Non-Influencial 'Gun' Players

TwiggleyFanClub

All Australian
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Posts
884
Likes
343
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
We are allowed to have different opinions. Was completely anonymous in the last nine and a half minutes against Collingwood. His only touch was kicking the ball out on the full which directly led to a Collingwood goal. Not saying he isn't an excellent player- he is. But he's not as influential as many of your own supporters would lead you to believe and unfortunately he went missing with the game on the line on Saturday. :thumbsu:
Like all of the GWS midfield guns last weekend against the Hawks.
Am I doing this right?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ferrisb

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 22, 2011
Posts
12,903
Likes
54,169
Location
The Naughty Corner
AFL Club
Carlton
How is Tom Mitchell simultaneously:
a) The least influential gun
b) The reason why the Hawks won't make finals this year through his injury

This thread in its entirety is peak BigFooty.
Mitchell's individual possessions are not necessarily the most damaging.

BUT you get 30-40 of them a game PLUS big tackle and huge clearance numbers. It sure as hell adds up and the total is underrated.

I guess the conundrum is this: I'd take Mitchell's output over most players'. But I'd prefer most other players' impact IF they had the same output (which almost no-one does).
 

Nugett

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 2, 2017
Posts
3,970
Likes
4,455
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Is this a polite way of stating a player that is perceived as overrated?

If so Gary Ablett Junior. Yes he might get 50 possessions a game, only about 20, have any real impact.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Posts
9,549
Likes
10,453
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester City, Boston Bruins
I think Macrae gets more kudos than due.

O'Meara will get the 3 brownlow votes for the absurd numbers he racked up against us, but it was Shiels doing the damage
Most of his touches were in the first half too, when the Hawks were getting smacked.

It’s fair enough he’ll get the 3 votes, but I don’t think he was the most influential player on the ground.

Worrying pattern of how badly he fades in the second half of games overall, too.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Posts
1,098
Likes
1,335
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
After seeing Scott West, Lachie Hunter and Jack Macrae mentioned I get the sense this is just largely a measure of midfielders that don’t kick goals and therefore aren’t considered influential enough. Not necessarily an unreasonable position given Beveridge himself has said he wants more goals from his midfield.
 

NZ_Tiger

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Posts
6,107
Likes
10,778
Location
kensington
AFL Club
Richmond
After seeing Scott West, Lachie Hunter and Jack Macrae mentioned I get the sense this is just largely a measure of midfielders that don’t kick goals and therefore aren’t considered influential enough. Not necessarily an unreasonable position given Beveridge himself has said he wants more goals from his midfield.
Macrae is a damaging player, he hits targets in dangerous space and can draw the players around him. Lachie Hunter is just an accumulating winger with poop disposal and little hurt factor. Complete opposites.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Posts
40,938
Likes
29,246
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
dont really see how high contested possession players can be considered non influential. smashing their bodies into the contest to grab the ball for the outside types. most attacks start at half back too so if you have guys who can get it 30 times there, that's 30 times the opposition doesn't have it on half forward.

regardless, bryce gibbs.
 
Joined
May 23, 2009
Posts
47,806
Likes
42,182
Location
Geelong
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Macrae is a damaging player, he hits targets in dangerous space and can draw the players around him. Lachie Hunter is just an accumulating winger with poop disposal and little hurt factor. Complete opposites.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That about sums it up. Although Hunter's disposal by foot under 20m is great. Any further though... And the less said about his handballs the better.
The post saying he doesn't run both ways is possibly the most incorrect thing someone could say about him though. He frustrates a lot of Dogs supporters, but I'd say pretty much unanimously we're always grateful for the insane running he does to get back and help the backline. Every game, without fail.

Macrae is a genuine gun who ****s teams up real hard and does not belong in this thread.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2006
Posts
1,622
Likes
2,238
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
I don't think Taylor Walker is the sort of player this thread is about. He doesn't accumulate a ton of possessions. You can make an argument that he often doesn't get enough of the ball. But he does tend to deal quite a bit of damage with the touches he gets.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Coops93

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 19, 2015
Posts
3,276
Likes
5,411
Location
Gold Coast
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Arsenal, Denv Broncos, Suns, Crows
I tend to think Oliver doesn't have a great impact, and this thought was only vindicated to an extent when I read an article that showed he's the least effective player in the comp at going inside 50.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...k=1c8f24abdc920e7661f2bf1551b102c6-1557875380

WORST KICKS INSIDE 50
1. Clayton Oliver (Melbourne): 45 kicks — 8.9 per cent retention rate

2. Rory Sloane (Adelaide): 31 kicks — 12.9 per cent retention rate

3. Ed Langdon (Fremantle): 30 kicks — 16.7 per cent retention rate

4. Hugh McCluggage (Brisbane Lions): 34 kicks — 17.6 per cent retention rate

5. Travis Boak (Port Adelaide): 38 kicks — 18.4 per cent retention rate
Also feel the same about O'Maera, as has been mentioned. He gets a bit of it but I never think he's turned the game or has carried the Hawks. The game v Carlton is a perfect example. He had incredible numbers but Shiels was quite clearly the best player for the Hawks on the day.
 

Beer n Skittles

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Posts
7,776
Likes
13,433
Location
on top of the world
AFL Club
Carlton
Macrae is a damaging player, he hits targets in dangerous space and can draw the players around him. Lachie Hunter is just an accumulating winger with poop disposal and little hurt factor. Complete opposites.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm of basically the exact opposite opinion. I've only watched the dogs live this year, and maybe Macrae comes across better on the tv, but live it looks like his possessions always put the receiver under pressure. That's been a bit of an issue for them this year, pressure building throughout a possession chain until they turn it over.

Then Hunter is the one who relieves that pressure with a cool head & smart ball use. Bontempelli should be too but he's seemed a bit less cool under pressure this year IMO.

Edit - Especially noticeable when we tagged Hunter, and not having him involved caused the dogs to turn the footy over far more often than usual.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Posts
14,794
Likes
7,508
Location
Nthn Beaches
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
BBGFC and LRGC
Some people must think less of guys that arnt meant to be ball winners.
You want blokes like Lloyd to become a ball ferret ? At his size ? He'd stick his head in a pack and be rag dolled out with one hand. He's got mongrel but a man needs to know his limitations.
Just off the contest, fast reliable decision making and excellent distribution.
You need a few of all types.
Tom Mitchell I can understand due to him being an inside mid.

One bloke that never worried me thru his entire career was Marc Murphy. If he had it 15 times in the first qtr it wasn't necessarily bad news.
 

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
16,490
Likes
17,115
AFL Club
Geelong
How can you get the footy 30 times a game on be non-influential?

I'd much rather a player get 32 and go at 50% DE, then a guy who gets it 13-14 times and goes at 90% DE.

Of course the more you get it, the less you're going to use it well. To say a player like Laird or Mitchell are 'non-influential' is absolutely ridiculous.
Well it depends whether the touches that ARENT effective, are costing you the other way.
 
Top Bottom