Dangerfield Over Ebert: One of The Best Recruiting Decisions In Recent Times

[MaxHunt]

your taking the piss surely

Based on season performances then he would be correct. I doesn't help Danger that he was almost killed last week, missed a large part of the game and then played again this week slightly under done.

But in the longer run Danger should be the better player. He is a game breaker and they are invaluable.

 

[estibador]

Ebert is comfortably better than Dangerfield so far this season and has been part of the reason we havent lost our games by more.

Ebert was one of the main reasons you managed to blow the game against Port. King of the butchers that day.

 

[Mayneman]

Brad Ebert's disposal by foot is cringeworthy.

You just cant carry those types of players in the middle anymore and be competitive, as West Coast are finding out now.

 

[Masto]

Brad Ebert's disposal by foot is cringeworthy.

You just cant carry those types of players in the middle anymore and be competitive, as West Coast are finding out now.

Fremantle would take him in a heart beat.

 

[Spartan]

Dangerfield has shown more to date than Ebert to suggest he will be the better player.

Given that Ebert was taken later in the draft that isn't such a massive suprise.

However at present overall Ebert's 2010 > Dangerfield's 2010. Yes i know Dangerfield had a massive junk time half a couple of weeks back but all in all for a player of his hype he has not delivered.

Just like Masten's disposal is apparently shithouse the myth now extends to Ebert as well.

The problem for alot of our young players is that their poor kicks/handballs have resulted in huge **** ups costing us a goal or gifting the opposition a goal. So even if 4 out of 5 kicks hit the target that 1 clanger that cost a goal will proceed to label player x a shithouse kick.

 

[Prem87]

Ebert's disposal was terrible over the first 3 games. Even last week he missed a couple of kicks to leads he should have hit under little pressure. I rate Ebert very highly, however his disposal needs to hit their targets. It has improved but he's got a bit to go. Kicking is my only negative of him.

 

[Spartan]

Ebert's disposal was terrible over the first 3 games. Even last week he missed a couple of kicks to leads he should have hit under little pressure. I rate Ebert very highly, however his disposal needs to hit their targets. It has improved but he's got a bit to go. Kicking is my only negative of him.

His kicking needs work but i think some of the comments based on his overall game, for a kid a couple of seasons into his career, is pretty harsh.

 

[le dominateur]

Dangerfield is clearly the better player and will be going forward as well. Ebert may well play 150 or 200 games but none of them will be elite games or matchwinning games.

 

[MaxHunt]

Dangerfield is clearly the better player and will be going forward as well. Ebert may well play 150 or 200 games but none of them will be elite games or matchwinning games.

I agree will most except that Danger, whilst having the better attributes does not mean that he has played better. So far this season, albeit 4 games, Ebert has performed better. I dont expect this to last though.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Dangerfield is clearly the better player and will be going forward as well. Ebert may well play 150 or 200 games but none of them will be elite games or matchwinning games.

Funny because they will play a similar sought of role in the long term and Ebert had a match winning game in his first season.

 

[Crow-mo]

Funny because they will play a similar sought of role in the long term and Ebert had a match winning game in his first season.

if that were only true...

ebert had a long unaccountable game where he picked up cheap possession, and in the aftermath a couple of lazy journalists looked back on the stats and declared him influential. the truth was that he had no influence at all that game, but if that equals matchwinner, then so be it

 

[Mattman93]

What a stupid thread. There's no way any of us can know at this stage who will be better out of Dangerfield and Ebert.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

if that were only true...

ebert had a long unaccountable game where he picked up cheap possession, and in the aftermath a couple of lazy journalists looked back on the stats and declared him influential. the truth was that he had no influence at all that game, but if that equals matchwinner, then so be it

Sure thing.

Your memory or the truth to often fails you.

 

[Crow-mo]

Sure thing.

Your memory or the truth to often fails you.

yeah, that sure told me.

 

[rant]

One of the bravest recruiting decisions of all time to pass on Ebert at that stage.

If Adelaide took Ebert and WCE took Dangerfield

Dangerfield>Ebert - No one in adelaide would have said anything as dangerfield did not appear in most people's top 10 and WCE would have had a recruiting gem

Ebert > Dangerfield (Hypothetically) - Good for adelaide

BUT Adelaide took Dangerfield and WCE took Dangerfield

Dangerfield>Ebert - Great recuiting decision

Ebert>Dangerfield (Hypothetically) the Adelaide fans would be looking for recruiting staff to be sacked. Already many on BF at the time were extremely angry at Adelaide missing Ebert.

Good forsight by Adelaide but an even to see the potential of Dangerfield as a bottom aged recruit before anyone else and knowing that Ebert was not going to be a Voss/Buckley which many moulded his game too.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

My god.. what!

Dangerfield is a better selection at this point in time. This time last year Ebert was a better selection. These things always go in waves and if Dangerfield suddenly has a lean trot and Ebert finds another gear it'll sway back the other way again

 

[Jordie_tackles]

Danger>Ebert since his first game and still is.

 

[sTeeL]

Perhaps you missed Eberts game last night? Prolly BOG for West Coast and been pretty darn consistent all year. On his way up is Ebert...

 

[The Purple Hill]

Both are pretty good players. I would say both Adelaide and West Coast would be happy. Too early to say who will be better long term

 

[Avalor]

I'm happy with our Ebert, thanks. He's showing a lot this season - good get.

 

[r dub 19]

Verry happy with Ebert, he is a hard runner which hurts his disposal.

 

[Believe Me]

now we know that rendell was a genius, glad to have him at collingwood

 

[bombermick]

Shows the value of not going with the safe, consensus pick. Dozens of examples of clubs going such an option and it backfiring.

 

[Keystone agony]

Rendells recruiting is second to none. He doesnt just get gems with top 15 picks which he should but he finds the hidden gems later on.

Talia, P.Davis, Sloane, Vanberlo, Dangerfield, S.Shaw, Gunston, Mackay, Tippett, Walker he even wanted Milera but the club wasnt prepared to give him 2 years. We have also seen how good Tom Lee was, a real surprise late pick. Some golden picks there even guys like Callinan, Wright, Thompson ect as rookies.

Its hard to see any fail picks in the last 5 years. Mckernan possibly the only one even he was pick 28 (not that early) and he showed some really good signs early. Brodie Smith has been playing a role as a high pick.

 

[Macca19]

Rendells recruiting is second to none. He doesnt just get gems with top 15 picks which he should but he finds the hidden gems later on.

Talia, P.Davis, Sloane, Vanberlo, Dangerfield, S.Shaw, Gunston, Mackay, Tippett, Walker he even wanted Milera but the club wasnt prepared to give him 2 years. We have also seen how good Tom Lee was, a real surprise late pick. Some golden picks there even guys like Callinan, Wright, Thompson ect as rookies.

Van Berlo, Mackay, Tippett & Walker weren't Rendell picks