N Brown(Coll) vs Garland

[undies37]

well just look at who opposition teams are voting for
GARLAND
the only people who rate nathan brown are collingwood supporters

 

[whelan=legend]

Garlands horror start to the season brings those averages down.

 

[yulong]

But Nathan Brown is holding down some of the biggest forwards in the game in a WINNING side

Garland is holding down some of the biggest forwards in the game in a LOSING side and doing a better job- which is much harder to do considering you conceded it gets to our backline a hell of a lot more than Collingwoods.

 

[saj_21]

As opposed to the gigantic 12 disposals per game that Garland is averaging?

We've got Heath Shaw in our backline providing a lot more run than anyone in Melbourne's, plus the ball spends a lot less time in our backline than it does in Melbourne, so Brown's opportunities for rebound are less.

According to pro-stats, Brown averages more tackles, more 1%ers and less errors than Garland, so he's doing something right on the defensive side of the ball.

I like the way that the Melbourne supporters are in here saying that everyone who says Brown is biased, yet every single one of them votes for Garland. Every vote for Brown is because we haven't seen Garland play, or that we're just biased, which completely discounts the fact that it IS possible to view things differently than the Melbourne supporters.

We get it. Your team sucks, and Garland is one of the more promising young players on it. It's natural to think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

But Nathan Brown is holding down some of the biggest forwards in the game in a WINNING side, and contributing to his teams run to the finals. That is nothing to sneeze at, and to suggest that the only reason to vote for him is bias would be criminally underrating him.

Correct me if i am wrong but:

Buddy kicked 8 on him and Brown didn't play on Fev the first time you played carlton and second time he did and fev kicked 8?

 

[Gopies 2002]

No, he gets your vote because you're a Collingwood supporter that obviously hasn't watched Garland play. Your reasoning is that he's played well considering the players he's matched up on so tell me, who has Garland played on?

Brown gets all the hype but Garland is the better player.

Let me get this straight - your a Melbourne supporter having a crack at a Pies supporter for picking Brown, while doing the same thing for the Dees player.

Does the word hypocrite mean anything to you ?

 

[Dave The Man]

Let me get this straight - your a Melbourne supporter having a crack at a Pies supporter for picking Brown, while doing the same thing for the Dees player.

Does the word hypocrite mean anything to you ?

I agree and They are Calling us Biased. They just think there team are full of Duds and Garland is a few of the Descent players that they think he is the next Big Thing

 

[smiddaz123]

Correct me if i am wrong but:

Buddy kicked 8 on him and Brown didn't play on Fev the first time you played carlton and second time he did and fev kicked 8?

Right, well consider yourself corrected.

Firstly, Buddy didn't even kick 8 goals in the entire game. He kicked 6, some of which weren't on from memory. The figure would have been 3 or 4 on brown I'd say.

O'Brien was on Fevola as well. I recall at least 4 goals being kicked on O'Brien. fevola kicked 4 at the max on Brown the second time.

On the flip side:

J Brown to 2 goals
Pavlich to 1 goal
Richardson to 1 goal
A Edwards completely scoreless
Gherig to 1 goal
Mooney to 1 goal

What a horrible defensive performance in his first year of AFL.

 

[yulong]

Let me get this straight - your a Melbourne supporter having a crack at a Pies supporter for picking Brown, while doing the same thing for the Dees player.

Does the word hypocrite mean anything to you ?

Pies supporters are as free as Dee supporters are to pick whoever they like.

i'm not having a crack at that, rather, if you looked at both players according to the reasoning he indicated his choice was based upon it becomes obvious he hasn't followed Garland at all this year. Hardly surprising. So when he voted it was only because he's a Collingwood supporter that he chose Brown because Brown has been very good for a first year full back but not from any knowledge or understanding of what Garland has achieved and how he has played.

Most Pie and opposition fans haven't really seen a lot of Garland, they may have heard reports recently he's been playing well, but they haven't really watched a lot of him or noticed the scalps he's taken this year.

In contrast, because Brown plays for the Pies (no fault of his own) and Micky Malthouse as well as thousands of Pie and BF supporters kept crying and whinging about Brown not getting the RS he has been in the spotlight and we've all had to bear reports of how good he is and have kept an eye on him in the media to see if he really is THAT good.

If you choose him because he's a pie player though don't go making out its not for this reason.

And yes, I'm very hypocritical and proud.

 

[Trav 20]

Both clubs would be happy with their respective players. Garland is more the modern day prototype tall backman as he can play on a variety of opponents. He's played well on Buddy, Bradshaw, Didak, Murphy, to name a few. He has tremendous pace and an excellent leap with an uncanny knack of getting his fist to the ball without infringing his opponent.

Considering he only cost us a draft pick in the 40's, he's been great value.

 

[Geelong63]

Garland easily

 

[Dave The Man]

Garland easily

You say that on 1 Bad Game?

 

[Dagless]

In terms of purely rating a defender, I think its folly to just count goals against. In terms of actually rating them I would divide the rating catagories into -
Contested possessions against (Direct opponent)
Uncontested possessions against (Direct opponent)
Direct opponents total marks - Divided themselves into contested/uncontested
Whole scoring shots, whether it is a goal, behind or clanger from the direct opponent
Then change that up into catagories of scoring shots from contested/uncontested/turnovers.

Then its fairly easy to compare the defenders stats to the forwards stats...

Some people may say that Sydney successfully shut down Buddy. But when he has 10+ scoring shots, hard to say your defenders won at all... Buddy didn't capitolise, pure and simple.

Anyway, just food for thought...

 

[Mofra]

After the first month of the season, I would've said Brown.
Took Garland on the efforts of his past few weeks. Simply supurb with little help from his midfield.

 

[Dave The Man]

After the first month of the season, I would've said Brown.
Took Garland on the efforts of his past few weeks. Simply supurb with little help from his midfield.

Well Brown has played every game this year and Garland Started Later

 

[smiddaz123]

Is Garland on Pavlich today?

 

[davey_magik]

Is Garland on Pavlich today?

Don't think so, but I could be wrong as I haven't been watching the game.

 

[whelan=legend]

Nope on Tarrant / Farmer

 

[smiddaz123]

Is there a reason he didn't get the number 1 forward?

 

[parrot]

Brown has been a disappointment. Too lumbering and slow for a KP defensive post. A poor top-10 superdraft selection.

 

[undies37]

Is there a reason he didn't get the number 1 forward?

Yea there is because pavlich was playing in the midfield.
Garland is now in front

 

[Young Gun #6]

Nathan Brown.

I may be a bit biased as he went to my high school and we were in the same year but I've seen a lot of his games and he is an absolute gun. BTW he also has versatiliy with other sports making the Victorian team in Basketball in year 10.

 

[unstable punt]

I agree and They are Calling us Biased. They just think there team are full of Duds and Garland is a few of the Descent players that they think he is the next Big Thing

why do you put capital letters on every second word??? what school did you go to? Reservoir Secondary....we are a team full of very young blokes on the rise, its going to take 2-4 years but we will get there

 

[davey_magik]

Nathan Brown.

I may be a bit biased as he went to my high school and we were in the same year but I've seen a lot of his games and he is an absolute gun. BTW he also has versatiliy with other sports making the Victorian team in Basketball in year 10.

So being able to play basketball well makes you a better footballer?

 

[Young Gun #6]

So being able to play basketball well makes you a better footballer?

It is a joke. People were choosing Garland because his versatile when Brown can play CHB, FB, CHF or FF.