AFL Player #11: Jade Gresham

[Beerfish]

Contract: Unrestricted Free Agent 2026
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 28, mcgrath_truther

 

[Zach Package]

Personal reason after a by weekend feels a bit suss

Yeah massively poor for him to not time his personal reasons to align with our bye.

I remember once my boss berated me because my dog’s emergency splenectomy didn’t line up with my day off. Rightfully so too.

What the hell is wrong with you?

 

[Ambrosia]

Yeah massively poor for him to not time his personal reasons to align with our bye.

I remember once my boss berated me because my dog’s emergency splenectomy didn’t line up with my day off. Rightfully so too.

What the hell is wrong with you?

I really don’t think you’d have the same reaction if I speculated about an opposition player

 

[DERO]

I really don’t think you’d have the same reaction if I speculated about an opposition player

Especially if it was Tom Papley.

 

[Snake Charmer]

Personal reason after a by weekend feels a bit suss

Could be anything and it’s none of our business

 

[Zach Package]

I really don’t think you’d have the same reaction if I speculated about an opposition player

I don’t discriminate, piss will be taken where available

 

[VelvetSledge]

150 up.

Go well Gresh!

 

[eth-dog]

He's a good player in an area we lack but just not sure why we recruited him. He's very similar to what we already have but his pressure is average and he isn't the most damaging going around.

Feels like we recruited him because he's good and plays forward even though he isn't the forward we need.

 

[Old Campaigner]

I think we recruited him because he was there, because he wasn’t costing much in terms of draft capital and because he’d make us somewhat better.

I’d be surprised if anyone at the club was convinced he was a perfect fit who would solve all of our small forward problems

 

[faible]

He's a good player in an area we lack but just not sure why we recruited him. He's very similar to what we already have but his pressure is average and he isn't the most damaging going around.

Feels like we recruited him because he's good and plays forward even though he isn't the forward we need.

Complete lack of decent 'small' forwards. 2017 and 2018 he went at 1.4 and 1.6 goals / game, which I assume is the Gresham we'd have been hoping to get. He's at 0.9 atm which is the same place he was in 22 and 23.

Not sure whether we're playing him too high up the ground and taking a player who's got decent goal sense away from the goals. I'd probably rather we play Perkins as a high half-forward and keep Gresham closer to goal.

 

[jannissary]

Complete lack of decent 'small' forwards. 2017 and 2018 he went at 1.4 and 1.6 goals / game, which I assume is the Gresham we'd have been hoping to get. He's at 0.9 atm which is the same place he was in 22 and 23.

Not sure whether we're playing him too high up the ground and taking a player who's got decent goal sense away from the goals. I'd probably rather we play Perkins as a high half-forward and keep Gresham closer to goal.

we've played him pretty high, he's ended up being a useful connection player (when he's playing well) and has ended up with decent delivery going inside f50. he's also briefly had stints in the guts, too.

 

[Snake Charmer]

We picked him up because he’s better than what we had. Problem is he’s always been a tweener and never been good enough as small forward or a mid.

 

[Hird05]

Think he will be better if we can fix the rest of our forwardline.

 

[eth-dog]

Think he will be better if we can fix the rest of our forwardline.

So would Menzie and Guelfi if we went with someone other than him.

He's a better Menzie right now. Is the salary worth it?

 

[Hird05]

Had the money and was free so worth rolling the dice imo. Can see him as a solid role player in a top four team. Obviously won't be a star

 

[ant555]

He's a good player in an area we lack but just not sure why we recruited him. He's very similar to what we already have but his pressure is average and he isn't the most damaging going around.

Feels like we recruited him because he's good and plays forward even though he isn't the forward we need.

Problem is he is not always forward. He has played high forward into wing or extra at the contest or even rolled into the midfield when Stringer moves back forward.
The few times he has been used as small forwards for an extended period he has been okay.
Agree he is not the pressure forward we need .
I guess we got him because he is an experienced player who from all reports has the professional attitude and preparation we are looking to build with.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Problem is he is not always forward. He has played high forward into wing or extra at the contest or even rolled into the midfield when Stringer moves back forward.
The few times he has been used as small forwards for an extended period he has been okay.
Agree he is not the pressure forward we need .
I guess we got him because he is an experienced player who from all reports has the professional attitude and preparation we are looking to build with.

both gresh and stringer have ended up playing alot more up the ground that what was originally planned I reckon, due to the injuries to midfielders like parish/hobbs/setterfield.
I know people were down on hobbs because of his decision making but I think our contested game/forward structure was working well when he played that high half forward role as he is good at winning loose ground ball/assisting at stoppages/applying pressure/sticking tackles and on top of that it meant guys like gresham could play more a predominantly forward role (similarly parish in centre bounces meant stringer stays inside 50).
I think we really need to bring in two of hobbs/shiel/setterfield this week,

 

[ghostdog]

He's a good player in an area we lack but just not sure why we recruited him. He's very similar to what we already have but his pressure is average and he isn't the most damaging going around.

Feels like we recruited him because he's good and plays forward even though he isn't the forward we need.

Yep. Solid role player. Was up and about early in the season but now he's the same guy St Kilda moved on. I feel like he's more impactful than Snello though, without looking at numbers.

Not sure Ainsworth would be much better either though?

 

[ghostdog]

both gresh and stringer have ended up playing alot more up the ground that what was originally planned I reckon, due to the injuries to midfielders like parish/hobbs/setterfield.
I know people were down on hobbs because of his decision making but I think our contested game/forward structure was working well when he played that high half forward role as he is good at winning loose ground ball/assisting at stoppages/applying pressure/sticking tackles and on top of that it meant guys like gresham could play more a predominantly forward role (similarly parish in centre bounces meant stringer stays inside 50).
I think we really need to bring in two of hobbs/shiel/setterfield this week,

Agreed. This is why I'd rather Hobbs than Perkins.

 

[DERO]

He is slightly better than Josh Green.

 

[Call Me Cake]

He hasn't been a mainstay forward, so to judge him based on scoring output and disregard his work around the ground/team efforts does him no justice in my opinion. Would flourish as a small forward if we had our act together/were in a later stage of development and had others to take up the chunk of the role that he's been doing. Casting our ballots this early in his tenure with us is silly to be honest.

 

[Darealrath]

He's a Snelling upgrade that does his best work about 40-70m out from goal (and has been pretty good in that role).

We still need to add a proper crumbing and pressure forward.

 

[Nifft]

He hasn't been a mainstay forward, so to judge him based on scoring output and disregard his work around the ground/team efforts does him no justice in my opinion. Would flourish as a small forward if we had our act together/were in a later stage of development and had others to take up the chunk of the role that he's been doing. Casting our ballots this early in his tenure with us is silly to be honest.

View attachment 2038452
View attachment 2038456View attachment 2038453

I'm not sure if I'm reading those stats wrong, but the number of goal assists seems low compared to the number of inside 50s. Zach for example has 69 entries inside 50, but only 11 goals have come from those.

Or maybe this a normal return for inside 50s?

 

[faible]

I'm not sure if I'm reading those stats wrong, but the number of goal assists seems low compared to the number of inside 50s. Zach for example has 69 entries inside 50, but only 11 goals have come from those.

Or maybe this a normal return for inside 50s?

For comparison (averages):

Petracca 1.46 GA, 7.92 SI and 5.31 i50
Gulden 1.27 GA, 8.13 SI and 6.40 i50
Bont 1.27 GA, 8.20 SI and 5.47 i50

Guelfi 1.11 GA, 5.67 SI and 1.67 i50
Gresham 0.93 GA, 5.29 SI and 4.50 i50
Perkins 0.83 GA, 4.83 SI and 4.42 i50
Merrett 0.73 GA, 6.73 SI and 4.60 i50

I'd say our poor conversion and general poor forward structure is impacting Zach's (and the others) GA figures somewhat, and he doesn't really play forward like Bont or Petracca sometimes do which might mess with the figures, but I would say he's not as damaging as those guys. Gulden is probably a better approximation and he's getting ~ 20% GA to i50s with Zach around 15% (Gulden is in a team averaging ~ 3 goals / game more).

 

[Haychh]

He was recruited because he’s a good role player in a good team when everything else up the ground is clicking. Exactly the kind of player you want in your system in a premiership window.

Stick your Josh Green comparisons up your ass.

 

[Haychh]

He is what Collingwood wanted Lachie Schultz to be.