Analysis Dangerfields drop in form

[Cursed Cat]

Hard to play him forward when his goal kicking is so erratic.

His ball drop is ridiculous, a player of his experience should not be gripping the ball on an angle like he does when lining up for a set shot and expecting it to go straight - looks fixable but not sure any of our coaches would have the temerity to address the problem.

 

[00VicWard001]

The gap between Dangerfield's best and worst games comes down purely to execution of skills; his effort is always very good and he usually gets his hands on the ball enough to have an impact - whether that impact is a positive or a negative one is predicated on the quality of his disposal.

I can accept that he is often under a great deal of physical pressure from the opposition, it is just the nature of the type of possessions he accumulates - but some of those efforts are all but pointless, it is all very well going in hard and low, but sometimes it is better to play it a bit smarter. To play like he does requires total commitment and that willingness to hit packs hard understandably impacts his decision-making at times

Dangerfield is supremely gifted in an athletic sense, but his footy IQ doesn't match his physical advantages.

He's no different to a lot of players far less gifted than he in that once he is missing targets and making bad decisions he becomes a liability; i.e. he still gets a lot of the ball but does not put it to Geelong's advantage.

I understand that when he is up and going he is clearly our best midfielder, but there are days when I wish he was played deeper in our forward line so that the range of decisions he is asked to make in-game is reduced to 'shot at goal' or 'get the ball to a teammate's advantage'.

I'd have tried him as a CHF before now, but then again we arguably don't have the midfield resources to cover his absence - who'd get it to him?

It's a conundrum; he's a match-winner at his best but a bad Dangerfield day can be disastrous for the team ..

Last week some of his passing (kicking) was sublime.

 

[Cursed Cat]

Last week some of his passing (kicking) was sublime.

I remember one nice one-step pass on his left that was very good.
in general though I don’t think his ‘touch’ by foot is as good as other facets of his game..

 

[My Tilly]

His ball drop is ridiculous, a player of his experience should not be gripping the ball on an angle like he does when lining up for a set shot and expecting it to go straight - looks fixable but not sure any of our coaches would have the temerity to address the problem.

He has always had a unique technique though.
I have some draft vision of him here and you can see there were question marks on some of the mechanics then.

 

[Cursed Cat]

He has always had a unique technique though.
I have some draft vision of him here and you can see there were question marks on some of the mechanics then.

even that looks a bit better than what we regularly see from him at AFL level though - not sure if he tilts it in a misguided attempt to get more distance, but I groan every time I see him hold the pill on an angle like that ...

 

[Partridge]

Last week some of his passing (kicking) was sublime.

That's it. He's not a bad kick; he's an erratic kick. There's nothing wrong with his technique at all from what I can tell, but he has days where kicks them beautifully, and some days he sprays them everywhere (different player, but reminds me of Ottens kicking for goal in that respect).

 

[00VicWard001]

That's it. He's not a bad kick; he's an erratic kick. There's nothing wrong with his technique at all from what I can tell, but he has days where kicks them beautifully, and some days he sprays them everywhere (different player, but reminds me of Ottens kicking for goal in that respect).

He looks rushed. Some of his terrible kicks, you completely get why they happened, as he's reefed the ball from under a pack, got someone hanging off him or about to tackle him, he's off balance and his aim is to gain territory.

Other kicks... I have no idea how he shanks them so badly. Maybe he's fatigued.

 

[Baudolino]

It's a conundrum; he's a match-winner at his best but a bad Dangerfield day can be disastrous for the team ..

It's really not a conundrum. Like, not even slightly.

He's been one of the two or three best players in the comp for five years. This isn't a "well, he does some good things and he does some bad things" situation. It's a "the good thing he does so overwhelmingly overweigh any so-called 'bad things' he does that the bad things are proportionally irrelevant and not worth thinking about" situation.

 

[Partridge]

It's really not a conundrum. Like, not even slightly.

He's been one of the two or three best players in the comp for five years. This isn't a "well, he does some good things and he does some bad things" situation. It's a "the good thing he does so overwhelmingly overweigh any so-called 'bad things' he does that the bad things are proportionally irrelevant and not worth thinking about" situation.

Don't agree with that. No player is above criticism or so good they don't have room for improvement.

 

[My Tilly]

He looks rushed. Some of his terrible kicks, you completely get why they happened, as he's reefed the ball from under a pack, got someone hanging off him or about to tackle him, he's off balance and his aim is to gain territory.

Other kicks... I have no idea how he shanks them so badly. Maybe he's fatigued.

Sometimes looks like he isn't going to strike the ball properly with his boot as he is running at top speed.
Akermanis did it all the time but he was poetry in motion when he ran at full speed and kicked.

Still, when Danger has a set shot and he's only 20, 30 out, I never trust him to kick it. Get him anywhere around fifty or beyond, he's a beautiful shot. Strange phenomenon but many players do it.

 

[Cursed Cat]

It's really not a conundrum. Like, not even slightly.

He's been one of the two or three best players in the comp for five years. This isn't a "well, he does some good things and he does some bad things" situation. It's a "the good thing he does so overwhelmingly overweigh any so-called 'bad things' he does that the bad things are proportionally irrelevant and not worth thinking about" situation.

You're clearly a big fan Baudolino, but I stand by what I wrote earlier - at his best he is a match-winner (and there's not many in the comp that you can say that about) - but when he is off I think he can actively damage the team's fortunes with poor decision-making and poor disposal.

On those bad days - and by the sounds of things you don't think he has any - he still usually gets enough of the ball that his turnovers are punished with a regularity that is damaging to the team.

Some players have quiet bad days, that is one thing, but I'd argue that getting a heap of the ball and turning it over is a bigger sin.

Anyway, feel free to not think about these things, it's probably more enjoyable that way!

 

[Baudolino]

You're clearly a big fan Baudolino, but I stand by what I wrote earlier - at his best he is a match-winner (and there's not many in the comp that you can say that about) - but when he is off I think he can actively damage the team's fortunes with poor decision-making and poor disposal.

On those bad days - and by the sounds of things you don't think he has any - he still usually gets enough of the ball that his turnovers are punished with a regularity that is damaging to the team.

It's not that I don't think he has bad days or that I don't think he has shortcomings, it's that I recognise the fact that on a proportional level his good qualities massively outweigh any negatives brought about by the imperfections that exist in his game. I'm not denying he has those deficiencies. But the point is, any discussion of his shortcoming has to acknowledge the context in which such a discussion takes place, which is that we're talking about one of the top two or three players in the entire AFL here. Which to me seems like a non-trivial data point. I agree there are areas of his game that could improve - no player is perfect - but if such criticism is not proportionally calibrated, I won't see it as credible. The way some people in this thread (others far more than you) talk about Danger you would think the drawbacks of him as player were roughly equivalent, if not more significant, than what he brings to the side in a positive sense.

 

[thylacine60]

gee wizz, dangerfield just spoke brilliantly on indigenous issues in the afl on footy crucified - fabulous stuff........

 

[Cursed Cat]

It's not that I don't think he has bad days or that I don't think he has shortcomings, it's that I recognise the fact that on a proportional level his good qualities massively outweigh any negatives brought about by the imperfections that exist in his game. I'm not denying he has those deficiencies. But the point is, any discussion of his shortcoming has to acknowledge the context in which such a discussion takes place, which is that we're talking about one of the top two or three players in the entire AFL here. Which to me seems like a non-trivial data point. I agree there are areas of his game that could improve - no player is perfect - but if such criticism is not proportionally calibrated, I won't see it as credible. The way some people in this thread (others far more than you) talk about Danger you would think the drawbacks of him as player were roughly equivalent, if not more significant, than what he brings to the side in a positive sense.

well, as you acknowledged I think I’ve been reasonably measured in my criticism of PD - to reiterate; he is a match-winner (not many in the comp) and his sheer effort is often exemplary.

but sometimes I feel his footy IQ leaves something to be desired, and his foot skills can be shabby for a player of his ability..

Happy to leave it there as I’ve got nothing to gain by ‘campaigning’ against him. At this stage of his career he is what he is, for better and sometimes worse ..

 

[Spazz Cat]

well, as you acknowledged I think I’ve been reasonably measured in my criticism of PD - to reiterate; he is a match-winner (not many in the comp) and his sheer effort is often exemplary.

but sometimes I feel his footy IQ leaves something to be desired, and his foot skills can be shabby for a player of his ability..

Happy to leave it there as I’ve got nothing to gain by ‘campaigning’ against him. At this stage of his career he is what he is, for better and sometimes worse ..

Exactly he's a gun and an outright match winner and a player that can lift a whole team places up the ladder on his own.
But yeah nothing wrong with analyzing players ffs.
It's not like (most) are having a go at him.
I've said before in this thread even Gaz snr wasn't perfect.

 

[Sttew]

I've said before in this thread even Gaz snr wasn't perfect.

Far from it, and that's why some rate him below Matthews and Carey as GOAT. I saw plenty of games where GAS looked disinterested and had minimal impact. I saw plenty of jaw opening' performances by GAS too

 

[My Tilly]

Been a little down on form the past fortnight has Danger.
The shorter quarters may be playing a major role for these guys who thrive on being able to work over their opponents in the latter stages of each quarter.

 

[Seeds]

Far from it, and that's why some rate him below Matthews and Carey as GOAT. I saw plenty of games where GAS looked disinterested and had minimal impact. I saw plenty of jaw opening' performances by GAS too

Carey and matthews wasnt perfect.

carey had a lot of dud games And never had a great grand final. Carey only ever reached 10 goals twice. just couldnt destroy teams quite like ablett could. Matthews highlights reel looks almost comical. He was slow and really didnt move all that well.

 

[Partridge]

Far from it, and that's why some rate him below Matthews and Carey as GOAT. I saw plenty of games where GAS looked disinterested and had minimal impact. I saw plenty of jaw opening' performances by GAS too

To be honest aside from Hawthorn and North supporters (who shock horror are going to nominate someone who played for their team), I'd say it's only because he didn't play in a premiership. Which is silly anyway because 1989 proved beyond any doubt how he handled that pressure.

 

[Mr X]

Carey and matthews wasnt perfect.

carey had a lot of dud games And never had a great grand final. Carey only ever reached 10 goals twice. just couldnt destroy teams quite like ablett could. Matthews highlights reel looks almost comical. He was slow and really didnt move all that well.

I have re-read your post because for a minute there I thought you had said Carey never had a great final. Shuddered at the thought of him tearing us a new one in 1997 in that final where we finished second and them 7th. Crappy conditions and I don't think he had been in great form, but he kicked 7 of their 11 that night to bury us.

All players have form fluctuations. Don't think Danger has been at his best, but he is in good company across the competition this year. If his best is yet to come for the season, and we are remaining in the hunt with some good players around him to come back, I am OK with that.

 

[My Tilly]

Matthews highlights reel looks almost comical. He was slow and really didnt move all that well.

He moved well alright.
You don't manage 330 games and 915 goals if you don't.

 

[Spazz Cat]

He moved well alright.
You don't manage 330 games and 915 goals if you don't.

Never saw him play. TBH all I've seen is him breaking that point post about 100 times and him knocking out Bruns.
But just on stats he seems unbelievable. Like the best player ever.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Exactly he's a gun and an outright match winner and a player that can lift a whole team places up the ladder on his own.
But yeah nothing wrong with analyzing players ffs.
It's not like (most) are having a go at him.
I've said before in this thread even Gaz snr wasn't perfect.

He is also 30 years old so if a natural decline has commenced then so be it. Nothing wrong with that. To an extent its good seeing the jobs done by others.

Wouldnt mind seeing him play a high HFF role like he did when he began his career to end his career. He is better roaming between 30-100m out providing contests up the line and still being involved in the clearances forward of centre, while using his power to push the ball forward to bomb it to a contest or break the lines for long range goals.

He is far more suited to being aroun the half forward territory than he is as a deep forward as its more natural for him with his playing style and strenghs

 

[My Tilly]

To an extent its good seeing the jobs done by others.

You know it won't last don't you?
What you are seeing now from Guthrie, Menegola, Tuohy and a couple others is not what we are going to get in the crunch games at end of the year (or even in finals).
It's a continual pattern at this club so that will mean Dangerfield and Selwood will be carrying the load when they shouldn't have to be.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Never saw him play. TBH all I've seen is him breaking that point post about 100 times and him knocking out Bruns.
But just on stats he seems unbelievable. Like the best player ever.

He was a cowardly dog.