Retired #12: Mark Baguley - Will retire at seasons end - 27/8

Remove this Banner Ad

Will be interesting to see what happens with Bags.

Has had 2 absolute shockers in a row.

If it was any of Langford/ Laverde/ Clarke/ Redman/ Parish etc., they’d 100% be dropped.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

bombreys said:
Will be interesting to see what happens with Bags.

Has had 2 absolute shockers in a row.

If it was any of Langford/ Laverde/ Clarke/ Redman/ Parish etc., they’d 100% be dropped.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't say Baguley has experienced two shockers in row - Most have unrealistic expectations of the small forward role - Average 10 possessions, kick a goal and 3 or 4 tackles and you've done your job - In saying that, Baguley does struggle to have an impact in between the two arcs.
 
Baguley as a forward was one of those trials that even if it worked it was going to be incredibly low pay off given his age and abilities. It worked reasonably well for the first couple of games and then his form has trailed off.

He might yet play some more good games up forward but I still don't think its worth it. Considering the team is unlikely to make the 8 we are better of giving our 4th year players in Laverde and Long a decent go.

Green is in a similar position but at least you can argue that he might be best 22 (I don't agree but its up for debate) and he's at least not at an age where he's going to need to retire within a year.
 
blitzer said:
Baguley as a forward was one of those trials that even if it worked it was going to be incredibly low pay off given his age and abilities. It worked reasonably well for the first couple of games and then his form has trailed off.

He might yet play some more good games up forward but I still don't think its worth it. Considering the team is unlikely to make the 8 we are better of giving our 4th year players in Laverde and Long a decent go.

Green is in a similar position but at least you can argue that he might be best 22 (I don't agree but its up for debate) and he's at least not at an age where he's going to need to retire within a year.
Click to expand...

The thing counting against Baguley is his pace has tallied off incredibly quickly. Has been found out when been asked to nulify faster paced players. Has found a terrible niche of going to ground very quickly and that just doesn't cut the mustard in todays game.

He has some credits imho, but they are running out very quickly with the way the game is moving and the returning guys into the senior team. When all of Green, Raz, Tippa are fit, we really don't have any room for one last one dimensional small forward.
 
yaco55 said:
Wouldn't say Baguley has experienced two shockers in row - Most have unrealistic expectations of the small forward role - Average 10 possessions, kick a goal and 3 or 4 tackles and you've done your job - In saying that, Baguley does struggle to have an impact in between the two arcs.
Click to expand...

Nah, they were shockers. He had less than 20 total stats and didn't score across those two games. Granted, he had two great games in a row before that.
 
yaco55 said:
Wouldn't say Baguley has experienced two shockers in row - Most have unrealistic expectations of the small forward role - Average 10 possessions, kick a goal and 3 or 4 tackles and you've done your job - In saying that, Baguley does struggle to have an impact in between the two arcs.
Click to expand...
but if laverde or long or langford, etc. put up those numbers they get dropped. why do green(e) and bag(u)ley get away with it?
 
katana said:
but if laverde or long or langford, etc. put up those numbers they get dropped. why do green(e) and bag(u)ley get away with it?
Click to expand...
Because Laverde can't hit a target or the scoreboard and Long isn't capable of consistently performing at a high enough level in the VFL to earn a spot in the side. Langford is playing a a mid and would absolutely deserve to get dropped if he was posting numbers like that. That said, he is probably the unluckiest out of those names and if Green gets a game this week and puts in another stinker then he deserves to get dropped.
 
bombreys said:
Nah, they were shockers. He had less than 20 total stats and didn't score across those two games. Granted, he had two great games in a row before that.
Click to expand...

You fail to understand and appreciate the role of a small forward - Check out average possessions of small forwards in all times - They all go around 10 to 14 possessions per game - You have unrealistic expectations.
 
He's the big question mark. We shouldn't make changes unless forced but geez he was poor. I didn't catch any of the two's to comment who would take his spot but Francis and Mutch come to mind.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Seagrave_Holmes said:
Still would rather have bags in the team at the expense of Green.
Click to expand...
If it's between them, yes. Wouldn't be adverse to seeing Long in the same role though.
 
Have to give Woosha credit for this move has made us a much better side moving him forward. That pressure and competitvness along with Mckernan and Brown over Joey have been instsrumental in our change of form.

His tired old legs were probably making him too slow for small nippy forwards.
 
Keystone agony said:
Have to give Woosha credit for this move has made us a much better side moving him forward. That pressure and competitvness along with Mckernan and Brown over Joey have been instsrumental in our change of form.

His tired old legs were probably making him too slow for small nippy forwards.
Click to expand...

Don't think we can get rid of him now has become an integral part of our forward line
 
Set the tone early when he forced a stoppage when outnumbered.
Happy for him to stay in as id say hes a bit of a talisman for the side. Its why he was moved forward instead of back to the twos when he fell out of the backline. He competes and brings a more defensive mindset to an overly attacking forward group.
 
Once again had little impact on the contest. 8 disposals and 4 frees against is a pretty tepid return.

It's great that Woosha gave him the opportunity to resurrect his career as a small forward but Baguley is no longer an AFL-standard footballer in any position. Thank him for his service, let him work with some of the younger blokes in the VFL and maybe give him a farewell game in round 23 if we are out of contention.

And 'is better than Green' isn't really an argument in his favour. Green is one of the worst footballers in the league; being better than him doesn't necessarily mean that you are an AFL-standard footballer. It is not a compelling argument in Baguley's favour.
 
He’s not really playing as a small forward tho more a backman up forward. Creating contests, pressure and link ups. Some of his frees are professional frees one section of play there was two North players taller than him and a bad kick went straight to the North player. He pushed him in the back to give away the free which ended up giving time to our defenders to set up.

Right now you can’t really go by stats as a lot of stuff he does isn’t a stat.
 
feel like a lot of supporters overlook garbage performances when the team wins. i mean if bags was 20 and had footskills and powerful running ability you could forgive the performance as teething or whatever. but yet again, he was very poor.
 
Studly Baker said:
He's the Nick Kommer replacement and not a moment too soon
Click to expand...
I'd forgotten all about him... Bloke was as average as they come.

Still, it's an indictment on this team that someone playing this role is necessary. That sort of thing should be instilled into the playing group from day 1 so it isn't necessary and if you don't buy in, you're in the two's to work on it until you're ready.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Duckworth
Delisted #38: Rhett Montgomerie - Not offered a contract for 2024 - 28/8
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
196
Views
19K
Zach Package
Zach Package

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top