AFL Player 5: Elijah Tsatas

[Nuggs Bunny]

 

[Zach Package]

Accumulator is just a fancy way of saying spud who doesn’t have basic AFL skills

Extractors are useful. But when their usage is questionable they better have an all round game and able to impact the game in every other way

What’s the fancy word for someone who’s not an accumulator?

Do we call it a Wardlaw?

 

[jdstorm]

What’s the fancy word for someone who’s not an accumulator?

Do we call it a Wardlaw?

In the negative? Omitted

Positive: high impact: I suspect another poster might have a better singular word but after quickly looking for synonyms I couldn’t find any I liked

 

[Vander18]

26 disposals, that's your benchmark? It's way too low. Tsatas can get 26 dispoals in his sleep.

What the critics recognise is that:

1. the number of possessions represents nothing other than the amount of time a player is given in the middle and the role he has while in the middle. 9/10 commentators, expert or not, clearly do not understand this;

2. there is a difference between getting the ball and getting the ball and doing something useful with it.

Essendon fans are or should be experts when it comes to this assessment. You can't help but see the difference between possessions and useful possession by the time we have Heppell and Parish accumulating possession in the same team. Dodoro built generations of midfields on players who can't do anything with the ball. They could all get it 30 times a game, though.

There is also what you do without ball in hand.

This gets overlooked a lot when assessing players.

 

[faible]

In the negative? Omitted

Positive: high impact: I suspect another poster might have a better singular word but after quickly looking for synonyms I couldn’t find any I liked

Mercurial?

 

[Zach Package]

In the negative? Omitted

Positive: high impact: I suspect another poster might have a better singular word but after quickly looking for synonyms I couldn’t find any I liked

If the benchmark is you’re high impact or you’re out 80% of the league is out.

If it presents more like a graph he is certainly in the high volume, low impact corner, but I would certainly rather invest time in trying to make a consistent player more impactful than make an impactful player more consistent.

But that’s only because I’ve watched Essendon cycle through dozens of inconsistent, wafty cowards who weren’t interested in putting the work in for the last 15 years.

 

[jdstorm]

Mercurial?

Doesn’t feel quite right because that’s more about unorthodox brilliance but some players do that with high possesion tally’s ie Daicos and NWM at present

 

[jdstorm]

If the benchmark is you’re high impact or you’re out 80% of the league is out.

If it presents more like a graph he is certainly in the high volume, low impact corner, but I would certainly rather invest time in trying to make a consistent player more impactful than make an impactful player more consistent.

But that’s only because I’ve watched Essendon cycle through dozens of inconsistent, wafty cowards who weren’t interested in putting the work in for the last 15 years.

i think something got lost between posts we were just generally talking about words to describe styles of play in the general sense.

those two terms were about how to describe midfielders with low/er posession counts.

In general I’d say 80% of AFL mids are serviceable and or dependable. They play both ways, get the ball enough and use it decently.

In general I agree that it’s better to target dependable players if you want to raise a teams floor and that’s something Essendon has lacked.

 

[Keystone agony]

Tom Mitchell/Matt Priddis. Get a heap of the ball on the inside, create opportunities for others, won't hurt you when they're in open space, but they are vital in a good side.

That is what Tsatas should be aiming to be, whilst working on upping his physicality and kicking, albeit he won't get to Brownlow Medalist level

Both have been in successful sides

 

[Keystone agony]

Listen to Buckley comment on accumulators.
A bloke who wins a lot of the footy but does not really do a lot of damage with the possessions.
An opposition team is unlikely to tag him because they have a lot of junk possessions that do not result in score involvements or score chains.

How many SI do you need to not be considered an 'accumulator'

 

[Zach Package]

i think something got lost between posts we were just generally talking about words to describe styles of play in the general sense.

those two terms were about how to describe midfielders with low/er posession counts.

In general I’d say 80% of AFL mids are serviceable and or dependable. They play both ways, get the ball enough and use it decently.

In general I agree that it’s better to target dependable players if you want to raise a teams floor and that’s something Essendon has lacked.

If it’s purely in reference to describing foot skills then I tend to agree, but you can be serviceable by foot and still be highly impactful because of the amount of pill you accumulate and the options you select.

 

[Zach Package]

How many SI do you need to not be considered an 'accumulator'

Jeeze you’d want to avoid our score involvement stats then, Martin 5.5, Durham 5.5, Caldwell 5.4, Parish 5.3.

That .1 of a score involvement per game is clearly the difference between damaging, and not damaging.

 

[Keystone agony]

Jeeze you’d want to avoid our score involvement stats then, Martin 5.5, Durham 5.5, Caldwell 5.4, Parish 5.3.

That .1 of a score involvement per game is clearly the difference between damaging, and not damaging.

Before we even discuss past years

But i wont get a quanitfiable number/avg anyway

 

[jdstorm]

If it’s purely in reference to describing foot skills then I tend to agree, but you can be serviceable by foot and still be highly impactful because of the amount of pill you accumulate and the options you select.

Not foot skills just generally how impact/efficency and volume rarely go hand in hand and it’s only the special players that have both and how we label players by where they fit on that graph/spectrum

As for Tsatsas. I like him and hope he goes well.

 

[Keystone agony]

If it’s purely in reference to describing foot skills then I tend to agree, but you can be serviceable by foot and still be highly impactful because of the amount of pill you accumulate and the options you select.

I dont think Neale is any better than serviceable by foot

The guy cant kick 50. He knows his limits though and hits the easy short targets fine

 

[JayJ20]

Time for him to show what he has. Let him play as an inside mid for the rest of the year. If he can play well at AFL level, then keep him and trade Parish. We're not playing finals so it will cost us nothing. We don't need to see what Parish can give us.

I want to see a couple of thing from Tsatas.

• Using his speed and power to burst out of stoppages
• Using his size to wear tackles and freeing his clean hands
• Using his size to block and stick tackles
• At least some outside game even if it is average

If we see those things in his game, then he is worth persisting with. He'll never be a good kick so I'm no longer looking for an improvement there.

 

[ant555]

How many SI do you need to not be considered an 'accumulator'

Lets get bogged down in the semantics. Again. If you can not work it out then more fool you.

 

[jdstorm]

How many SI do you need to not be considered an 'accumulator'

It’s a term that means high volume user who does so inefficiently.

So the number of SI doesn’t matter as much as SI per possesion, SI to turnover ratio. And a bunch of other stats that aren’t publicly available

 

[ghostdog]

Time for him to show what he has. Let him play as an inside mid for the rest of the year. If he can play well at AFL level, then keep him and trade Parish. We're not playing finals so it will cost us nothing. We don't need to see what Parish can give us.

I want to see a couple of thing from Tsatas.

• Using his speed and power to burst out of stoppages
• Using his size to wear tackles and freeing his clean hands
• Using his size to block and stick tackles
• At least some outside game even if it is average

If we see those things in his game, then he is worth persisting with. He'll never be a good kick so I'm no longer looking for an improvement there.

This is it for me. Time to demonstrate these Durhamesque qualities at the top level. His next contract, wherever that may be, depends on it.
Hopefully he tears it up. This game in particular should be an excellent opportunity.

 

[yodellinhank]

This is it for me. Time to demonstrate these Durhamesque qualities at the top level. His next contract, wherever that may be, depends on it.
Hopefully he tears it up. This game in particular should be an excellent opportunity.

If he doesn't play well this game they might tear up his next contract, but we should hope he plays well instead.

 

[Nifft]

I always think of “pilfer” as a fancy word, “gossamer” too.

And especially “vienetta”.

I always liked hove, seems kind of fancy.

For example, "Hooker hove into view as Buddy sprinted away down the wing".

 

[ant555]

29 disposals
7 clearances
Will do some good things
Will turn some over
Question mark will be is there any outside run and if he can limit the hot potato handballs .

 

[HirdyLannister]

This thread is going to be painful tonight

Good luck Elijah!

 

[HirdyLannister]

Goal kicking mid

 

[Westlo]

On pace for 1000m gained

 

[Maxabillions]

Impact player