Luke Bruest Vs Chad Wingard

[Hawkas1988]

It's like people arguing for Wingard think Breust is pretty vanilla and just a good solid player. Breust is an extremely creative exciting player to watch. Has the 2nd best don't argue behind Dustin Martin and can kick goals from almost anywhere.

Look both are AA's. Breust is 3 years older so the consistency argument is a tad harsh seeming Wingard is younger. However the thread is based on now, who would you have taken this season, Breust. Wingard the year before.

As for the future, well it looks like Wingard could become anything and I reckon most neutrals would take him. Both players are stars and both will have great CV's by the end of their careers.

I just don't like the whole argument leaning towards Breust is a good solid no frills a few goals a game small forward whereas Wingard is a freak and can do much more exciting things. Wingard probably has more tricks but Breust has a lot of them himself.

As i said I can understand many picking Wingard as he is practically my favourite non Hawks player to watch. Can't wait to see his career unfold. I think that Breust is something special too and I'm excited to see how it pans out.

 

[TazHawk15]

Statistics in football are extremely overrated and over used. The people that actually sit down and watch the two players, not knowing the stats would choose Wingard because he is the better player and talent. The people that don't watch every game and form their opinion based heavily on stats will choose Bruest because he gets the numbers. I am by no means saying Bruest is a bad player because lets face it nearly every team would want him playing for them, but Wingard is still ahead even with the inconsistency of last year.

In your opinion.

 

[TheFVK]

Look both are AA's. Breust is 3 years older so the consistency argument is a tad harsh seeming Wingard is younger. However the thread is based on now, who would you have taken this season, Breust. Wingard the year before.

As for the future, well it looks like Wingard could become anything and I reckon most neutrals would take him. Both players are stars and both will have great CV's by the end of their careers.

I just don't like the whole argument leaning towards Breust is a good solid no frills a few goals a game small forward whereas Wingard is a freak and can do much more exciting things. Wingard probably has more tricks but Breust has a lot of them himself.

As i said I can understand many picking Wingard as he is practically my favourite non Hawks player to watch. Can't wait to see his career unfold. I think that Breust is something special too and I'm excited to see how it pans out.

Nowhere in the OP or title does it say this. Hawks supporters are only assuming it's based on the 2014 season alone as it's the only time interval over which Breust would come close.

This smacks of the Gibbs/Robinson > Boak/Hartlett poll Carlton fans were trying to push a couple years back, with stats again being the primary argument. Actually in general I find polls which are posted by supporters of one of the included players can be reduced to:
Player A: player from OP's team of support
Player B: Generally higher rated player who is either going through a perceived form slump/injury related dip in form OR the comparison is made over a time period which supports Player A winning the poll.

Given a choice between the two and 95% of neutral football fans would take Wingard in their team; confining a comparison between two players to an arbitrary time period to suit an argument is a pointless exercise.

I'm not really interested in a repeat of the circular back and forth I had on the Boak/Hartlett Gibbs/Robinson thread so I'll leave this with saying I'll be bumping this thread in 5 years.

 

[TazHawk15]

Bruest by a considerable margin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep.

 

[Hawkas1988]

Nowhere in the OP or title does it say this. Hawks supporters are only assuming it's based on the 2014 season alone as it's the only time interval over which Breust would come close.

This smacks of the Gibbs/Robinson > Boak/Hartlett poll Carlton fans were trying to push a couple years back, with stats again being the primary argument. Actually in general I find polls which are posted by supporters of one of the included players can be reduced to:
Player A: player from OP's team of support
Player B: Generally higher rated player who is either going through a perceived form slump/injury related dip in form OR the comparison is made over a time period which supports Player A winning the poll.

Given a choice between the two and 95% of neutral football fans would take Wingard in their team; confining a comparison between two players to an arbitrary time period to suit an argument is a pointless exercise.

I'm not really interested in a repeat of the circular back and forth I had on the Boak/Hartlett Gibbs/Robinson thread so I'll leave this with saying I'll be bumping this thread in 5 years.

You looked at one part of my whole post, most assumed it was of now.

Besides that I already said that most neutral people would probably pick Wingard. You got upset with one part of my post and ignored the rest.

 

[Rioli magic]

Nowhere in the OP or title does it say this. Hawks supporters are only assuming it's based on the 2014 season alone as it's the only time interval over which Breust would come close.

This smacks of the Gibbs/Robinson > Boak/Hartlett poll Carlton fans were trying to push a couple years back, with stats again being the primary argument. Actually in general I find polls which are posted by supporters of one of the included players can be reduced to:
Player A: player from OP's team of support
Player B: Generally higher rated player who is either going through a perceived form slump/injury related dip in form OR the comparison is made over a time period which supports Player A winning the poll.

Given a choice between the two and 95% of neutral football fans would take Wingard in their team; confining a comparison between two players to an arbitrary time period to suit an argument is a pointless exercise.

I'm not really interested in a repeat of the circular back and forth I had on the Boak/Hartlett Gibbs/Robinson thread so I'll leave this with saying I'll be bumping this thread in 5 years.

Breust is currently a better footballer than Wingard.

 

[Jables]

Wingard is going to be a great player, but acting like it's some seasoned veteran being compared to him is a bit petty. Breust only has 24 more games of experience, very raw coming into Hawthorn, and he improved every year coming off the rookie list. He came into the AFL a whole one year before Wingard. He was told he couldn't tackle or pressure well enough by Clarkson when he was in the VFL and now he'll get around 4 tackles per game, then he couldn't kick straight, and now he's in the discussion for best kick for goal in the league. Pay credit where it's due, the kid works damn hard.

I can't wait to see him get better next year too, same with Wingard now that he'll have an injury free season. I think the ankle injury he got early on ruined his season, it's always hard to shake even minor ankle injuries off over a season for a kid. Both might move into the midfield in the long run, so the poll might only get more interesting in a few years.

 

[Wargreymon90]

Breust is currently a better footballer than Wingard.

Breust had a better 2014. Wingard had a better 2013. One year does not make one player better then another

 

[cryptor]

Breust had a better 2014. Wingard had a better 2013. One year does not make one player better then another

So Wingard was better last year, Breust was better this year and that somehow means that Wingard is certain to be better in the future?

Check out the year on year graph from the AFL player ratings http://www.afl.com.au/afl-player-ratings
Breust had a breakout year in 2012 and held steady since. Wingard had a breakout in 2013 and has also held steady. In fact the point where Breust started 2012 (160 points) is about where Wingard started in 2013. The tragectories of both players is very similar. If anything they're both going to continue at about their current level, increasing their best slightly but still playing the occasional quiet game. They've both held the #1 small forward position according to those rankings this year and I expect we'll see the same again next season.

 

[WWSD]

Breust had a better 2014. Wingard had a better 2013. One year does not make one player better then another

Luke Breust
2011: 12 diposals, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 1.8 goals per game (30 goals)
2012: 16 disposals, 3 marks, 3 inside 50s, 5 tackles and 1.9 goals per game (45 goals)
2013: 15 disposals, 4 marks, 4 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.6 goals per game (40 goals)
2014: 15 disposals, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 2.3 goals per game (57 goals)
Career average: 14.5 disposals, 3.25 marks, 3.75 tackles, 2.5 inside 50s, 1.9 goals per game

Chad Wingard
Season average
2012: 12 disposals, 2 marks, 2 tackles, 2 inside 50s, 0.5 goals per game (9 goals)
2013: 21 disposals, 4 marks, 2 tackles, 4 inside 50s, 1.8 goals per game (43 goals)
2014: 16 disposals, 4 marks, 3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.8 goals per game (43 goals)
Career average: 16.3 disposals, 3.3 marks, 2.3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.41 goals per game

Looking at those stats Luke Breust had a better debut season and also clearly performed better in 2014. Chad Wingard had a better year in 2013. Overall though there's not much between the two but you have to go with Breust at this stage because he's been the more consistent player right from the very start.

 

[MinerBoy]

Breust's figures in 2011 should be looked at in light of the fact he only played about 1/4 a game too, starting as sub a high % of the time.

 

[WWSD]

Breust's figures in 2011 should be looked at in light of the fact he only played about 1/4 a game too, starting as sub a high % of the time.

Makes his debut year even more impressive. In 2014 Luke Breust kicked a goal in 24/25 matches.

 

[KissKiss]

Breust's figures in 2011 should be looked at in light of the fact he only played about 1/4 a game too, starting as sub a high % of the time.

I dont know if its true or not but I wouldn't be surprised if Wingard was a sub a fair bit in his debut season too. The nature of the position and style they both play means they would likely have been great green vest candidate

 

[MinerBoy]

I dont know if its true or not but I wouldn't be surprised if Wingard was a sub a fair bit in his debut season too. The nature of the position and style they both play means they would likely have been great green vest candidate

Yep, would make sense if it was the case.

My comment had little to do with the comparison though and more to just highlight how good 30 goals is in your debut year when you only play 16 or 17 games and only get 25-40 minutes in a large % of them. Pretty outstanding effort.

 

[KissKiss]

Yep, would make sense if it was the case.

My comment had little to do with the comparison though and more to just highlight how good 30 goals is in your debut year when you only play 16 or 17 games and only get 25-40 minutes in a large % of them. Pretty outstanding effort.

Oh absolutely it was a great effort. I probably should have quoted the WWSD post not yours. Would potentially be worth looking at the TOG% for both of their first seasons if you wanted to compare them

 

[Hawkas1988]

Yep, would make sense if it was the case.

My comment had little to do with the comparison though and more to just highlight how good 30 goals is in your debut year when you only play 16 or 17 games and only get 25-40 minutes in a large % of them. Pretty outstanding effort.

He is still the best sub we have ever had. He came on in the last quarter of those games and kicked 2 goals a few times and really had an impact. Was great to see and you soon knew this kid was going to be something special.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Luke Breust
2011: 12 diposals, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 1.8 goals per game (30 goals)
2012: 16 disposals, 3 marks, 3 inside 50s, 5 tackles and 1.9 goals per game (45 goals)
2013: 15 disposals, 4 marks, 4 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.6 goals per game (40 goals)
2014: 15 disposals, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 2.3 goals per game (57 goals)
Career average: 14.5 disposals, 3.25 marks, 3.75 tackles, 2.5 inside 50s, 1.9 goals per game

Chad Wingard
Season average
2012: 12 disposals, 2 marks, 2 tackles, 2 inside 50s, 0.5 goals per game (9 goals)
2013: 21 disposals, 4 marks, 2 tackles, 4 inside 50s, 1.8 goals per game (43 goals)
2014: 16 disposals, 4 marks, 3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.8 goals per game (43 goals)
Career average: 16.3 disposals, 3.3 marks, 2.3 tackles, 3 inside 50s, 1.41 goals per game

Looking at those stats Luke Breust had a better debut season and also clearly performed better in 2014. Chad Wingard had a better year in 2013. Overall though there's not much between the two but you have to go with Breust at this stage because he's been the more consistent player right from the very start.

Refer to the following

Statistics in football are extremely overrated and over used. The people that actually sit down and watch the two players, not knowing the stats would choose Wingard because he is the better player and talent. The people that don't watch every game and form their opinion based heavily on stats will choose Bruest because he gets the numbers. I am by no means saying Bruest is a bad player because lets face it nearly every team would want him playing for them, but Wingard is still ahead even with the inconsistency of last year.

 

[MinerBoy]

The same logic that we get laughed at when talking about Rioli.

 

[cryptor]

Refer to the following

That's still just your opinion. People could and are saying the same thing about Breust but at least the stats back those claims up.

 

[TheFourPillars]

The same logic that we get laughed at when talking about Rioli.

How can i REALLY REALLY LIKE this post

 

[Scary_Foot_9]

Luke Breust.

 

[pacman]

Breust had a better 2014. Wingard had a better 2013. One year does not make one player better then another

Breusts last 3 years have been brilliant.

 

[detox]

But no my argument can be reduced to, simply, just watch him- it's obvious. I won't pretend it's underpinned by a ream of statistics and Einstein's Theory of Relativity, and at this point anyone who does so expecting this to produce a more reasoned (and unbiased) opinion is kidding themselves.

Mate, you can't argue with proof. Bruest kicks more goals, and sets up more goals than Wingard currently, this is a fact.

In no other stat is wingard that dominant over Bruest for you to even make a case, in which he would have to be to override the above fact, that one small forward contributes more goals than the other.

Maybe if Wingard was averaging 5-6 more possessions a game, or higher tackles/contested possessions ect, but he doesn't. Its very square apart from the fact he contributes less goals and assists (and less tackles)

Wingard could end up better if he becomes more consistent. Until then you have no argument.

 

[Scary_Foot_9]

Wingard might have more moments of flashy brilliance, but theres no question as to who I'd want in my side.

 

[MinerBoy]

Wingard might have more moments of flashy brilliance, but theres no question as to who I'd want in my side.

Dalhaus?