Inside Mid vs Outside Mid

[swiftdog]

This thread has been created from the Murphy vs Pendlebury comparisons.

Simple really, who is more valuable in modern football, a gun inside mid or a gun outside mid? If you were to choose between the two what one would you take?

 

[SirJimi05]

Guy's like Ablett and Judd who can do both.

If i had to chose between the two i would say a gun inside MID is harder to come by so i would go that way.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Guy's like Ablett and Judd who can do both.

If i had to chose between the two i would say a gun inside MID is harder to come by so i would go that way.

I think this is a great example of "elite" midfielders being both inside/outside and I for one see Murphy being exactly that and the reason why he will be so much better than others he is being currently compared to.

 

[Sir Robert]

Gun inside mid fo shoure.

Didn't see the other thread, but Murphy>>>>>>Pendlebury.

Cue Pies supporters 'everyone elses mids>>>>St Kilda mids'. I actually know this, we are sitting outside the 8 so it kinda speaks for itself.

 

[magtrev]

you need to have both: outside mids dont do anything without someone to get the ball for them when the going gets tough (see Port) and inside mids need someone to do something with the ball after they win it (haven't seen enough of richmond to comment - but their stats suggest this is the case for them)

 

[Soul_Pie]

I agree that the best players are those who can win their own ball, as well as act as a receiver, so in effect they're kind of "inside-out" players. Guys like Judd, Ablett, Black, etc are capable of this.

 

[hellfire]

This thread has been created from the Murphy vs Pendlebury comparisons.

Simple really, who is more valuable in modern football, a gun inside mid or a gun outside mid? If you were to choose between the two what one would you take?

Inside.

But Pendlebury isn't "outside", he is just better outside. He can definately play inside, shown by his HBG and contested possession stats.

 

[sneakydaycrawler]

Inside.

But Pendlebury isn't "outside", he is just better outside. He can definately play inside, shown by his HBG and contested possession stats.

Ah so true.

 

[enosis7]

I agree that the best players are those who can win their own ball, as well as act as a receiver, so in effect they're kind of "inside-out" players. Guys like Judd, Ablett, Black, etc are capable of this.

Agree. That's what puts these guys above more pure-inside mids like Sam Mitchell and more pure-outside mids. But, for the sake of team balance, I actually think you need a few of each type of player.

As pointed out in the thread, Pendlebury is an emerging inside-out mid - those who watch him closely can see that. As he gets stronger, hopefully his inside game will bring him to that elite inside-out status.

 

[SirJimi05]

Inside.

But Pendlebury isn't "outside", he is just better outside. He can definately play inside, shown by his HBG and contested possession stats.

Correct, Pendles certainly knows how to roll his sleeves up if he has to.

 

[smiddaz123]

Pendlebury is insidein the same way Simon Black is.

Almost one third of Pendlebury's possessions are contested ones.

 

[Claude Balls]

There are the obvious elite mids who can play both inside and outside comfortably, like Judd, Ablett, Black, and probably even Cooney... They are the most valuable. Extractors like Sam Mitchell and Scott West are supremely valuable in their role, though their value is somewhat dependant on having complementing players around them to finish the work off - just as the pure outside mids need someone to feed them the ball.

A well balance midfield would have two of each I suppose.

On a side note, Jimmy Bartel is a flexible mid, being probably more inside than out, though quite adept at kicking goals and sending the ball long inside the forward 50. Also a great mark.

 

[PowerForGood]

I wholehartedly agree that the "inside midfielder" is of more value, but we mostly don't really know the value because we measure it the wrong way.
Who is the better inside mid - one who wins 20 possessions out of 35 contests, or one who wins 30 possessions out of 80 contests?

For example, whilst I know that Port Adelaide is not anywhere as good in the clinches as it should be (we're 15th overall in the contested possession count for the year to date ), but this can be misleading as it is your possession count against your opponent each week that is the real measure. For example, Port Adelaide were dead last for contested possessions in 2004, but were actually 6th out of 16 if you created a "contested possessions ladder" - based on whether you beat your opponent each week rather than a cumulative for the year.

I don't have any data for it this year, if someone knows who might have it might make for interesting reading.

 

[Underdog]

you need to have both: outside mids dont do anything without someone to get the ball for them when the going gets tough (see Port) and inside mids need someone to do something with the ball after they win it (haven't seen enough of richmond to comment - but their stats suggest this is the case for them)

Exactly. Both are equally valuable

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

Probably close to the ideal centre square set up isn't it...one inside, one outside and a tagger? Or do you go with 2 insides and a tagger and have your outside mids coming in from the wings ect so they don't even get involved in the scrimmages? (assuming of course you don't have the top shelf types who can do both in your setup)

Remember in 06' the Eagles frequently started with Judd, Kerr and Stenglein in the square, and Cousins on a HFF. Even for a fairly attack minded side the Cousins / Judd / Kerr combo didn't all go into the square together much.

 

[Lloydy4Pope]

Agree. That's what puts these guys above more pure-inside mids like Sam Mitchell and more pure-outside mids. But, for the sake of team balance, I actually think you need a few of each type of player.

As pointed out in the thread, Pendlebury is an emerging inside-out mid - those who watch him closely can see that. As he gets stronger, hopefully his inside game will bring him to that elite inside-out status.

The best players can do both - mitchell, ablett, judd. But every team has players who can hit targets when in space (some more than others admittedly) - it's the players who can win the contested ball and then are able to cleanly move it on to an outside runner that can have a bigger influence. Think about all the players who can be good outside runners, there always has to someone getting it to them. i would definately prefer some contested ball wins with some average disposal later on than having to chase tail all day because we're getting smashed in the packs.

 

[DaVe86]

simply put, you cant have one without the other.

 

[benhawk]

What about the inside/outside mid that can go forward and take contested marks and kick goals or can go back and shut down an opponent or simply dominate the defensive half?

Luke Hodge you are the man!!

 

[beaver fever]

An inside dud always beats an outside dud.

 

[wicksy]

An inside dud always beats an outside dud.

"Deledio spots up Tambling with a mongrel punt"

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

I think you can get by with average/good inside midfielders and quality outside midfielders - Collingwood does.

On the other hand, I don't think there's any point of having a world-class extractor who's got nobody who can finish.

Back when Collingwood had Licuria at his best, Burns and O'Bree doing the inside work, but no class, our midfield was one of the worst in the comp.

Now, our inside crew isn't that much better than it was then, but the outside midfield rotation of Didak, Davis, Thomas and Pendlebury to a certain extent are significantly classier than anyone we had running through our midfield back then.

Pendlebury isn't really outside though - He does plenty of good inside work, but it's advantageous for him to get out on space given that he's one of the best kicks on the team. He's Top 5 on the team in clearances, first possessions and contested possessions though.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

The best players can do both - mitchell, ablett, judd.

Every player does both - The best players in the league average around 5-6 contested possessions, which means that the rest are uncontested and, in most people's estimations, "outside".

What you want is a player who isn't weak at either of them - Strange example to use Mitchell, as he's certainly not the best kick of the ball.

 

[Hawkas_01]

Every player does both - The best players in the league average around 5-6 contested possessions, which means that the rest are uncontested and, in most people's estimations, "outside".

What you want is a player who isn't weak at either of them - Strange example to use Mitchell, as he's certainly not the best kick of the ball.[/quote]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Mitchell is a very good kick of the ball and hardly ever wastes it.

The only weakness in his kicking is probably penetration, but none of the elite midfielders really have booming long kicks, so can't see how it can be used against Mitchell.

 

[Gyroscope_182]

People don't realise that Pendlebury gets alot of uncontested possessions, but they don't look at the relation in hard-ball gets.

The fact with Pendlebury, like Dal Santo, is that they work themselves so well out of a contested situtation that it ends up being uncontested.

As for the Murphy vs Pendlebury comparison, can't compare just yet, but Pendlebury has had more honours so far.

 

[jgb99]

You need to have both. Look at WC now, 2 v.good inside ball winners doing the grunt work (Kerr, Priddis etc.) - ranked 3rd in first possessions, 4th in clearances, yet 13th on the AFL ladder, largely because they have no quality ball users on the outside (now that Cousins and Judd have left - I know Judd's an inside mid primarily, but his kicking was high class) to finish of the good inside work by hitting targets upfield, delivering to the advantage of forwards and kicking goals from the midfield.