Opinion Dustin Martin is better than Dangerfield

ldamico

All Australian
Jun 4, 2013
774
2,100
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Juventus
Why are you so hung up about efficiency? You refuse to acknowledge how flawed the stat is. Dusty goes for high risk kicks. When he makes them, he opens the game up allowing us to score. When he doesn't we get an occasional turnover score against us.
I think it's great to take risks in footy. All the best teams do it. No one wins playing risk free footy. So players that take the biggest risks with their kicks will have a lower than expected DE. It's expected and not a blight on them. You seem to put a ridiculous amount of importance on the stat without any acknowledgement of its limitations.

Exactly.
Anyone can have a high DE when they handball and kick short and sideways 80% of the time.
 
Why are you so hung up about efficiency? You refuse to acknowledge how flawed the stat is. Dusty goes for high risk kicks. When he makes them, he opens the game up allowing us to score. When he doesn't we get an occasional turnover score against us.
I think it's great to take risks in footy. All the best teams do it. No one wins playing risk free footy. So players that take the biggest risks with their kicks will have a lower than expected DE. It's expected and not a blight on them. You seem to put a ridiculous amount of importance on the stat without any acknowledgement of its limitations.
The worst efficiency on the ground.

15 of his disposals a game are ineffective. :eek:
 
But 20 are match winning!

And that's far more important!
43 players on the field had better efficiency. Your excuse that it was wet simply doesn't cut the mustard.

You need to stop making excuses.

Only 13 of his disposals are effective.
 
May 8, 2007
48,686
71,371
AFL Club
Richmond
Wow. What a captivating statistic to know. I think Collingwood should sack him based on such a trivial piece of information.

Please, enlighten us with more. What is his handball conversion rate with his non preferred hand?
Trivial?
A statistic that shows one of the best mids in the competition cannot hit a target on his non prefrerred foot is trivial?
Do you think opposition coaching staff share you view?
 

MightyTiger

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 21, 2010
8,816
8,703
AFL Club
Richmond
The worst efficiency on the ground.

15 of his disposals a game are ineffective. :eek:
Monday night against Melbourne Dusty had just over 200 metres gained coming into the last quarter, by the end of the match he was #1 with metres gained at almost 700 I believe it was. In a game where it has rained pretty much the whole night, and the ball being as slippery as it was, do you truly think every kick is going to be pin point?

He's had a broken eye socket or cheekbone what ever it was, groin issue that's popped up last week, and played two games so far out of 5 that have been wet, with the west coast game being almost torrential weather at the ground in the last half.

Here's the thing, everyone is noticing him this year, the kids been performing at an A grade level since he was drafted, apparently hes not consistent, yet there hasn't been to many games in the past few years he has been quiet.
 

Royce Hafey

Premiership Player
Mar 6, 2013
3,799
12,764
Point Cook
AFL Club
Richmond
The worst efficiency on the ground.

15 of his disposals a game are ineffective. :eek:
But a few of them, particularly in the last, helped win us the game when, with them he doubled the amount of meters-gained he'd had up to 3/4 time in ten minutes of football. I remember early when Richmond began (successfully at the time) experimenting with our now derided faux-Hawthorn short kicking, high possession game, an article in the Age informing the shocked public how we had the highest disposal efficiency in the league. Would you prefer he played that way?

Dusty has a reputation for being a clanger merchant based on his stats. He has a reputation for being an elite kick based on people seeing him kick 60 metre passes which break the zone and hit a team-mate on the tit, wrong foot bananas for goal from 50 and so on.

The fact is that he is one of the most talented kicks in the league who has struggled at times to make the right decision. He can have games like the Carlton one in round one where he kicked at (from memory) 80% efficiency with 30+ possessions and four goals + two that he gave away. He can have games like the Collingwood one where he had 40 possessions, a low efficiency rating but gained nearly an entire kilometer of ground. He can have games like the Brisbane one where he was injured and tagged by three (yes they tagged him with three players) and had a mare in both stats. And he can have games like the Melbourne one where he contributes all game but is somewhat off until the final quarter when, just at the right time for the team, he does three or four unbelievable things and wins a game. There are no stats for that.

Also guess who also recently said on one of the footy shows that Danger was't a good kick and has been handballing more to compensate? A player who's initials are "R D".

How does he compare to Danger? We'll know by the end of the season. Stats before this season are irrelevant. What we've see so far has been an insufficient sample size. But Tiger supporters are enjoying the ride.
 

ldamico

All Australian
Jun 4, 2013
774
2,100
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Juventus
43 players on the field had better efficiency. Your excuse that it was wet simply doesn't cut the mustard.

You need to stop making excuses.

Only 13 of his disposals are effective.

Fellas, there is no point in feeding this troll.

Everyone knows that DE can be inflated when a player handballs it a lot and takes 0 risk sideways kicks. Conversely, it can be low when a player kicks the ball 80% of the time and takes risk.

What do I prefer in a player? The ability to win games.
This can't be seen by looking up stats, you have to actually watch games of football to know who is winning your team the game.
Nakia boy obviously watches the live stat feed and not the live game. Leave him be.
 
Lol why are you guys debating him? He will go on forever, best just ignore him trully
Because he argues with Richmond halfwits delusional that Dusty is Danger's equal. Not even close.
 
No supporter base as delusional.
This 5-0 start is good for football... Makes the crash back to earth when it inevitably leads nowhere even better for the rest of us :D
 
This 5-0 start is good for football... Makes the crash back to earth when it inevitably leads nowhere even better for the rest of us :D
It doesn't help when most of them are 14.
 
Slight embellishment possibly but seriously 2016 was the first year where Dusty emerged from Cotchin and Deledio's shadow. Rewarded with AA and B&F.
Danger has 4 AA's to his name, 2 B&F's and a Brownlow. Been playing at a very high level since 2012.

Our dynamic duo are both better players and that doesn't make him a dud, Dusty's a champ but he's not on their level.
 
Back