Sign Here - Im getting Bradd Dalziell!!

[Outburst]

ugh is this thread gunna be revived everytime he gets a 100+?

 

[Hodges]

Yes.

 

[Audacious]

Priced at 95, averaging 91

Going south

lol whoopee 4 ppw short. Can easily be made up in one game.

Spot all the people who dont have Dalziell

Beautifully called if i dont mind saying so myself. Now averaging 99 for the year

 

[Saint KFC]

ugh is this thread gunna be revived everytime he gets a 100+?

I don't get it either mate - are we meant to feel remorse that we didn't pick him up? Because I'm not feeling any

 

[Stormer]

ugh is this thread gunna be revived everytime he gets a 100+?

Nah, any 80+ score would be suffice for a thread revival.

 

[lifelike_]

where are all the Dalziell knockers now? The great man is averaging 99 for the season, and has 3 hundred plus scores out of 4 rounds

And oh how sweet it is that one of the "safer" options in Swan got bugger all to boot

I think you'll find that anyone with half a clue couldn't care less about week to week scores, only the final average

Not sure if it's just me, but there's nothing special about buying someone at a 94 average, then bragging about a 99 average four rounds into a season.

 

[CRAWF 08]

I just love DTM so much and i just dont want to do bad because i enjoy my footy and footy stats so much. I have 2 teams, i have said this before. One has Dalziell and the other doesnt.

Im sorry i cant just have 1 side, i think next year i defiatnly will only have the one team.

The thing that alot of use probably dont realise is that alot of people on BF would have more than one side and around the country. Their isnt 250 000 different individuals doing DTM. Theirs about 100 000.

All my mates have multiple teams so it does get quite hard.

Sorry if you dont respect me, i cant do much about that. But whats to say that all the other people you talk to dont have more than one side. Not saying that everyone has more than one side, probably a few do and more than you think.

good to see u have admitted it mate shows some character and a step in the right direction

all the same do what u like with your teams and u are an asset to this board...

let the love fest cont....

p.s dalziell has proven himself well and truly now 11 games 9 games 100+

 

[Jab]

I would love those averages to continue!! 22games 18 @ 100+.......

We would need a "Sign Here - Im getting Bradd Dalziell Part 2"

Not sure that's going to happen though.

 

[Clutch_N_Bolt]

I think you'll find that anyone with half a clue couldn't care less about week to week scores, only the final average

Not sure if it's just me, but there's nothing special about buying someone at a 94 average, then bragging about a 99 average four rounds into a season.

99 average.. is only cause he hit a 60 in his second game., that was a blow out game.. with carlton in 2nd qtr in full effect.. thats was a hiccup.. cant really judge him on that.. the fact that he as average 100+ 0ver his last 7 games out of 8.. is a better indicator.. every player is going to have a a down game at some point.. ala Dane swan tonight.. woodies still won and he only got 79.. but are you going to say swans not consistently good in DT. because of his 79... I doubt it highly.. So dalziel shouldn't be see as 99 average player... more 100+

If you average out his last 8 games inc preseason hes averaging 102.. and thats with 4 games with reduced presason game time.. when are you guys going to admit hes gold.. with DT... reckon only next year when you will put him your side from get go...

 

[Saint KFC]

99 average.. is only cause he hit a 60 in his second game., that was a blow out game.. with carlton in 2nsd qtr in full effect.. thats was a hiccup.. cant really judge him on that.. the fact that he as average 100+ 0ver his last 7 games out of 8.. is a better indicator.. every player is going to have a a down game at some point.. ala Dane swan tonight.. woodies still lwon and he only got 79.. but are you going to say swans not consistently good in DT. because of his 79... I doubt it highly.. So dalziel shouldn't be see as 99 average player... more 100+

Dane Swan's down game of 79 > Bradd Dalziell's down game of 60

Swan > Dalziell any day of the week.

 

[Stormer]

Well, except today, right?

 

[leungtl]

I was tempted to revive this thread by half time

 

[Virgil]

Now averaging 99 for the year

Barham >>> Dalziell.

 

[Audacious]

I think you'll find that anyone with half a clue couldn't care less about week to week scores, only the final average

Not sure if it's just me, but there's nothing special about buying someone at a 94 average, then bragging about a 99 average four rounds into a season.

the time of the season didnt stop people coming into this thread after round 2 when he scored 60 odd and laying the boots in. He had an average of 80 and people couldnt wait to tell us we had all made a mistake and to expect similar scores frequently from him throughout the season.

Since then he has gone back into his 100 mode scoring, and tonights 123 score will be nice for that rolling average in the coming weeks.

 

[Saint KFC]

Well, except today, right?

May I direct you to this post:

I think you'll find that anyone with half a clue couldn't care less about week to week scores, only the final average

 

[Stormer]

May I direct you to this post:

Not the point.

I do agree that Swan is better though.

 

[Audacious]

Dane Swan's down game of 79 > Bradd Dalziell's down game of 60

Swan > Dalziell any day of the week.

Well, except today, right?

lol

Not to mention Swan costs 30k more at the beginning of the season, so if Swan wasnt doing better then something would be wrong...

 

[Saint KFC]

Not the point.

Your point is moot because week-to-week scores are largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Stormer]

My point was just negating your point that Swan is better than Dalziell every day of the week.

 

[Clutch_N_Bolt]

Dane Swan's down game of 79 > Bradd Dalziell's down game of 60

Swan > Dalziell any day of the week.

yeah difference is.. collingwood won.. in this game and brisbane lost in the carlton game.. most of the brisbane players there DT scores where well below average.. The Carlton vs Brisbane game was a joke.. the whole game Carlton showed in all quarters why they are the next premiership contenders/power midfield.. second to sydney in terms of negating style of football.. denying opposition, possession of football like sydney.. but in a different way than sydney..

Im not saying that daziell is better than swan.. hes is after all less expensive than swan.. but i think he will prove to be worth every cent.. and contradictory comments are just jealously.. the guys proven over 8 games + 7 from last year... he can be amongst the top 5 midfielders week in week out.. What the **** else do you want him to do to prove that he is not.....????

 

[Saint KFC]

Not to mention Swan costs 30k more at the beginning of the season, so if Swan wasnt doing better then something would be wrong...

.

But let's not forget, it's perfectly valid for you to lay the boots into Swan when he has a 'down game' of 79, yet when Dalziell has a game of 60 those who give a bit back to the people acting as if he's Jesus himself and laughing at those who 'didnt pick Razzle Dazzle " after a Round 1 game of 101 are suddenly the bad guys

My point was just negating your point that Swan is better than Dalziell every day of the week.

It's an idiom m8, it's not meant to be taken literally

 

[Jab]

Seriously guys.

I have Razzel, but surely we cant argue with Lakey91!!

We took a massive risk which still could leave us with egg on our faces.

Lets celebrate tonight but lets not get carried away and have a shot a proven DT'ers cause they didn't by a bloke that gave us all a lump in our throat when we first picked him.

Swan is no hack, lets not make fools of ourselves just yet

 

[William C]

It's interesting to note that Dalziell only had about 70-75% TOG tonight.

Spent the start of Q1,2 and 3 on the pine. Anyways, I think I picked the right captain this week

 

[Audacious]

.

But let's not forget, it's perfectly valid for you to lay the boots into Swan when he has a 'down game' of 79, yet when Dalziell has a game of 60 those who give a bit back to the people acting as if he's Jesus himself and laughing at those who 'didnt pick Razzle Dazzle " after a Round 1 game of 101 are suddenly the bad guys

your post is written poorly. Re-write it.

 

[Saint KFC]

your post is written poorly. Re-write it.

Hardly.


But let's not forget, it's perfectly valid for you to lay the boots into Swan when he has a 'down game' of 79, yet when Dalziell has a game of 60 those who give a bit back to the people who were acting as if he's Jesus himself after a Round 1 game of 101 whilst laughing at those who 'didnt pick Razzle Dazzle " - are suddenly the bad guys


Better?