores for the season we had. everyone needed to minus 1 or 2 points. Its overall value for mine. Quality of performances and especially games played. But yeah all subjective!
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
7,770
Reaction score
2,103
I was listening to both Sharkcast and Fins Up, but stopped due to one being too peachy and the other being a trash fire (was like listening to my ex- wife whinge for an hour).
I like Sharkcast but agree on the other one. I have given it a go but it's not for me.
Agreed. It's a shame, because the episode Terry and Sam did together was fantastic, and shows what Fins up could be if he and Dan weren't competing for the most swear words or vegetable/inanimate object metaphors.

End of the day it's their project though, and if it being a vent space is what they want then power to them.
 

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
54,152
Reaction score
6,944
Location
Sydney
Agreed. It's a shame, because the episode Terry and Sam did together was fantastic, and shows what Fins up could be if he and Dan weren't competing for the most swear words or vegetable/inanimate object metaphors.

End of the day it's their project though, and if it being a vent space is what they want then power to them.
It really was, I thoroughly enjoyed that one.

They're obviously targeting a specific audience and that's fine, like you said it's their podcast.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
28,618
Reaction score
5,079
Location
IN A BAR
It’s just one fan’s opinion (well two, since he had his mate Josh on).

Any time someone starts scoring players it is going to be subjective, and there is always the question of whether the score is “overall” or relative to their role and/or opportunities. E.g. Does JC get rated as an “extra” who played one ok game at second row, or based on how well he played as a 10-15 minutes bench middle? For me, that’s the difference between a 5 and whatever Jack Williams gets (JC was equally as effective as a 15 minute player as Jack was as a 30 minute player).

Without getting hung up on the number/scores, I agreed with a lot of what they said about the players. I just thought their was a little recency bias (the players were moreso rated on their performance in the final 2-3 months). E.g. McInnes was hooked in round 3, but most don’t remember that 25 weeks down the track.
And similarly, for player X score 7/10 is 10 if they played their best game every week, the best positional players in the comp that season, or the best player ever in their best game ever in that position.

Say it was vs best player in that position for the year, say Payne Haas as a prop was a 10/10 if another forward is a 5 are they half as good? Are they ‘average’?
Are they a 5 because they looked decent for a role played in very limited opportunities? If that’s all it takes to be a 5/10 then it may as well be a 0/5 as there shouldn’t be anyone playing NRL that can’t do that

Someone doing all teams at least gives you a broad context for comparison
 

Rob

Hammerhead
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
429
Reaction score
230
Agreed. It's a shame, because the episode Terry and Sam did together was fantastic, and shows what Fins up could be if he and Dan weren't competing for the most swear words or vegetable/inanimate object metaphors.

End of the day it's their project though, and if it being a vent space is what they want then power to them.
Non stop swearing is 100% the reason I don’t listen, 90% time iv got kids in the car. I swear like a sailor but **** me the boys take it to an un listenable level.
 

mr.sharkiee

Great White
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
4,981
Reaction score
660
Non stop swearing is 100% the reason I don’t listen, 90% time iv got kids in the car. I swear like a sailor but **** me the boys take it to an un listenable level.
Don't mind either podcast, I enjoy Fins Up because there's no holding back and typically agree with what the boys say. Helps validate my thoughts after a loss too lol

With Sharkcast, Sam is great and obviously he can't be to critical as it sounds like he has connections with the club which is great for those player interviews.
 
Top