Colin Wisbey's Profiles:
---------------------
Dale Thomas (Gippsland Power)
183/75 mid-age right foot (dual-sided) HFF/ midfielder/ HBF.
*STYLE LIKE: undernourished Cooney
*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 17
*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 2.
- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 10-15.
*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / L-M
*TRADEMARK:
- Speccy (for his size) or charge to collect the ball at pace, then take them on, dash away and kick direct and for length ... the keep running hard.
- Chase hard and tackle like a terrier, then pick himself up and run on.
*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:
- Not special at anything but no major weakness either. A quickish terrier with a bit of everything.
Not silky in that "cool, always has plenty of time" sense but he does have quite good skills. Biggest assets are his consistency and ability to impact. He can inspire his team through sheer frenetic effort (both ways) and in-your-face daring.
- Not a ball magnet by any means. (see below). Averages 18 disposals, somewhat low for his type and abilities (even though he does play HFF a lot).
What you are buying is:-
1. A never-say-die who never plays a genuinely poor game. You can count on him to contribute to every game, albeit without often getting special stats or ever challenging for the Brownlow.
2. An almost 6' dasher who takes them on and runs the lines yet, unlike many for whom that description applies, is certainly not outside. Quick, slippery.
3. A terrier who attacks the man as keenly as he attacks the ball. Works hard both ways.
4. Work ethic.
5. Versatility.
6. Leadership and a nice, mature, sensible kid with infectious personality. A good personaility to have around a club.
7. A potential team lifter
- Fairly handy around goals but good in-close too.
- Most people would question why I have Thomas a bit earlier in my rankings than Xavier Ellis. (I often use Ellis as the yard stick for mids as he is well known and plays the same very week):-
-----------------
Ellis is a reliable kick, an elite reader of the player, a very good contested mark, and has wonderful vision. Not that Thomas is any slouch in these areas but Ellis is the better.
On the other hand, Thomas is a ball-carrier and, at times, a "run through the 50" goal-kicker, which Ellis is not.
Thomas is genuinely dual-sided. Ellis is basically one-sided.
Both get a roughly similar amount of the pill but, other than marking, Ellis relies mainly on receives and the mistakes of others. Thomas gets more of his own ball.
Thomas is fierce at both man and ball, which Ellis is not. Thomas' intensity is way ahead of Ellis'. He is routinely determined and desperate.
Thomas is accountable. Ellis is not.
AFL-wise, Thomas presents as much more versatility. He could play anywhere down the flanks and perhaps onball and or even run-with in time. Ellis' current outsidedness would have to radically change for him to have much versatility. It might, but it would be mere blind faith to state that it definitely will. Thomas's game is suited to team various game plans - from fast-moving / fast scoring to dour scrumby. Ellis' is not. In various Ellis games, it seemed that Ellis plays as if the team game plan comes to Ellis. Thomas adapts himself to the team game plan. Some of those comments may turn out to be unfair on Ellis. I'm just explaining how I see things based on what we have seen to date.
Ellis is average off the mark and has good pace after that. He doesn't currently do much of the "after that" though. Thomas is quicker than Ellis over ground and much quicker off the mark.
Ellis is taller and probably has the better leap.
Ellis is 8 months younger and hasn't had the depth of TAC experience that Thomas has.
Thomas has a frame that would appear to be more likely to finish up with a reasonable build --for AFL.
---------------------
- I've probably seen Dale about 30 times and I am a fan of the way he plays but I definitely feel that his very good TAC GF has significantly exaggerated anyone's perception of what he brings to the draft table. The same thing happened with Jordan Barham a few years ago. I thought Dale played a very good GF but I hope people don't see it as a sign that a star has emerged from nowhere. Let me add my reality check, so that we keep Thomas's capabilities in perspective:-
Goodes was arguably drafted mainly on his terrific TAC GF performance. However Goodes had had an interrupted year and his form was up and down. It was a case of "Will the real Adam Goodes please stand up?"
Thomas is different. His form and style of game have been consistent over 2 years. He is not a late bloomer or sudden improver. Dale is "what you see is what you get and you can count on him putting in a similar performance virtually every week, sometimes a bit quieter, sometimes a bit more impact". The GF was just the latter, albeit probably his best game. He gets around the 18-20 disposals most weeks as he did in the GF (20d). He kicked 4-0 in the GF, he kicked 2-3 two games earlier. Thomas gives you something every game and is good for a goal or so most games. Sometimes his shots go the wrong side of the post and sometimes (as in the GF) the right side. I thought he put in a very similar performance to the GF in R13 (19 disposals, 6 scoring shots) - it's just that on GF day his 4 scoring shots all went straight and resulted in 4-0 and in R13 he finished with 1-5. He was on fire for periods of the GF but, just the previous week, Bronik Davies did a very good job shutting him down (as much as you can shut Thomas down) and restricting Thomas to 13 disposals in what was the equal quietest game I saw from Dale all year. (Coincidentally, the other was also against Davies' team but I don't recall Thomas' opponent).
I don't say any of the above to discredit Thomas. I just want Thomas to be seen as the consistent "good" player that his is, not have fans' expectations hyped up by the GF so that he is unfairly expected to be the "next big thing".
Would I draft him? Definitely. Depending on need, I'd use any pick from about 12 onwards. I expect him to go at about 12-15. My rankings are never meant to reflect the draft pick I would use on a player but, in Dale's case, I think my ranking of 17 is a fair and reasonable price to pay.
I'm confident he will sustain an AFL career, probably noted, as it is now and as he is now, for its character.
*DISPOSAL:
- As with much of Dale's game, fairly reliable without being special - hand or foot.
- Rarely kicks a direct turnover but not many bullet-like 40m pin-point passes either and he can be prone to kick more than the odd floater/wobbler. Overall accuracy "good", rather than "very good".
- Struggles a bit for depth.
- Not a bad kicking style but could be improved. eg. Sometimes angles his plant foot too far outward, which can in turn drag the kicking leg around with it instead of it (the kicking leg) being able to stay in a more "straight through" arc.
- Dual-sided.
- Goal-kicking is mixed bag. Seems to be more reliable on the run (even from a fairly difficult angle 40m out under pressure) than set-shot (even <40m on an easy angle). That may or ay not be statistically correct but that's the way it has looked to me.
- Quick hands. Good power in feeds. Feeds often have a good hurt factor.
- Healthy mix of kicks to feeds.
*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
- Usual theme - "fairly reliable" without being "very good". In particular, with respect to vision, quick thinking, poise / look for options.
- Rarely does anything genuinely dumb but occasionally goes with the wrong option (or fails to notice an option) or tries to do too much, or takes an imprudent risk, etc.
- Very sharp evasive skills - both in close and on the run. Often good traffic management.
- Tendency to charge through stop-play traffic in a cavalier "hit or miss" manner though - can be high return but also leaves the opposition still at the contest if Thomas has sailed by without the pill.
- Sometimes thinks very quickly under pressure.
*HANDS:
- Generally clean but not bullet-proof.
*OVERHEAD MARKING:
- Good overhead for his height. Attacks his marks (from front, side or behind), nice leap and judgement, hangs onto them.
*ATHLETICISM:
- Genuinely quick - both off the mark and over ground.
- Very good leap.
- Appears to be a latish physical developer so I suspect he may still have further growth to come. Appears to be quite strong. Was skinny last year and appears to be quite capable of bulking to a fair degree up over time. Build is OK but I suspect he has some scope for hardening his body as it doesn't look to be super-defined at the moment.
- Endurance is a current query. (Not a concern, just a query). Some players are born to have a greater motor than others but, subject to build (and that's not a perfect indicator by any means), commitment etc, I don't get too concerned about U18 endurance in most players as that's what AFL conditioning usually brings out. I can see no reason why Thomas won't have good endurance down the track.
*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
- Tick off just about everything re ethic / intensity, including 2nd efforts, courage (fearless), attack on ball and man, hardball gets, desperation.
- Works hard both ways.
- His physical appearance might suggest he is a bit wild but he is, in fact, a sensible, mature kid of good character. School captain and has shown leadership potential. My mail is that Dale is a kid who keeps himself in pretty good nick without being the type who are religious about diet, etc.
*CONSISTENCY:
- Quite consistent in that he doesn't have very poor games but not many blinders either. Has played 34 TAC games in last 2 years and 3 U18 Champs games this year and has never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25.
*AFL VERSATILITY:
(see above)
*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):
- No special factors.
*QUERY:
- (Nothing too serious)
*SOME STATS:
- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 18 disposals in 18 TAC games. 4.9 marks. 5.1 tackles (ranking No.10 in comp). Total goals 28-23. 14 kicks per 20 disposals. 5 marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 10%. % change in marks was + 32%. % change in tackles was + 22%.
Never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25 in his last 2 years, incl U18 Champs. .
At least 20 disposals in 6 of his 18 games. 18-20d in 7 of his 18 games.
- Stats summary '04 TAC:
Averaged 15 disposals in 16 TAC games. 3.4 marks. 4.2 tackles. Total goals 11-18. 13 kicks per 20 disposals. 5marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 9%. % change in marks was + 57%. % change in tackles was + 3%.
- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 15 disposals and 3.0 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 19).
Kicks per 20 disp: 10.
Kicks long vs short: 14-4 (8 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 4/22 (1.8 per 10 kicks), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 6/22 (2.7 per 10 handballs), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 10/44 (4.5 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 10/44 (5 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 7/44 (3 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 8/44 (4 per 20 disp), incl 2 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 3 CBC (1 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 8 (Avg 2.7 per game).
Marks: 9 (4 per 20 disp), incl 1 contested (1.1 per 10 marks).
*OTHER STUFF:
- All Aust TY.
- TAC Team Of Year TY: W.
- Sister plays netball (Phoenix) and is about 183cm
---------------------
Dale Thomas (Gippsland Power)
183/75 mid-age right foot (dual-sided) HFF/ midfielder/ HBF.
*STYLE LIKE: undernourished Cooney
*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 17
*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 2.
- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 10-15.
*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / L-M
*TRADEMARK:
- Speccy (for his size) or charge to collect the ball at pace, then take them on, dash away and kick direct and for length ... the keep running hard.
- Chase hard and tackle like a terrier, then pick himself up and run on.
*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:
- Not special at anything but no major weakness either. A quickish terrier with a bit of everything.
Not silky in that "cool, always has plenty of time" sense but he does have quite good skills. Biggest assets are his consistency and ability to impact. He can inspire his team through sheer frenetic effort (both ways) and in-your-face daring.
- Not a ball magnet by any means. (see below). Averages 18 disposals, somewhat low for his type and abilities (even though he does play HFF a lot).
What you are buying is:-
1. A never-say-die who never plays a genuinely poor game. You can count on him to contribute to every game, albeit without often getting special stats or ever challenging for the Brownlow.
2. An almost 6' dasher who takes them on and runs the lines yet, unlike many for whom that description applies, is certainly not outside. Quick, slippery.
3. A terrier who attacks the man as keenly as he attacks the ball. Works hard both ways.
4. Work ethic.
5. Versatility.
6. Leadership and a nice, mature, sensible kid with infectious personality. A good personaility to have around a club.
7. A potential team lifter
- Fairly handy around goals but good in-close too.
- Most people would question why I have Thomas a bit earlier in my rankings than Xavier Ellis. (I often use Ellis as the yard stick for mids as he is well known and plays the same very week):-
-----------------
Ellis is a reliable kick, an elite reader of the player, a very good contested mark, and has wonderful vision. Not that Thomas is any slouch in these areas but Ellis is the better.
On the other hand, Thomas is a ball-carrier and, at times, a "run through the 50" goal-kicker, which Ellis is not.
Thomas is genuinely dual-sided. Ellis is basically one-sided.
Both get a roughly similar amount of the pill but, other than marking, Ellis relies mainly on receives and the mistakes of others. Thomas gets more of his own ball.
Thomas is fierce at both man and ball, which Ellis is not. Thomas' intensity is way ahead of Ellis'. He is routinely determined and desperate.
Thomas is accountable. Ellis is not.
AFL-wise, Thomas presents as much more versatility. He could play anywhere down the flanks and perhaps onball and or even run-with in time. Ellis' current outsidedness would have to radically change for him to have much versatility. It might, but it would be mere blind faith to state that it definitely will. Thomas's game is suited to team various game plans - from fast-moving / fast scoring to dour scrumby. Ellis' is not. In various Ellis games, it seemed that Ellis plays as if the team game plan comes to Ellis. Thomas adapts himself to the team game plan. Some of those comments may turn out to be unfair on Ellis. I'm just explaining how I see things based on what we have seen to date.
Ellis is average off the mark and has good pace after that. He doesn't currently do much of the "after that" though. Thomas is quicker than Ellis over ground and much quicker off the mark.
Ellis is taller and probably has the better leap.
Ellis is 8 months younger and hasn't had the depth of TAC experience that Thomas has.
Thomas has a frame that would appear to be more likely to finish up with a reasonable build --for AFL.
---------------------
- I've probably seen Dale about 30 times and I am a fan of the way he plays but I definitely feel that his very good TAC GF has significantly exaggerated anyone's perception of what he brings to the draft table. The same thing happened with Jordan Barham a few years ago. I thought Dale played a very good GF but I hope people don't see it as a sign that a star has emerged from nowhere. Let me add my reality check, so that we keep Thomas's capabilities in perspective:-
Goodes was arguably drafted mainly on his terrific TAC GF performance. However Goodes had had an interrupted year and his form was up and down. It was a case of "Will the real Adam Goodes please stand up?"
Thomas is different. His form and style of game have been consistent over 2 years. He is not a late bloomer or sudden improver. Dale is "what you see is what you get and you can count on him putting in a similar performance virtually every week, sometimes a bit quieter, sometimes a bit more impact". The GF was just the latter, albeit probably his best game. He gets around the 18-20 disposals most weeks as he did in the GF (20d). He kicked 4-0 in the GF, he kicked 2-3 two games earlier. Thomas gives you something every game and is good for a goal or so most games. Sometimes his shots go the wrong side of the post and sometimes (as in the GF) the right side. I thought he put in a very similar performance to the GF in R13 (19 disposals, 6 scoring shots) - it's just that on GF day his 4 scoring shots all went straight and resulted in 4-0 and in R13 he finished with 1-5. He was on fire for periods of the GF but, just the previous week, Bronik Davies did a very good job shutting him down (as much as you can shut Thomas down) and restricting Thomas to 13 disposals in what was the equal quietest game I saw from Dale all year. (Coincidentally, the other was also against Davies' team but I don't recall Thomas' opponent).
I don't say any of the above to discredit Thomas. I just want Thomas to be seen as the consistent "good" player that his is, not have fans' expectations hyped up by the GF so that he is unfairly expected to be the "next big thing".
Would I draft him? Definitely. Depending on need, I'd use any pick from about 12 onwards. I expect him to go at about 12-15. My rankings are never meant to reflect the draft pick I would use on a player but, in Dale's case, I think my ranking of 17 is a fair and reasonable price to pay.
I'm confident he will sustain an AFL career, probably noted, as it is now and as he is now, for its character.
*DISPOSAL:
- As with much of Dale's game, fairly reliable without being special - hand or foot.
- Rarely kicks a direct turnover but not many bullet-like 40m pin-point passes either and he can be prone to kick more than the odd floater/wobbler. Overall accuracy "good", rather than "very good".
- Struggles a bit for depth.
- Not a bad kicking style but could be improved. eg. Sometimes angles his plant foot too far outward, which can in turn drag the kicking leg around with it instead of it (the kicking leg) being able to stay in a more "straight through" arc.
- Dual-sided.
- Goal-kicking is mixed bag. Seems to be more reliable on the run (even from a fairly difficult angle 40m out under pressure) than set-shot (even <40m on an easy angle). That may or ay not be statistically correct but that's the way it has looked to me.
- Quick hands. Good power in feeds. Feeds often have a good hurt factor.
- Healthy mix of kicks to feeds.
*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
- Usual theme - "fairly reliable" without being "very good". In particular, with respect to vision, quick thinking, poise / look for options.
- Rarely does anything genuinely dumb but occasionally goes with the wrong option (or fails to notice an option) or tries to do too much, or takes an imprudent risk, etc.
- Very sharp evasive skills - both in close and on the run. Often good traffic management.
- Tendency to charge through stop-play traffic in a cavalier "hit or miss" manner though - can be high return but also leaves the opposition still at the contest if Thomas has sailed by without the pill.
- Sometimes thinks very quickly under pressure.
*HANDS:
- Generally clean but not bullet-proof.
*OVERHEAD MARKING:
- Good overhead for his height. Attacks his marks (from front, side or behind), nice leap and judgement, hangs onto them.
*ATHLETICISM:
- Genuinely quick - both off the mark and over ground.
- Very good leap.
- Appears to be a latish physical developer so I suspect he may still have further growth to come. Appears to be quite strong. Was skinny last year and appears to be quite capable of bulking to a fair degree up over time. Build is OK but I suspect he has some scope for hardening his body as it doesn't look to be super-defined at the moment.
- Endurance is a current query. (Not a concern, just a query). Some players are born to have a greater motor than others but, subject to build (and that's not a perfect indicator by any means), commitment etc, I don't get too concerned about U18 endurance in most players as that's what AFL conditioning usually brings out. I can see no reason why Thomas won't have good endurance down the track.
*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
- Tick off just about everything re ethic / intensity, including 2nd efforts, courage (fearless), attack on ball and man, hardball gets, desperation.
- Works hard both ways.
- His physical appearance might suggest he is a bit wild but he is, in fact, a sensible, mature kid of good character. School captain and has shown leadership potential. My mail is that Dale is a kid who keeps himself in pretty good nick without being the type who are religious about diet, etc.
*CONSISTENCY:
- Quite consistent in that he doesn't have very poor games but not many blinders either. Has played 34 TAC games in last 2 years and 3 U18 Champs games this year and has never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25.
*AFL VERSATILITY:
(see above)
*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):
- No special factors.
*QUERY:
- (Nothing too serious)
*SOME STATS:
- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 18 disposals in 18 TAC games. 4.9 marks. 5.1 tackles (ranking No.10 in comp). Total goals 28-23. 14 kicks per 20 disposals. 5 marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 10%. % change in marks was + 32%. % change in tackles was + 22%.
Never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25 in his last 2 years, incl U18 Champs. .
At least 20 disposals in 6 of his 18 games. 18-20d in 7 of his 18 games.
- Stats summary '04 TAC:
Averaged 15 disposals in 16 TAC games. 3.4 marks. 4.2 tackles. Total goals 11-18. 13 kicks per 20 disposals. 5marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 9%. % change in marks was + 57%. % change in tackles was + 3%.
- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 15 disposals and 3.0 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 19).
Kicks per 20 disp: 10.
Kicks long vs short: 14-4 (8 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 4/22 (1.8 per 10 kicks), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 6/22 (2.7 per 10 handballs), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 10/44 (4.5 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 10/44 (5 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 7/44 (3 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 8/44 (4 per 20 disp), incl 2 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 3 CBC (1 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 8 (Avg 2.7 per game).
Marks: 9 (4 per 20 disp), incl 1 contested (1.1 per 10 marks).
*OTHER STUFF:
- All Aust TY.
- TAC Team Of Year TY: W.
- Sister plays netball (Phoenix) and is about 183cm
only happy with stanley and thomas would have prefered ellis and thomas it could have happened hawthorn ********ed us over bad
