Toast How good is Brad Ebert - 250 games

[philthy05]

Still him at half forward. Keep him the hell away from the defensive 50.

Hell no.

Pick forwards to play forward

If they’re not good enough to make our midfield rotation they don’t play.

He is not a goal kicker

His marking is not suited to being a forward target.

 

[Magus]

Hell no.

Pick forwards to play forward

If they’re not good enough to make our midfield rotation they don’t play.

He is not a goal kicker

His marking is not suited to being a forward target.

His marking is one of his strengths.

 

[philthy05]

His marking is one of his strengths.

The guy has taken some spectacular overhead marks and everyone rates his marking as a whole now.

When was the last time you saw Ebert take a mark in a contested situation and go back and slot a goal? If ever?

In the same way gray and westhoff are excellent marks but In different ways there are people good at marking in different ways. Ebert is capable of floating in and plucking marks from a contest when no one is paying him any attention. I think westhoff is the best contested mark on our team but he needs to have a run and jump at it. Doesn’t like a body which is why playing him as a traditional forward inside 50 doesn’t get very good results. They body him up and take his run away. Being free to roam the ground gives his opponent less opportunity to watch the ball coming in and body westhoff up. Ebert is the same. If an opponent can watch the ball coming in and body him up it will take away his strengths. Every good mark Ebert has ever taking has been a running leap into a pack when he has been let go by his opponent.

There is zero evidence that he is a good mark in the type of situations that present to a forward.

And I certainly don’t trust him in front of goals.

And he certainly has shown zero ability to crumb or shark goals.

 

[Andre]

He’s not justifying his place in his current role. However I’d take him playing the small forward role over Sam Gray / Neade / Johnson. Not replicating his cousin as the undersized KPF, but as a small forward who can take a mark, won’t be pushed off the ball easily and I’d back to kick a goal from 10metres out. If he’s not going to play that role in 2019 he should be on the trade table.

 

[RossFC]

He’s not justifying his place in his current role. However I’d take him playing the small forward role over Sam Gray / Neade / Johnson. Not replicating his cousin as the undersized KPF, but as a small forward who can take a mark, won’t be pushed off the ball easily and I’d back to kick a goal from 10metres out. If he’s not going to play that role in 2019 he should be on the trade table.

Sounds like a role that Aaron Young ala 2016 would fit well in. (He ended up kicking 37 goals that year)

 

[mic59]

Hell no.
Pick forwards to play forward
If they’re not good enough to make our midfield rotation they don’t play.
He is not a goal kicker
His marking is not suited to being a forward target.

Agree. Not enough to show he can be a regular marking forward. Like a lot of players a few good forward gigs make it appear he would do well there but he would be wasted.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

When we play on and create space and run hard Ebert has a role to play.

His gut running and marking is a strength in a proper game plan is we choose to actually use it.

If we play slow, chipping defensive football then his skills and pace will get exposed.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Magus]

The guy has taken some spectacular overhead marks and everyone rates his marking as a whole now.

When was the last time you saw Ebert take a mark in a contested situation and go back and slot a goal? If ever?

In the same way gray and westhoff are excellent marks but In different ways there are people good at marking in different ways. Ebert is capable of floating in and plucking marks from a contest when no one is paying him any attention. I think westhoff is the best contested mark on our team but he needs to have a run and jump at it. Doesn’t like a body which is why playing him as a traditional forward inside 50 doesn’t get very good results. They body him up and take his run away. Being free to roam the ground gives his opponent less opportunity to watch the ball coming in and body westhoff up. Ebert is the same. If an opponent can watch the ball coming in and body him up it will take away his strengths. Every good mark Ebert has ever taking has been a running leap into a pack when he has been let go by his opponent.

There is zero evidence that he is a good mark in the type of situations that present to a forward.

And I certainly don’t trust him in front of goals.

And he certainly has shown zero ability to crumb or shark goals.

Not sure why you're criticising him for not kicking goals when he isn't a forward. He's spent most of his time playing behind the ball this year.

If trust his ability to go back and slot one because his set shots have never been bad, it's his field kicking and decision making that's the issue.

As others have said - would be an immediate upgrade on Sam Gray.

 

[philthy05]

Not sure why you're criticising him for not kicking goals when he isn't a forward. He's spent most of his time playing behind the ball this year.

If trust his ability to go back and slot one because his set shots have never been bad, it's his field kicking and decision making that's the issue.

As others have said - would be an immediate upgrade on Sam Gray.

His kicking for goal is poor. He has very poor touch on his kicks basically a kick it and hope player.

I really want Sam gray to be replaced but replacing him with another “not a forward” midfielder who can’t kick would be a dumb move.

 

[Hong-Kong Phooey]

i also think his best place is in the forward line.

 

[Schulzenfest]

An embarrassment of riches that for three years Voss has failed to get the most out of. I never subscribed to Ryder being missing as an excuse for poor midfield performance. He's not got Scott Thompson assisting in this area too. He has everything he needs.

If our midfield aren't one of the best in the comp this year (barring allowance for some sort of catastrophic injury list), he's gotta go. Has to.

Or we could finish 10th and give him a two year contract extension lol

 

[Magus]

Or we could finish 10th and give him a two year contract extension lol

With our three bulls spending a stupid amount of time on the bench. Amazing stuff.

 

[Long live PAFC]

So he has a career best season as an inside mid in 2017. So we recruit a player to be an inside mid and move Brad into this twilight zone between inside and outside, forward and back that he has never been particularly good at. Then he tags a bit or goes loose in defence or up forward and has a average year at best.

For me he either plays as an inside mid or half forward in the same style as Caddy, De Goey, etc. For that role he would need to add some kgs and power in the off season.

 

[Smithy7]

I watched the replay of our last game. Brad marked the ball out on the wing and made a perfect pass to Billy who goaled.
Its little things like this that makes you take notice of his game and what he can do..

 

[TeeKray]

With each passing season he has gone from being a key midfielder to a role player. I'm OK with it. He is reliable and does his bit. We've got far bigger problems.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

A good ordinary footballer according to Jack Dyer.

 

[Powerstufff]

A good ordinary footballer according to Jack Dyer.

Via Ouija board? You made me go look up whether he was still alive. As it turns out he'd have been 115 if he hadn't shuffled off in 2003.

 

[Powerage]

There is zero evidence that he is a good mark in the type of situations that present to a forward.

And I certainly don’t trust him in front of goals.

And he certainly has shown zero ability to crumb or shark goals.

And then there was this one time at band camp...

Seriously, part of the reason there is no evidence that he is a good mark as a forward is because he almost never presents as a forward.

Its like saying there was zero evidence that Tim Evans was a gun full forward when he was playing in defense. Without such evidence he should never have been allowed to play forward. Zero evidence that Chad Cornes could be an all australian midfielder, therefore he shouldn't have been given the opportunity in 2007. Give a player a chance before you shoot him down in flames.

I think he has a number of attributes which would make him a better than average defensive forward. Not being a midget doesn't hurt. His endurance, his tackling. You can be assured he will run his opponent of his feet. If he finds space, or get to run and jump at one, he will take his fair share of marks. No one is asking him to be a contested marking beast. Yeah his kicking at goal might be a concern.

 

[Portology]

Shuffling Brad upfield into the current Samwise/Neade role would be an upgrade regardless of any debates about his marking style or goalkicking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[philthy05]

And then there was this one time at band camp...

Seriously, part of the reason there is no evidence that he is a good mark as a forward is because he almost never presents as a forward.

Its like saying there was zero evidence that Tim Evans was a gun full forward when he was playing in defense. Without such evidence he should never have been allowed to play forward. Zero evidence that Chad Cornes could be an all australian midfielder, therefore he shouldn't have been given the opportunity in 2007. Give a player a chance before you shoot him down in flames.

I think he has a number of attributes which would make him a better than average defensive forward. Not being a midget doesn't hurt. His endurance, his tackling. You can be assured he will run his opponent of his feet. If he finds space, or get to run and jump at one, he will take his fair share of marks. No one is asking him to be a contested marking beast. Yeah his kicking at goal might be a concern.

The guy has played 150odd games for port.

We’ve had plenty of time to assess his marking ability. That’s plenty of times to see him suggest a 1 on 1 type of marking ability around the ground that would suggest he could compete up forward.

I’ve asked that people turn a critical eye to what they call his “excellent marking”

And if you do you would see it is always an unchecked running jump sideways into a pack.

That is great and he is great at that particular type of marking contest but it is not the type of contest he will see lots of if he plays up forward. Pulling out one of those every 5 games will not be a successful outcome.

 

[Powerage]

The guy has played 150odd games for port.

We’ve had plenty of time to assess his marking ability. That’s plenty of times to see him suggest a 1 on 1 type of marking ability around the ground that would suggest he could compete up forward.

I’ve asked that people turn a critical eye to what they call his “excellent marking”

And if you do you would see it is always an unchecked running jump sideways into a pack.

That is great and he is great at that particular type of marking contest but it is not the type of contest he will see lots of if he plays up forward. Pulling out one of those every 5 games will not be a successful outcome.

Aaaargh. There are many small/medium forwards who make a career out of taking what you are calling uncontested marks. How many contested marks do you see Eddie Betts take? Puopolo? Wingard? Breust? Rioli?

This is not to suggest he has the aerial ability of some of these players in terms of leap or agility. However he does read the ball very well in the air, one reason why he appears to be 'unchecked' on occasion. Like all of these players he gets in the right place to take the mark. He does have the advantage of being bigger and stronger than most of those players. He knows how to crumb a pack as well, and apply defensive pressure.

I'm going to turn it around and say there is zero evidence to suggest he wouldn't be a useful medium forward BECAUSE HE HAS NEVER PLAYED IN THAT ROLE. It would be nice to see Hinkley do something stupid and experiment with a player in a different role for a few games to see whether it works, rather than stick to the same old same old week in week out even when it is not working as he does with so many other things.

Clearly Boak is not cutting it as a forward, he does his best work as a mid so at least swap them for a half, a game, two games and see what happens. He and we might be pleasantly surprised. He cannot do any worse than players like Neade who have been gifted games on the back of 5 handball performances.

 

[Ishikawa]

Aaaargh. There are many small/medium forwards who make a career out of taking what you are calling uncontested marks. How many contested marks do you see Eddie Betts take? Puopolo? Wingard? Breust? Rioli?

This is not to suggest he has the aerial ability of some of these players in terms of leap or agility. However he does read the ball very well in the air, one reason why he appears to be 'unchecked' on occasion. Like all of these players he gets in the right place to take the mark. He does have the advantage of being bigger and stronger than most of those players. He knows how to crumb a pack as well, and apply defensive pressure.

I'm going to turn it around and say there is zero evidence to suggest he wouldn't be a useful medium forward BECAUSE HE HAS NEVER PLAYED IN THAT ROLE. It would be nice to see Hinkley do something stupid and experiment with a player in a different role for a few games to see whether it works, rather than stick to the same old same old week in week out even when it is not working as he does with so many other things.

Clearly Boak is not cutting it as a forward, he does his best work as a mid so at least swap them for a half, a game, two games and see what happens. He and we might be pleasantly surprised. He cannot do any worse than players like Neade who have been gifted games on the back of 5 handball performances.

Not sure if serious. This was where he played all his footy for the Eagles and the lack of midfield minutes was an additional factor contributing to his decision to return home.

At this stage of his career could it be an option again? Hmm maybe, I'm a bit sceptical think his predominant ability to contribute is his inside work and tackling and creation of space by spreading out to the wings so even though he has good footy nous not sure I see him succeeding up front. Boak these days I think would be a better candidate for that kind of role.

 

[rogerjames]

And then there was this one time at band camp...

Seriously, part of the reason there is no evidence that he is a good mark as a forward is because he almost never presents as a forward.

Its like saying there was zero evidence that Tim Evans was a gun full forward when he was playing in defense. Without such evidence he should never have been allowed to play forward. Zero evidence that Chad Cornes could be an all australian midfielder, therefore he shouldn't have been given the opportunity in 2007. Give a player a chance before you shoot him down in flames.

I think he has a number of attributes which would make him a better than average defensive forward. Not being a midget doesn't hurt. His endurance, his tackling. You can be assured he will run his opponent of his feet. If he finds space, or get to run and jump at one, he will take his fair share of marks. No one is asking him to be a contested marking beast. Yeah his kicking at goal might be a concern.

His kicking at goal is far better than his field kicking. I think it's worth a go, his career has hit a roadblock and this move may revive it.

 

[Powerage]

Not sure if serious. This was where he played all his footy for the Eagles and the lack of midfield minutes was an additional factor contributing to his decision to return home.

At this stage of his career could it be an option again? Hmm maybe, I'm a bit sceptical think his predominant ability to contribute is his inside work and tackling and creation of space by spreading out to the wings so even though he has good footy nous not sure I see him succeeding up front. Boak these days I think would be a better candidate for that kind of role.

For accuracy's sake, he played forward in 2011. One year out of four, at the WCE, as a 21 year old, seven seasons ago, and got dropped twice, also contributing to his request to be traded to Port. So I debate how relevant any of that evidence is. He is stronger, more experienced, and a much better mark now than that kid.

So minimal evidence. I was deliberately making fun of the absolutes used in the post I was responding to, and yes I am serious.

My main argument is that he is worth trying out in that role because he has abilities and attributes that others who have played there haven't had. Arguably the best endurance in the team, taller and stronger than Neade, SGray etc. A better mark than Boak, with a more penetrating kick, if less accurate. Also less fumbly than the half forward Boak of late who looks like a fish out of water.

Additionally it is not that Boak is not adequate, but Boak's best work by far is done in the midfield IMO, whereas Ebert given the opportunity as a man and not a kid may prove to be a more than adequate forward. Unquestionably he is the best choice for a defensive forward you could ask for. With the loss of Polec there might be space for both of them up forward because the only place Motlop should be playing is on a wing.

 

[Ishikawa]

Absolutely excellent up forward this year. Bobs up frequently, still a gun tackler and is taking his chances.

Was a bit of speculation over his eyesight on here. Not sure if there was any substance to it or was one of those long bows that get drawn from time to time. But this article caught my eye (yes, great pun..) today on Stephen Curry & American sportsmen and their surprisingly average/poor vision.

The closest thing to a comprehensive study of NBA vision that exists in the medical literature is a 10-year survey of the league’s future workforce: Duke basketball players. The physicians of the Duke Eye Center bring their equipment to Cameron Indoor Stadium for a screening every year. They’re often shocked by what they see. There was even one player who looked at the Snellen chart and was blind in one eye.

“He couldn’t even see the big E,” said Duke ophthalmologist Terry Kim, co-author of the study published by the Journal of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences.

They examined a total of 60 players over the course of a decade and found that a staggering 15 per cent needed their eyes corrected. These players had become the best high-school basketball prospects in the country without knowing they had a major physical flaw. Some players had vision as lousy as 20/70 — lower than the threshold for legal driving in North Carolina.

The average vision in Major League Baseball isn’t 20/20, either. It’s better. An ordinary baseball player has extraordinary 20/12 vision, said Daniel Laby, an ophthalmologist who has worked with the Boston Celtics and Philadelphia 76ers.

Baseball players would voluntarily wear Rec-Spec goggles to enhance their vision from 20/20 to 20/19. That degree of obsession is unnecessary in the NBA. The convenient thing for Curry is that his target is not moving at 95 miles per hour. It isn’t moving at all. Which is why his sublime peripheral vision, depth perception and hand-eye co-ordination are more useful on a basketball court.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/bu...n/news-story/8c47bf1f0a67c68441b1d0e0af618c5e

Might be able to get around the paywall through the WSJ.