Speculation Bailey Smith

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Draft picks are so overrated. Worth a pick 6 to 10. He's the most marketable player in the game and has delivered at a high level since being drafted.

The draft is a lottery and you know what you are getting with Baz. He's either going to be 2nd or 3rd best player on your midfield or if he recaptured 2021 form the best midfielder in your team.

Frankly I don't want him going anymore he's a good player
 
PurpJuice said:
I’ve noticed, the only people saying he’s not worth a top 10 pick are Pies fans who think they will get him for a second rounder.

No hard feelings, I wish I could get every teams top end talent for peanuts too!
Click to expand...
Curious If he does nominate Geelong what are you expecting in return?
 
mattwa said:
Draft picks are so overrated. Worth a pick 6 to 10. He's the most marketable player in the game and has delivered at a high level since being drafted.

The draft is a lottery and you know what you are getting with Baz. He's either going to be 2nd or 3rd best player on your midfield or if he recaptured 2021 form the best midfielder in your team.

Frankly I don't want him going anymore he's a good player
Click to expand...
They may be over rated but if he went to cats I dunno how we'd upgrade it for you. Unless we won like maybe 2 games for the rest of the season. Actually I wouldn't completely rule that out.
 
Seedsfan said:
No he isn’t was poor in 2023 and ACL this year.
Click to expand...
"Poor" is an unusual way to describe Bailey Smith in 2023, considering he split his time mostly on a wing and at times at centre bounce and a forward flank (not too dissimilar to Collingwood's Best and Fairest winner in 2023).

Statistically, this is how Bailey compared to Josh:
  • -1.5 disposals per game
  • -1.3 marks per game
  • +1.2 tackles per game
  • +0.6 clearances per game
  • -0.6 turnovers per game
  • +3.9 pressure acts per game
  • -3.3% disposal efficiency
  • -12% kick efficiency
I don't think the difference in stats holistically suggests one is "poor" and the other is the best player in the best team in the league. The kicking efficiency is clearly a problem, admittedly, but again not enough to suggest Bailey was poor. He was below his own lofty standards, for sure.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bald said:
"Poor" is an unusual way to describe Bailey Smith in 2023, considering he split his time mostly on a wing and at times at centre bounce and a forward flank (not too dissimilar to Collingwood's Best and Fairest winner in 2023).

Statistically, this is how Bailey compared to Josh:
  • -1.5 disposals per game
  • -1.3 marks per game
  • +1.2 tackles per game
  • +0.6 clearances per game
  • -0.6 turnovers per game
  • +3.9 pressure acts per game
  • -3.3% disposal efficiency
  • -12% kick efficiency
I don't think the difference in stats holistically suggests one is "poor" and the other is the best player in the best team in the league. The kicking efficiency is clearly a problem, admittedly, but again not enough to suggest Bailey was poor. He was below his own lofty standards, for sure.
Click to expand...
Eye test. Stats never paint the full picture.

Did he regress in 2023?
 
Seedsfan said:
Eye test. Stats never paint the full picture.

Did he regress in 2023?
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, let's take the common footy eye test over literal statistics. Brilliant.

Did he regress? Of course he did, but that's not what you said, you said he was poor - your failure to understand the difference is why your eye test is rubbish. Bontempelli has also regressed on last year, does that make him poor?
 
mattwa said:
Draft picks are so overrated. Worth a pick 6 to 10. He's the most marketable player in the game and has delivered at a high level since being drafted.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure anybody, including Hawks supporters, are ready for Baz, Ginni, Sicily and Watson in the same team.

Might help us return to Thursday and Friday night timeslots though.
 
Bald said:
"Poor" is an unusual way to describe Bailey Smith in 2023, considering he split his time mostly on a wing and at times at centre bounce and a forward flank (not too dissimilar to Collingwood's Best and Fairest winner in 2023).

Statistically, this is how Bailey compared to Josh:
  • -1.5 disposals per game
  • -1.3 marks per game
  • +1.2 tackles per game
  • +0.6 clearances per game
  • -0.6 turnovers per game
  • +3.9 pressure acts per game
  • -3.3% disposal efficiency
  • -12% kick efficiency
I don't think the difference in stats holistically suggests one is "poor" and the other is the best player in the best team in the league. The kicking efficiency is clearly a problem, admittedly, but again not enough to suggest Bailey was poor. He was below his own lofty standards, for sure.
Click to expand...
Would anyone offer a top ten pick for Josh Daicos who was a better player?

Another stat of importance for a mid is metres gained - Daicos again well ahead 419 metres per game to 340.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Rob R said:
Would anyone offer a top ten pick for Josh Daicos who was a better player?

Another stat of importance for a mid is metres gained - Daicos again well ahead 419 metres per game to 340.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I mentioned anything about Baileys worth in my post?
 
So good we are all aligned. Bailey Smith will go for somewhere between Hawks pick 4 and Pies future 2nd, depending on how well he finishes out the year.😉
 
Bald said:
Oh yeah, let's take the common footy eye test over literal statistics. Brilliant.

Did he regress? Of course he did, but that's not what you said, you said he was poor - your failure to understand the difference is why your eye test is rubbish. Bontempelli has also regressed on last year, does that make him poor?
Click to expand...
eye test is only as good as the eyes of the viewer. sometimes stat's don't tell the whole story. a good comparison is dyson heppell being rated like a top 50 player - it's identified that he's in some good form, and it's certainly up from years past, but he's playing a role relatively well - but the stuff he does that doesn't get a stat, sheperding, 1%ers, on-field coaching are equally as important - that's where the eye test works.

he mightn't "look" good but he was playing well last year, and i think the bulldogs would be loving him if he was able to play right now. realistically he should be entering his prime over the next year or two.
 
mcgrath_truther said:
eye test is only as good as the eyes of the viewer. sometimes stat's don't tell the whole story. a good comparison is dyson heppell being rated like a top 50 player - it's identified that he's in some good form, and it's certainly up from years past, but he's playing a role relatively well - but the stuff he does that doesn't get a stat, sheperding, 1%ers, on-field coaching are equally as important - that's where the eye test works.

he mightn't "look" good but he was playing well last year, and i think the bulldogs would be loving him if he was able to play right now. realistically he should be entering his prime over the next year or two.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, the upside is massive, of course the ACL is a concern but the fact is he is performing at an above expected level, prior to his peak.

Top ten picks have been spent on worse.
 
Bald said:
Pretty much, the upside is massive, of course the ACL is a concern but the fact is he is performing at an above expected level, prior to his peak.

Top ten picks have been spent on worse.
Click to expand...

I think he's worth a top 10 pick.
Will they get it is the question?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Elmer_Judd
Recommitted Bailey Smith [OOC 2024]
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
742
Views
43K
Lore
Lore
The Nostradamus
Recommitted Bailey Williams [signs 4 year deal]
2 3
Replies
57
Views
7K
Foxman98
Foxman98
MisterMarcus
Recommitted Bailey Scott [re-signed to 2024]
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
5K
Kangaroos4eva
Kangaroos4eva

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top