Korbin Sims: It's "unfair" to compare Latrell Mitchell to Greg Inglis

I think he only played fullback when he was younger becuase it was just a way to get him the ball more. It was reasonably evident in his first season that he was someone not used to having to make decisions, he'd probably spent the previous 5 years running over the first teenager and then outrunning the other 12. At NRL level, in a good team, focusing on the quality of each posssesion has been a boon. It would be interesting to see what happens if he does take a fullback gig at another club

To be fair though Robinson does have Manu on the other side and Teddy (who is probably the best player for the tricolours - thanks tigers for the perpetual ineptitude!) popping up through the middle so it's not like his decision to spread it around is a philosophical one.

I made a similar comment above before reading this. Latrell showed he was a gun while playing fullback but I think that’s also where he got his reputation for “brain explosions” his decision amkin* wasn’t great. I don’t think he has a big enough motor to play a full season of fullback and from memory he had to be shifted to the wing a couple of times to have a spell. What I like about the Roosters is that they’re not just playing “get it to Latrell” which must be tempting - it’s about getting him quality ball in space and getting him one on one with defenders, where he’s next to impossible to stop. There’s not many players that can do what he can do, but he wouldn’t be doing it so effectively without his inside men setting it up for him.

Also a smart move by Robinson to shift Latrell away from fullback. It could have been an easy call to leave him where he’d handle the ball more and in the days when players feel empowered to demand positional switches so they can earn “fullback money” Latrell’s fitness and decision making wasn’t really up to it and he’s definitely a “less is more” player. Robinson doesn’t employ a strategy of just shovel the ball to Mitchell and let him do his thing, it’s about delivering quality ball to him. Against the Tigers, Mitchell had only seven runs but made over 200 metres, scored three tries and one try assist. That’s a pretty phenomenal return but as I say I think Robinson deserves a lot of credit with how he’s using (and not using) Mitchell. He also made two line breaks and five tackle busts and was only tackled three times. It’s one of the more remarkable statistical returns.

Cliffy and Beaver

Actually if you go back to the middle 70's Easts teams under Gibbo with Arthur and his ability to unload the full back would trail up the field waiting for that pass off Beto. Ian Schubert & Johnny Brass would trail Beto up the field like a bad smell, just waiting for his off load. Tedesco does the same thing with the current pack

Yeah like I said below - I'd genuinely like to see the article as things like the NFL combine results suggest otherwise, particularly when you account for size. Whilst it’s just anecdotal the only NFL player I’ve ever “known” told me he added 30 pounds and dropped 0.1 off his 40 time with the switch from college to pro training regime.

Yeah Mitchell defintiely looks bigger through the body. I think the reuslts (well obviously given your stats) might be the same but the process to me feels very different. I see Mitchell use his raw strength more to break contact after space is taken away and inglis used that lankyiness to maintain the space.

Side note: Good work though on trawling through the old game logs (did you use the old NRLstats given the postition designations?). Just becuase I don't necessarily agree doens't mean I don't appreciate the (far more accurate than my guess) work that went in.

Yes, Latrell started out as a Fullback with a couple of games on the wing. I think it is true that the indigenous component makes the comparison for want of a better word, easier. But I think that is as much to do with body shape, though GI was probably lankier than Latrell at the same age.

Paulie I understand is simply suggesting the advantages with modern training techniques and facilities are negligible, the one area that has drastically improved is recovery time from both a game and injury management

When you say the times what do you mean? The training time or sprint times? If it's sprint times it would be interesting to see the data because other sports have seen a marked improvement - particualrly when adjsuted for weight vs average

I think you're understating the work done by the rest of the team to create that space for him but yes he uses those gifts he’s got to covert those opportunities. Again not sure why that makes him a suited to full back. At centre he plays exactly what is there in a closed win loss for that possession which suits his high risk decision making and his skills. And yep you can over structure and miss opportunities, though Latrell probably more than a little guilty of not taking the simple pass and backing himself – not out of structure but because that’s the price you have to pay with a player like him. It’s like a Ferrari comes with high insurance and maintenance costs – you live with it because it’s a Ferrari. Looking at the Dufty try did he really take much of a chance? Pretty regulation pass back towards the centre of the field (hardly SKD stuff) and most of the offloads were pretty low risk standing, arm free, player hitting the gap and limited traffic (I think one mid way through the passage was tougher but still regulation by NRL standards). But then that’s kind of the point, judicious risk taking. Knowing when the payoff is worth the marginal increase in risk and going for it. I can see Mitchell getting offered spine money and it will be a tough call for the Roosters to match that without causing issue further down the track with Manu.

Latrell is often moved to fullback not to tame him but because he has the ability to exploit a staggered defensive line, I can’t remember the last time a fullback scored an intercept try, as for “playing what’s in front” their is so much structure in how sides build up into attack that when an opportunity appears most don’t take advantage, how many bombed try’s have you seen this year? As Freddy stated even a simple 2 on 1 overlap is being missed. The bulk of Latrells try’s have been on the back of backing his individual ability, in fairness I should also add Walker to this list. Dufty scored a brilliant try on weekend. As a fullback he exploited Parras defensive line, took a chance attacking from his red zone as a result we witnessed a brilliant team try, why don’t we see more of this? Because coaches don’t like their sides attacking from their red zone it’s risky so they resort to boring predictable structures until they reach their objective.

Yep becuase if everyone has the same training then the same latent advantage wins out. Where I think there's probably some differnece is the gym junkies of the 70s and 80s like a Wayne Pearce might (might... please tigers fans I haven't shot his mum I like Wayne and wish his son had have been a bit more like him) not have the same careers now when the laziest player still needs to train hard.

I wrote about that two years back, Robbo embraced the sample size when he had a team that lacked the conservative decision makers to play the “typical” NRL style of low risk play. The paradox is that by taking lots of individual “risks” (assuming the reward is worth it) you average out to a lower risk position.

Not sure why playing what is in front of you is mutually exclusive of risk? Yes good on Robbo, but that style works better as a centre, Do you want your fullback screming through for intercepts? Part of a fullback’s job is to survey the field and bark instructions to get people into the lowest risk positon defensively. Also as a ball player he’s, at this point anyway, better with a one consequence decision (the “play what is in front of him” cliche) as he often makes rash decisons in the cotnext of the tackle count etc (you could probably pull together a montage of Mitchell line braks that end with him or the ball in touch – I swear he must have played junior footy with one of the touch jusges) . Again fine in a centre becuase when they are likely to ge the ball it’s typically a high reward situation that offsets the risk, tougher to swallow in a fullback (which might be why he was moved) who would see the ball more frequently.

I definitely got that wrong. My core point, and apologies for side traking with poor detial on my side, he didn’t “really” play 5/8 in the sense of what calling him a 5/8 evokes. He played like another centre, which if we ignore the qualitative, is probably born out by the rest of his career. If he was genuinely playing as a 5/8 he would have continued to play 5/8 as you don’t shift a player of his quality away from the ball in salary cap league. But he wasn’t, so he didn’t. The weird part though – if he was genuinely playing 5/8 it makes the comparison more ill fitting as their positions don’t cross over at this point in their career according to your analysis (assuming I haven’t screwed up again) didn’t Latrell play wing and full back to start and then centre the for the last couple? If they both weren’t aboriginal would we make the comparission?

Isn’t it just great to watch raw footy! Errors are quickly forgotten when you see the style of footy the chooks have brought to the comp this year, structure is boring, predictable and more often than not won’t help you come the last month of the football calendar, good on the chooks! I’m no fan but I can’t help but admire what’s being served up every week this year

actually when you look at the stats ...that exciting footy that my beloved chooks are playing has them ranked as the most error prone team ....yet they win games .... They back their defence and at the same time are trying things all the time....there is no boring safety first rubbish...it is lets go play footy fellas ....and I am loving it.