Patrick Dangerfield vs Marcus Bontempelli

[00Stinger]

Not sure what you mean.

Bont has an enormous capacity to be better than he has shown despite his high rating.

Dangerfield has just played his best ever season and is a fantastic player with breakaway speed, but his disposal is an issue at times.

Bont has sublime skills and despite lacking the breakaway speed, is able to seemingly position himself to take advantage from most contests. He can be the games best midfielder but he is also exceptionally good as a forward and could easily play CHF.

I would suspect that any list manager would feel very comfortable choosing Bont over Dangerfield if you are looking at the career still ahead for both.

Your right Bont could be the best midfielder in the game, no one can doubt this. In fact you could argue that you would take him over almost any other midfielder in the game.
However Danger is the best mid and is coming off one of the greatest seasons a player has ever had. He was 20% better than any other player in the league this year.

 

[Amigo]

Your right Bont could be the best midfielder in the game, no one can doubt this. In fact you could argue that you would take him over almost any other midfielder in the game.
However Danger is the best mid and is coming off one of the greatest seasons a player has ever had. He was 20% better than any other player in the league this year.

Bont is also 5 and a half years younger and a far better kick than Dangerfield.

Bontempelli and I don't have to think twice. I don't think there's a single club in the competition that would take Dangerfield over Bontempelli right now; maybe one that was desperate for pace like GWS.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Your right Bont could be the best midfielder in the game, no one can doubt this. In fact you could argue that you would take him over almost any other midfielder in the game.
However Danger is the best mid and is coming off one of the greatest seasons a player has ever had. He was 20% better than any other player in the league this year.

both fyfe and gaj have had better years than him in the last handful of years. Don't get carried away.

 

[Lethality]

I don't think Bont will have the upside that some people have already assumed for him. We've seen it before, particularly with long limbed skinny players who explode in their early years, they don't go on with the expected gradient of improvement once they put the weight on. Still think he will be very good, but I expect Bont will be looked back on as an early developer, like Judd, rather than like Dangerfield who steadily improved every year.

 

[Cadillac]

I don't think Bont will have the upside that some people have already assumed for him. We've seen it before, particularly with long limbed skinny players who explode in their early years, they don't go on with the expected gradient of improvement once they put the weight on. Still think he will be very good, but I expect Bont will be looked back on as an early developer, like Judd, rather than like Dangerfield who steadily improved every year.

If Bont turns out like Judd I'd be pretty happy. Also, this kid went okay once he put some weight on.

I always assumed it was the bigger more physically mature guys who dominate early, not usually the other way around with the skinny guys dominating early as you mentioned.

 

[ManOfClay]

I do laugh when people act like we are talking about potential and what Bont might be, say, in two years' time.

No, we are talking the now. 20 years old or 30, the current Bont is one of the competition's best players. Not many players can influence a game like he does most weeks. Not many players can take the physical beating north threw at him and still be best on ground. Not many players can sit luke hodge on his arse in a crunch final on his way to best on ground. Not too many can stand up in the heat of a grand final and hit every target by foot despite the chaos around him.

And ****ing lol at the judd and Dangerfield comparison. Dangerfield is nowhere near judd as a player.

 

[Lethality]

I always assumed it was the bigger more physically mature guys who dominate early, not usually the other way around with the skinny guys dominating early as you mentioned.

I suppose it depends on the role. Fyfe needed to put weight on because he was not particularly quick and a larger body suits his game. Someone like Judd at WCE was a wiry type explosive inside and outside player, and the extra weight didn't really help him.

 

[GreyCrow]

I don't think there's a single club in the competition that would take Dangerfield over Bontempelli right now; maybe one that was desperate for pace like GWS.

I thought this was a 50/50 choice until I read this.

If both were on the draft table now who would go 1st?

I think Bontempelli

 

[Bulldog Joe]

I suppose it depends on the role. Fyfe needed to put weight on because he was not particularly quick and a larger body suits his game. Someone like Judd at WCE was a wiry type explosive inside and outside player, and the extra weight didn't really help him.

You do realise you have contradicted yourself here.

Earlier you suggest that Bont won't improve further because bulking up will not help him, but then you agree that Fyfe needed extra weight for his larger body because he was not particularly quick.

Perhaps you could have a close look at Bontempelli.
Large body not particularly quick. Sounds a bit like the Fyfe you suggested needed to bulk, yet adding bulk to Bonts will limit him developing further.

Do you just type stuff to suit or do you actually analyse what you are suggesting?

 

[BillyW]

Danger right now as he's in his prime and although he turns the ball over now and then I love the way he bursts away from congestion, but the Bont is not far behind and will almost certainly be the pick in 2 or 3 years time....

 

[conrad_437]

Danger right now as he's in his prime and although he turns the ball over now and then I love the way he bursts away from congestion, but the Bont is not far behind and will almost certainly be the pick in 2 or 3 years time....

Judging by that wouldn't you take Bont because he is five and a half years younger? Already elite, just turned 21. Would you rather have an elite player at the top of their game for 2-3 years or an elite player, about 4-5 years off their peak playing years, for the next 9-10 years?

 

[Lethality]

You do realise you have contradicted yourself here.

Earlier you suggest that Bont won't improve further because bulking up will not help him, but then you agree that Fyfe needed extra weight for his larger body because he was not particularly quick.

Perhaps you could have a close look at Bontempelli.
Large body not particularly quick. Sounds a bit like the Fyfe you suggested needed to bulk, yet adding bulk to Bonts will limit him developing further.

Do you just type stuff to suit or do you actually analyse what you are suggesting?

You do realise you have contradicted yourself here.

Earlier you suggest that Bont won't improve further because bulking up will not help him, but then you agree that Fyfe needed extra weight for his larger body because he was not particularly quick.

Perhaps you could have a close look at Bontempelli.
Large body not particularly quick. Sounds a bit like the Fyfe you suggested needed to bulk, yet adding bulk to Bonts will limit him developing further.

Do you just type stuff to suit or do you actually analyse what you are suggesting?

I see bont as a very good burst of speed player, unlike Fyfe. So there's no contradiction.

 

[ManOfClay]

I see bont as a very good burst of speed player, unlike Fyfe. So there's no contradiction.

Bont's main weakness is lack of pace.

So you are right. There's no contradiction. You just don't know what you are talking about if that if that is what you "see"

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Bu who's going to 20 and 3 first?

 

[12Chill]

I do laugh when people act like we are talking about potential and what Bont might be, say, in two years' time.

No, we are talking the now. 20 years old or 30, the current Bont is one of the competition's best players. Not many players can influence a game like he does most weeks. Not many players can take the physical beating north threw at him and still be best on ground. Not many players can sit luke hodge on his arse in a crunch final on his way to best on ground. Not too many can stand up in the heat of a grand final and hit every target by foot despite the chaos around him.

And ******* lol at the judd and Dangerfield comparison. Dangerfield is nowhere near judd as a player.

That's not true though is it? I remember hearing that stat on here but I'm pretty sure when I re-watched it he kicked a long bomb at one stage just forward of centre/to half forward, it bounced once and was cleanly taken by a Sydney player. Not sure how that is considered effective. Either way he definitely went at a ridiculously high percentage so it's just nitpicking, this stat gets thrown around a lot but I'm sure I remember otherwise.

I'd take Bont over Danger for sure. Better by foot and is far younger. Makes more sense.

 

[ManOfClay]

That's not true though is it? I remember hearing that stat on here but I'm pretty sure when I re-watched it he kicked a long bomb at one stage just forward of centre/to half forward, it bounced once and was cleanly taken by a Sydney player. Not sure how that is considered effective. Either way he definitely went at a ridiculously high percentage so it's just nitpicking, this stat gets thrown around a lot but I'm sure I remember otherwise.

I'd take Bont over Danger for sure. Better by foot and is far younger. Makes more sense.

The stat still says 100% but you are right. Remembering kicking efficiency counts kicking to a contest as effective. As I recall that was to a contest and Sydney had an easy takeaway.

Either way he finished the game with a total disposal effficiency in the 90s and was nigh on perfect with his kicking. Those two passes to Tom Boyd for his 1st and 2nd goals were unbelievable

 

[12Chill]

The stat still says 100% but you are right. Remembering kicking efficiency counts kicking to a contest as effective. As I recall that was to a contest and Sydney had an easy takeaway.

Either way he finished the game with a total disposal effficiency in the 90s and was nigh on perfect with his kicking. Those two passes to Tom Boyd for his 1st and 2nd goals were unbelievable

Absolutely, one of the more memorable passages of the Grand Final for me was Bont's sidestep cramped up against the boundary and then measuring the kick onto Boyd's chest to perfection and he promptly kicked the goal. Everything about that play was clean and that sort of stuff is invaluable in Grand Finals especially.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

I see bont as a very good burst of speed player, unlike Fyfe. So there's no contradiction.

Nice that you liked my post so much you had to quote it twice.

If you think Bont is a burst of speed player, you are simply not watching.

Bont get space by deft change of direction, not by burst of speed.
I would suspect that Fyfe would actually be quicker over the ground.

Both have excellent endurance.

 

[conrad_437]

I see bont as a very good burst of speed player, unlike Fyfe. So there's no contradiction.

Tell the truth, have you actually ever watched Bont play?

 

[Monkey King]

If I could have one of these players for next season it would be Dangerfield. If I could have one for the rest of their careers, it would be Bont. He just matches the age profile that most suits my club.

 

[Lethality]

Nice that you liked my post so much you had to quote it twice.

If you think Bont is a burst of speed player, you are simply not watching.

Bont get space by deft change of direction, not by burst of speed.
I would suspect that Fyfe would actually be quicker over the ground.

Both have excellent endurance.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I see elite acceleration out of a pack.

This isn't top speed, it's just quickness over the first 10 to 20 meters. There are slow players who have elite acceleration, and fast players that do not.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

We'll have to agree to disagree. I see elite acceleration out of a pack.

This isn't top speed, it's just quickness over the first 10 to 20 meters. There are slow players who have elite acceleration, and fast players that do not.

You must be watching in some other reality.
I have watched Bont every game (mostly live) and in replay. Often comment about how he is actually slow, but finds space. When he is up and running he is not too bad, but there is simply no way anyone could watch him and think he has elite acceleration.

Johannisen has elite accelaeration and so does Hunter. Not as many will see it in Hunter because he simply running all of the time and rarely uses the acceleration. Bont simply does not have it to use.

 

[Lethality]

You must be watching in some other reality.
I have watched Bont every game (mostly live) and in replay. Often comment about how he is actually slow, but finds space. When he is up and running he is not too bad, but there is simply no way anyone could watch him and think he has elite acceleration.

Johannisen has elite accelaeration and so does Hunter. Not as many will see it in Hunter because he simply running all of the time and rarely uses the acceleration. Bont simply does not have it to use.

There are draft profiles and other write ups that refer to his speed or acceleration, so it's not this other worldly claim that you are saying.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

There are draft profiles and other write ups that refer to his speed or acceleration, so it's not this other worldly claim that you are saying.

If you watch him you will know he does not have elite acceleration.

 

[conrad_437]

I think bonts running action makes him appear slower than he actually is, that's not to say he is fast though. His pace along with his breakaway speed and acceleration does is very average. You would never consider him anywhere near elite in this area, definitely nowhere near Dangerfield and definitely slower than Fyfe.