2017 Best midfield and depth

[theprospect]

?

How is he tier 1?

 

[theprospect]

Too many nangs.

Classic, how'd you come up with that? Certainly haven't heard it on here before

 

[Milanista28]

How is he tier 1?

What tier would you have him in?

He's comfortably Tier 1, Has been one of the best midfielders in the game over the last 10 years, He hasn't lost his ability all of a sudden. He's trained well all pre season including posting PBs in time trials. He's right and raring to go in 2017.

 

[Donakebab]

Classic, how'd you come up with that? Certainly haven't heard it on here before
View attachment 332689

Maybe you shouldn't have named yourself after some crappy hippy inhalant, or just stop posting dumb shit.

 

[boydee]

Well of course if we don't improve in there outside of depth our midfield won't be good enough to hold its own against the best! No shit, but all things being equal, I'm very very confident that our midfield will be better, as well as deeper, this year.

Some reasons:

-Armitage was as good as Jack Steven two seasons ago (14 rounds in he was leading the disposal count in the whole comp and then there was little between them in the B&F- and they tied for Brownlow votes), but then he missed most of last preseason with a back injury and went from having zero sub-20 disposal games in 2015, to 10 of them in 2016, and being very average again.

It sounds like he's back in ripping fitness again this year though, so if he returns to his 2015-type form, that alone will make a big difference to our midfield. I imagine he will also appreciate not having to carry such a huge load in there, with a few more big strong bodies to help.

-Koby Stevens may not be Paddy Dangerfield, but he wouldn't need to be, to be an upgrade on the 17 disposals per game we were getting from Luke Dunstan (who played almost exclusively on the guts, but struggled to play 70% game time) last season.

Prior to his first injury last year Koby was averaging 26 disposals per game and in spite of the fact his form really dropped after his 2nd injury in particular (during which he didn't run for 5 weeks), and he was playing a lot forward, he still averaged 22 for the year, so with all that being the case, I could easily see him averaging say 24 per game, if given the amount of midfield percentage that Dunstan got last year. Which would mean he would be a sizeable upgrade on what we were getting from Luke.

- Given the fact that Jack Steele apparently has considerably better endurance than Dunstan, it wouldn't surprise me if he is better for us this year than Luke was last year as well. He, like Stevens, is also more versatile than Luke- who pretty much only plays guts or bench.

-Sure none of the young ones like Acres, Billings, Gresham, Dunstan, Freeman, Sinclair and Minchington might not improve much, but given that all bar Gresh and Sincs are coming into at least their 4th season, and our development has proven to be very good in recent years, I reckon it's much more likely that one or more will really step up than none of them- especially with so much competition for spots amongst them all now.

One thing that has held all bar Freeman back in previous years has been poor endurance and/or strong enough bodies to play midfield, but with another preseason under the belts, that could make a big difference to any or all of them.

There may not be a Jaeger O'Meara or Patty Cripps amongst them, but this is still probably the most young midfield talent we've had coming through in my 27 years following the club really closely. If we develop them like we have say Ross, Membrey, Bruce, Weller, Roberton and Hickey, we're going to be in business going forward- and that's before whatever we do with a couple of million in cap space and 3 first rounders in the next two years drafts.

Jack Steven is a class midfielder. Koby Stevens is a good player when fit. I have seen him play many good games for the Dogs. Hopefully Koby has an injury free season. He is no champion but I think he will be good for the Saints. Jack Steele is really untried at this level, but reports suggest he could be a great pick up. We will see. Freeman is untried, hasnt done anything yet. We need to see. Players like Acres, Billings, Gresham, Dunstan, should be improving quickly now, in their fourth season. That is where St. Kilda need a lift. Gresham and Acres look exciting, just need to be more consistent now. Billings, especially, needs to pull his finger out. No more excuses, he has enough time. There is no doubt the Saints have the talent to make the finals, I hope this is the season where they become more consistent start, to win away from home more and become a short term threat to win another flag.

 

[Janus]

Janus if you need Ryder back then why did the team fail to perform in 2015 when he was there?

He only played something like 4 games as primary ruck in 2015. The rest of the time he was in the forward line as a secondary forward target to Schulz.

I think placing much credit in individual AFL player ratings is misguided, it's really just a rolling average of a players contribution based on past games, and doesn't really consider consistency, team result and individual upside. I would also imagine a team relying on a few would having high player ratings for those given their added responsibility. they're not an ideal comparison for players across different clubs IMO. I mean having high player ratings hasn't really helped you in the past. Anyways, some off the cuff remarks about your mids, they're particularly frustrating IMO so I'm gonna be a shit.

Best 25

Robbie Gray- undeniable
Chad Wingard - debatable that you'd play him mid
Travis Boak - crossroads. Goinf backwards AND no consistency
Oliver Wines - went backwards last year, not damaging, I don't see the raging quadzilla bull, like, ever?
Hamish Hartlett - not doing yourself any favours here. Inconsistent
Matthew Broadbent - half back with few weapons in or near a contest
Brad Ebert - good soldier. Consistent, not damaging
Sam Gray- if you're still trying with him then good luck.
Jared Polec- wildcard. Probably can't hack it when there's any pressure as before

Don't think the others are worth much a mention here

There's a reason you doubled down on mids at the draft. Your core group are overrated

Oh, the only reason I mentioned them was because they are done over two years and we haven't made finals whereas you've made the grand final twice. It was just interesting to me.

Wingard has already played in midfield quite a bit. Our first win against Hawthorn in 2015 he played the Gray role and went 'IDDQD' on the Hawks mids, winning clearance after clearance in the first half.

The thing with Boak is that we had to play him up forward in the role that Monfries generally plays for half the year, and then he just couldn't get it going for whatever reason. But just like Wines, I believe he went backwards because of the lack of being able to win a decisive clearance due to having to defend such a large number of opposition hitouts (it was something like double the amount to what we won). So I'm not worried about them. With Ryder back in the side, I expect both of these guys to be better performers.

Hartlett is definitely frustrating, but hopefully this trade period where he had the sads and said he wanted to go to Melbourne but then had a change of heart after Hinkley said that he wants him to play off the half back and push into midfield in the Hurn/Hodge type role is a wake up call.

You can cut Polec some slack for last year - his career almost ended because of that navicular in 2015. I'm expecting a better version of him in 2017 - and he doesn't actually struggle in tight. His problem is more a mental one (not sure if that's what you meant).

The reason we doubled down on contested mids was because we've got a lot of outside running types but only one real raging bull in Wines. So what would happen is sides would flood the contest with their mids and forwards but at the same time ensure that they kept their defenders a kick back to stop any prospect of running the ball. Without a decent ruck, this problem was amplified. Our kicking efficiency was the worst in the competition because we never had players who could stay outside of the pack to get the ball moving due to the fact that it was a struggle for us just to win the ball in 2016.

With the guys we recruited (Powell-Pepper, Atley, Drew) it will give Wines a rest and also enhance our contested game so that we're not continually kicking around the corner just to get a clearance. We don't need to be a contested based team like Sydney - we just need to not struggle so badly in the contest against them.

I'm also of the opinion that by adding those guys into training, it will emphasize the need for our starting mids to get harder around the contest and not be so easily brushed aside. But like anything, it's just guesswork at the moment, based on what has happened in the past.

We don't have to wait long to see if they've come to play this year or not. If they get smashed by your mob in R1, it's same old same old. But if it becomes a genuine contest...

 

[Dan87]

He only played something like 4 games as primary ruck in 2015. The rest of the time he was in the forward line as a secondary forward target to Schulz.



Oh, the only reason I mentioned them was because they are done over two years and we haven't made finals whereas you've made the grand final twice. It was just interesting to me.

Wingard has already played in midfield quite a bit. Our first win against Hawthorn in 2015 he played the Gray role and went 'IDDQD' on the Hawks mids, winning clearance after clearance in the first half.

The thing with Boak is that we had to play him up forward in the role that Monfries generally plays for half the year, and then he just couldn't get it going for whatever reason. But just like Wines, I believe he went backwards because of the lack of being able to win a decisive clearance due to having to defend such a large number of opposition hitouts (it was something like double the amount to what we won). So I'm not worried about them. With Ryder back in the side, I expect both of these guys to be better performers.

Hartlett is definitely frustrating, but hopefully this trade period where he had the sads and said he wanted to go to Melbourne but then had a change of heart after Hinkley said that he wants him to play off the half back and push into midfield in the Hurn/Hodge type role is a wake up call.

You can cut Polec some slack for last year - his career almost ended because of that navicular in 2015. I'm expecting a better version of him in 2017 - and he doesn't actually struggle in tight. His problem is more a mental one (not sure if that's what you meant).

The reason we doubled down on contested mids was because we've got a lot of outside running types but only one real raging bull in Wines. So what would happen is sides would flood the contest with their mids and forwards but at the same time ensure that they kept their defenders a kick back to stop any prospect of running the ball. Without a decent ruck, this problem was amplified. Our kicking efficiency was the worst in the competition because we never had players who could stay outside of the pack to get the ball moving due to the fact that it was a struggle for us just to win the ball in 2016.

With the guys we recruited (Powell-Pepper, Atley, Drew) it will give Wines a rest and also enhance our contested game so that we're not continually kicking around the corner just to get a clearance. We don't need to be a contested based team like Sydney - we just need to not struggle so badly in the contest against them.

I'm also of the opinion that by adding those guys into training, it will emphasize the need for our starting mids to get harder around the contest and not be so easily brushed aside. But like anything, it's just guesswork at the moment, based on what has happened in the past.

We don't have to wait long to see if they've come to play this year or not. If they get smashed by your mob in R1, it's same old same old. But if it becomes a genuine contest...

Definitely, still remember that buddy beauty of a match from 2014. Wouldn't be surprised if that round 1 match has already been talked about as line in the sand type stuff for Power. It was pretty amusing ending Collingwood's season in Rd 1 last year.

Hopefully a cracker, maybe some debutants so we get to see Drew and maybe Florent go for a spin

 

[theprospect]

What tier would you have him in?

He's comfortably Tier 1, Has been one of the best midfielders in the game over the last 10 years, He hasn't lost his ability all of a sudden. He's trained well all pre season including posting PBs in time trials. He's right and raring to go in 2017.

Wouldn't say one of the best in the game over the last 10 years. Wasn't even really a good player until around 07/08, and won the Brownlow when he was on the gear which he was rightly stripped of. At the peak of his career I'd say he was tier 1 at Essendon comfortably, but certainly not in 2015, out all of 2016 and is now well and truly in the last year or two max of his career.

EDIT: To answer your question, I'd have him tier 2. Heppell and Merrett tier 1

 

[theprospect]

Maybe you shouldn't have named yourself after some crappy hippy inhalant, or just stop posting dumb shit.

Like what?

 

[vozzon]

Well of course if we don't improve in there outside of depth our midfield won't be good enough to hold its own against the best! No shit, but all things being equal, I'm very very confident that our midfield will be better, as well as deeper, this year.

Some reasons:

-Armitage was as good as Jack Steven two seasons ago (14 rounds in he was leading the disposal count in the whole comp and then there was little between them in the B&F- and they tied for Brownlow votes), but then he missed most of last preseason with a back injury and went from having zero sub-20 disposal games in 2015, to 10 of them in 2016, and being very average again.

It sounds like he's back in ripping fitness again this year though, so if he returns to his 2015-type form, that alone will make a big difference to our midfield. I imagine he will also appreciate not having to carry such a huge load in there, with a few more big strong bodies to help.

-Koby Stevens may not be Paddy Dangerfield, but he wouldn't need to be, to be an upgrade on the 17 disposals per game we were getting from Luke Dunstan (who played almost exclusively on the guts, but struggled to play 70% game time) last season.

Prior to his first injury last year Koby was averaging 26 disposals per game and in spite of the fact his form really dropped after his 2nd injury in particular (during which he didn't run for 5 weeks), and he was playing a lot forward, he still averaged 22 for the year, so with all that being the case, I could easily see him averaging say 24 per game, if given the amount of midfield percentage that Dunstan got last year. Which would mean he would be a sizeable upgrade on what we were getting from Luke.

- Given the fact that Jack Steele apparently has considerably better endurance than Dunstan, it wouldn't surprise me if he is better for us this year than Luke was last year as well. He, like Stevens, is also more versatile than Luke- who pretty much only plays guts or bench.

-Sure none of the young ones like Acres, Billings, Gresham, Dunstan, Freeman, Sinclair and Minchington might not improve much, but given that all bar Gresh and Sincs are coming into at least their 4th season, and our development has proven to be very good in recent years, I reckon it's much more likely that one or more will really step up than none of them- especially with so much competition for spots amongst them all now.

One thing that has held all bar Freeman back in previous years has been poor endurance and/or strong enough bodies to play midfield, but with another preseason under the belts, that could make a big difference to any or all of them.

There may not be a Jaeger O'Meara or Patty Cripps amongst them, but this is still probably the most young midfield talent we've had coming through in my 27 years following the club really closely. If we develop them like we have say Ross, Membrey, Bruce, Weller, Roberton and Hickey, we're going to be in business going forward- and that's before whatever we do with a couple of million in cap space and 3 first rounders in the next two years drafts.

Agree that your midfield depth is good in a few age groups (young guys and also guys in the mid 20's), the only concern is there is no absolute gun coming through from the younger guys (something Port also has an issue with bar mabey ollie wines) but all you need is 1-2 guys to have massive improvement and you have a good spread.

 

[vozzon]

I always find it interesting your statistics that you post on BF seem to have Port highly rated despite two mediocre years.

I agree that we have been mediocre, but our issue this year have been having key defenders and ruck men out. clearly KP depth is an issue. We missed Homsche and jonas for 10-12 games each and our back up Carlisle was injured all year. Also no ryder (all year, thanks for that lol) and lobbe missed 10 games. We have had no spine for most of the year and lost close games to West coast and bulldogs due to Kennedy and Redpath dominating our replacement key defenders.

Mind you our midfield isnt the best but i would say ranks in the 7th -11th bracket against other team. The champion data isnt always 100% true and can only be used a part of the judgement IMO.

 

[12Chill]

Agree that your midfield depth is good in a few age groups (young guys and also guys in the mid 20's), the only concern is there is no absolute gun coming through from the younger guys (something Port also has an issue with bar mabey ollie wines) but all you need is 1-2 guys to have massive improvement and you have a good spread.

How would you know?

Acres and Gresham have shown signs of becoming absolute guns. It doesn't matter whether they develop quickly and explode early like a Wines or at a regular pace as long as they get there.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

GWS and bulldogs are the clear standouts. i'd give the edge just to GWS just because of their outside runners. The can be beaten on the inside but if they get that ball on the outside it's off to the races like winx.

Next echelon i'd put Collingwood, Sydney, Melbourne, West Coast and Essendon in that exact order. Sydney would be with the top group if they kept mitchell. He's the worst of their 'big 4' but still quality. I don't know how pies aren't better with the midfield they have, it's seriously strong. melbourne and west coast have made already strong groups stronger this off season plus you'll get the natural development from guys like sheed and petracca. Essendons is inconspicuous but very good. To add watson, heppell and stanton to a group that already has merrett, zaharakism goddard shouldn't be underrated. the question mark is how the outcasts go coming back to footy, but if they can get back close to their best they'll be hard to stop.

Next i'd go Geelong, adelaide, richmond, st kilda, gold coast and hawthorn in no particular order. cats depth after their top 2 isn't great, crows would probably be lower if not for every single metric i see telling me it's a good midfield. richmond group will be new and still not sure how well they'll go but potentially could go higher. same for st kilda but feel like they need another gun. don't really know what to expect from hawks or gold coast midfields....

then it's port, north, freo, brisbane and carlton. these sides all pretty much have a superstar and then depth falls off terribly, except north who have decent depth but with no superstar.

 

[HairyO]

I wonder how chad would go in the midfield where you have to occasionally get your hair messy?

His run ins with Hodge will be less WWE-like.

Gray is a gun. No other player in that team is a gun. Top 5 is a joke.

We have a few guns and arent top 5.

 

[Janus]

His run ins with Hodge will be less WWE-like.

Gray is a gun. No other player in that team is a gun. Top 5 is a joke.

We have a few guns and arent top 5.

That midfield sans Gray smashed your team in 2015 for a half at AO when you were at the peak of your powers. Just remember that.

 

[HairyO]

That midfield sans Gray smashed your team in 2015 for a half at AO when you were at the peak of your powers. Just remember that.

There are not many times when the results of a single game matter.

2014 Prelim on the other hand...

Sometimes team kick goals every time they touch the ball. And in that first quarter Port didnt miss. Yet Hawthorn nearly ran you down - despite your big claim to fame being fitness and us being too old and too slow.

But i think that game is famous for something else anyway...

 

[Grrr]

Wouldn't say one of the best in the game over the last 10 years. Wasn't even really a good player until around 07/08, and won the Brownlow when he was on the gear which he was rightly stripped of. At the peak of his career I'd say he was tier 1 at Essendon comfortably, but certainly not in 2015, out all of 2016 and is now well and truly in the last year or two max of his career.

EDIT: To answer your question, I'd have him tier 2. Heppell and Merrett tier 1

wow, Heppell better than Watson. Don't forget Heppell was on the gear as well if you're going to use that to grade a player (maybe rightly so). We'll see how Heppell goes when he's got a tagger swinging of him every week. Plenty of good young players at the Bombers, just don't quite get the Heppell A grade thing.. just yet.

 

[TiAn_]

This is the metric I use to rank midfields. Based on regular season stats (no finals):

This accounts for hitouts, clearances and inside 50 numbers, because just focusing on inside 50 numbers skews it in favour of sides that get a lot of repeat inside 50 entries through their forward defensive structure, which is nothing to do with the midfield itself and more to do with game plan. A side that wins more hitouts but generates less clearances has, by any metric, a poorer performing midfield than one that wins the same amount of clearances from fewer hitouts.

That's why Melbourne is so low (1053 hitouts won for only 844 clearances won and 1183 inside 50s is pretty bad) and Port Adelaide is so high (669 hitouts won for 862 clearances and 1208 inside 50s). It's all about efficiency of performance. I mean, compare the defensive side of the ball - Melbourne only lost 791 hitouts but pretty much every single time they gave away a clearance when it happened (782). Conversely, Port Adelaide gave up a league high 1134 hitouts to their opponents, but only 880 of them ended up as clearances.

Fremantle was no surprise - their entire setup is based around the dominance of Sandilands and Fyfe. So when they went missing, their performance suffered.

Oh, and Collingwood has the best midfield in the competition from a pure numbers standpoint. It's seriously not even close with how efficient they are. Too bad the rest of the side isn't the same, but it's why I have them in my eight for this year. It's also why I think Geelong is going to fade - those hitout and clearance numbers are going to drop considerably with the rule changes. Less free kicks = less clearances. That's not an opinion, it's just as fact.

If you wanna know the formulas used - Attack and Defence Ratio were Inside 50/(Inside 50/(Clearance/Hitouts)). This was to work out what inside 50s were actually generated from the midfield and not through transition from defence (which is also more to do with game plan). Midfield Efficiency is a multiplication of Attack and Defence Ratio. And Midfield Rating is Inside 50 Attack/Inside 50 Defence x Midfield Efficiency.

lol I'm sorry but this is the biggest pile of horse shit you've wheeled out yet, in your unrelenting search to convince the world Port isn't crap.

You draw these sweeping conclusions from the most rudimentary formulas: "Collingwood has the most efficient midfield because they have more I50s per hitout/clearance". lol wtf? How does that follow?

You completely fail to take into account that 70% of clearances aren't from a hitout to advantage, where the hitouts occur, or the multiple other sources of I50s outside of hitouts... not to mention uneven draws, per game averages, differentials... You can't draw any conclusions from the random data you've sprayed onto that spreadsheet.

Some "metric".

 

[Bulldog Joe]

lol I'm sorry but this is the biggest pile of horse shit you've wheeled out yet, in your unrelenting search to convince the world Port isn't crap.

You draw these sweeping conclusions from the most rudimentary formulas: "Collingwood has the most efficient midfield because they have more I50s per hitout/clearance". lol wtf? How does that follow?

You completely fail to take into account that 70% of clearances aren't from a hitout to advantage, where the hitouts occur, or the multiple other sources of I50s outside of hitouts... not to mention uneven draws, per game averages, differentials... You can't draw any conclusions from the random data you've sprayed onto that spreadsheet.

Some "metric".

Well he can draw any conclusion he likes.

The issue is that he is unable to persuade anyone else of the validity of his conclusions.
Perhaps Ken Hinkley will believe him.

 

[theprospect]

wow, Heppell better than Watson. Don't forget Heppell was on the gear as well if you're going to use that to grade a player (maybe rightly so). We'll see how Heppell goes when he's got a tagger swinging of him every week. Plenty of good young players at the Bombers, just don't quite get the Heppell A grade thing.. just yet.

I'm not necessarily calling him an a grader - tbh I don't think he is. But if we're talking about purely just who Essendon have, I would have him in their top tier of players

 

[Gavin Excell]

There are not many times when the results of a single game matter.

2014 Prelim on the other hand...

Sometimes team kick goals every time they touch the ball. And in that first quarter Port didnt miss. Yet Hawthorn nearly ran you down - despite your big claim to fame being fitness and us being too old and too slow.

But i think that game is famous for something else anyway...

Yes ... what?

 

[Royale]

Lol this thread. Not fussed at how othes rate us. A star studded midfield can be beat if they are overworked and the rest of their team arent pulling their weight.

FWIW looking at Collingwoods trades and moves during the off season they are looking to emulate what dogs do. And i think they'll see some success.

It also looks like Richmond are heading in that direction.

What direction?

Put more onus on your midfield to do the heavy lifting. You help them do this by eschewing 1 dimensional key position players and rely more on half back flankers, midfielders and small forwards. You know? The kind of guys that can run defensively to spoil or clog space for an easy kick. The kind of guys that can break lines with run and handball. The kind of guys that are infinitely more useful at or near the ball rather than a key position player who may never see it.

After that, then you look at the talent of your players, whether they have the nous to know where to be, whether they have the discipline to run and not plod along when the ball gets turned over. That part of it comes down to your on field leadership.









On SM-G900I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Masqualero]

Classic, how'd you come up with that? Certainly haven't heard it on here before
View attachment 332689

I think it might be because of your name.
Can't be sure though.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Definitely, still remember that buddy beauty of a match from 2014. Wouldn't be surprised if that round 1 match has already been talked about as line in the sand type stuff for Power. It was pretty amusing ending Collingwood's season in Rd 1 last year.

Hopefully a cracker, maybe some debutants so we get to see Drew and maybe Florent go for a spin

How did you end our season? If you're talking about our best player having to retire due to a serious injury I'd hardly call that "amusing".

 

[Janus]

But i think that game is famous for something else anyway...[/QUOTE]

lol I'm sorry but this is the biggest pile of horse shit you've wheeled out yet, in your unrelenting search to convince the world Port isn't crap.

You draw these sweeping conclusions from the most rudimentary formulas: "Collingwood has the most efficient midfield because they have more I50s per hitout/clearance". lol wtf? How does that follow?

You completely fail to take into account that 70% of clearances aren't from a hitout to advantage, where the hitouts occur, or the multiple other sources of I50s outside of hitouts... not to mention uneven draws, per game averages, differentials... You can't draw any conclusions from the random data you've sprayed onto that spreadsheet.

Some "metric".

Hah. It doesn't actually. Sorry, your post has actually made me go through it again - I didn't put the right formula in for Collingwood (missed them when I was changing from simply dividing inside 50s by clearances without adding hitouts). My bad I thought it was weird that they were rated so high when they generated break even clearances from hitouts...so thanks for that

Don't know why you're having a cry for anyways. Port Adelaide is rated high because they had crap hitout numbers but a decent ratio of inside 50s and clearances to that number. If they were as garbage as you seem to think, they would have had the sort of figures that Gold Coast or Fremantle had.

If there were other publicly available numbers that were related solely to midfield, I'd include them too. But there aren't, unless you go through every single midfielder and tally up their disposal efficiency, clanger count, tackles etc. And frankly, I don't care about it enough to worry about it.