Which is the best player stats

So I know this topic has come up a few times about the value of player stats, meter gained, clean breaks etc. 

My least favourite player, Siya Kolisi made the Super rugby team of the week. Event though he only had five runs. But what stood out was the fact that he made a clean break and scored a try from 30 meters outs. 

To me, that combination tells a better story on whether the stats is relevant. 

So I'm actually propsosing that we start building combo stats, similar to fighting video games. 

So if a player, missed a tackle + opposing player scored a try tells you the full story. 

Or drop catch, 30 meters gained by opposing team

Or scrum penalty, 3 points Goal kick

Or ruck penalty, 40m touch kick, line out, try. 

I think that this would put the spotlight on the actual impact of a players performance on the scoreboard. 

Getting back to Kolisi, the guy pretty much faded out through the rest of the game and wasn't as prominent in his defence or rest of his carries, event though his clean break made him look really good on his stats board when comes to attack. 

This is my main problem with players like Kolisi, he has one massive run down the touch line, racks up 50 meters but then fails to complete a pass which results in a knock on or scoring opportunity. 

What do you guys think?

In other words ... stats are a waste of time, used by ignorant fools trying to impress the even more ignorant ... right, Mozart?

It's probably the only way he can promote guys like Vermeulen and Fat Fransie.

Fact is CC it is the exact opposite,   Mozart and co pick certain stats and ignore the rest to promote the duds they support.   

Stats is not the alpha and omega of player contribution evaluation.   There are comprehensive stats systems used by coaches and Rugby Management - but those are not available to us ordinary mortals - access to those cost huge amounts of money,   

So the limited rudimentary stats made available to the general public by for instance ESPN is open to abuse,   Fact is I have a view that the only value of the limited stats available to all of us should be seen as -

*   some confirmation about what we see with our own eyes of performance of players; and

*   potential trends as to what happens with basic defense and performances over a series of games.

Even in the latter case one has to look at all available stats on all aspects of play and not nit-pick stats from a single game like Mozart does on site.   In fact one of the worst things to be done is to nit-pick incidents that happened and then make general normally false statements based on those single incidents.    Take for instance the ball turnover stats of Louw in the 2015 WC series when he was second in making turnovers,   However, by 2018 Louw's turnovers in tests played were minimal and the reputation story of 2015 was still in full swing - Louw is a turnover specialist and a must for the Springbok team despite his constant failures in all aspects of the game.   

In essence fact is we have minimal stats available on which a sound opinion on player performances can be based and what we have in fact is an indication of tendencies noticeable in players over a full series,   In fact what we have available at best can show tendencies in player performances over a series and one has to be very careful not to abuse the stats the way Mozart and co do.            

Are we actually all saying that player stats is there merely for the fantasy league players and has no bearing on a players actual performance? 

I almost feel that a players impact should be measured while they were on the field based on start to finish. 

ie. if they started, where did they feature? E.g. Minute 0:01 - Caught Ball, 30 min. Tackle, 32, missed tackle. So those of us that feel that players don't have an impact can actually see what a players overall contribution was through out the game rather than fantasy stats because one guy made a ran a 100 m. 

I'm not just talking about kolisi, e.g. Reinach ran 100 m for Northampton over the weekend, but that can from a gutsy intercept from his own try line which enabled him to spring the full length of the pitch. Did he play well, was that his only contribution? 

I would like to see the stats be more representative, but how can it be done?

KC

Read carefully what I wrote above and se the limitations aced in using the resent stats available to us.   It is of no use in Fantasy Rugby selections - even less than it is in real player evaluation.

What you write above is another extreme.   If we all follow rugby we see what really supid deductions are made on site by members,   Members see incidents and then base arguments on that - often enough based on what happened without regard to what preceded the incident nor dealing with the results of incidents.   

I have seen what Mozart called his Morzoscopes and what he wrote was a totally twisted and did not reflect what actually happened,   So what you say must also be considered - but who is going to do the evaluation and be objective about it?

I am afraid we as amateurs neither have the time nor the tools to deal with player performance evaluations on ay basis rather than see what happens - but then lose contact about what happened  before and after occurrences,  Stats cannot help us either - the only thing the available stats is worth looking at is to look at tendencies displayed by players over a full series - certainly not iro individual games.

I will give you a simple example -  in Super Rugby this year in all matches he made minimal tackles and missed a hell of a lot of tackle attempts,  In the gam in Round 4 Vermeulen made 13 tackles and missed none.   After more than half of the season being a below par defender does his defense on Saturday suddenly lift him out of what he did for the rest of the season?    .        

Mozart

Your extra calculations are totally worthless since they are not comprehensive at all and is nitpicked,   You are sop besotted with Du Toit that it is tiresome.   You cannot even start a thread  on a match of the Stormers without throwing Du Toit's name into the heading.   Don't you think it is time to change your childish drivel?

No player are perfect and all players make mistakes - that is why it is total nonsense to try and manufacture deficiencies if there is none or look at single incidents in games to try and proof a point.

I still think that stats are useful to evaluate trends in player performances and therefore one match should never be a consideration.   You say something very pertinent above - "People see what they want to see".   That is the best description of your contributions on site that I have ever seen before.   You would be wise to get over that deficiency of yours and start making reasonable contributions on site.