Liverpower
Debutant
It would be an understatement to say that the other Dangerfield thread isn't exactly full of objective analyses of his strengths and weaknesses as a player. So, I am starting a thread to rectify that. What I have done is compared Dangerfield with many of the top midfielders in the league over the past four years across a range of key metrics. The other players are Ablett, Swan, Pendlebury, Griffin, Johnson, Selwood, Mitchell, Watson, Beams, Cotchin, Kennedy and Sloane.
This is not meant to be a complete list of the best mids over that timeframe and so don't be offended by individual inclusions or exclusions (Judd, Murphy, Boyd, Jones, etc). My aim was simply to see if Dangerfield could be thought to be in the top-5 among a particular group of midfielders that many would regard as the competition's benchmarks over the period. I threw Sloane in because I wanted to compare Dangerfield to Adelaide's other current top midfielder.
Two caveats before I start. First, the indicators I focus on - total disposals, effective disposals, contested disposals, the variance of total disposals, goals, goal assists, tackles, and inside-50s - do not fully summarise what a player adds to a team. I only had so much time to put this together and am happy to see others add other indicators that they think are relevant to the discussion (1%ers, metres gained, hard ball gets, etc). Second, yes, I am a Port supporter. However, as you can see from the rarity of my posting, I'm not involved in the daily BF flame wars. So, judge me on my analysis, not the team that I support.
Let me begin with Dangerfield's relative strengths. First, he is arguably the best goal kicking midfielder in the game. In three out of the last four years he has been in the top-100 players in the competition for average goals per game. Ablett, Swan and Beams have also been in the top-100 three times but Dangerfield's goals per game is slightly higher. Steve Johnson has a higher average over the past four years but that is driven by his 2011 numbers. Since he became more of a full-time mid his numbers have dropped below Dangerfield's averages.
Dangerfield's value forward of centre can also be seen by comparing his inside-50 stats. In 2012 he was ranked second in the competition for average inside-50s per game and in 2013 he was eighth in the competition. He is down this year but it is still early in the season and so the sample is too small to make strong inferences. Other players that excel in this area are Griffin, Ablett, Swan, Selwood and Johnson, though Dangerfield's averages over 2012 and 2013 are second only to Griffin over that time frame.
Dangerfield's other key strength is in contested posessions. He was ranked second in the comp for contested posessions per game in 2012, sixth in 2013 and fourth so far this year. Indeed, over that three year period his average ratio of contested posessions to total posessions has been 60%. The only top mid with a better ratio is Kennedy from the Swans and even then only just. For comparison, Ablett and Pendlebury both have ratios below 50%. As an interesting aside, in 2011 Dangerfield was ranked 32nd in the comp for contested posessions despite not even being in the top 100 in the competition for total posessions.
Now for the weaknesses. First, Dangerfield simply gets less of the ball than the other top midfielders in the game. His best result for average posessions per game over the past four years is his ranking of 14th in 2012. He then dropped to 47th in 2013 and is 61st so far this year. He averages 8 fewer posessions per game than Ablett over the past three years, six less than swan, 5 less than Pendlebury, 4 less than Mitchell, 5 less than Beams, 4 less than Watson, and the list goes on.
Unfortunately, he does not appear to make up for getting less of the ball by using the ball more effectively. His best ranking for total effective disposals is 48th in 2012 and he was ranked only 99th last year. His average ranking decline between total disposals and effective disposals is larger than for any of other top midfielders in the competition besides Cotchin. This is where his reputation for burning the ball comes from. Other players whose ranking slides on the basis of effective disposals are Johnson, Swan and Kennedy. Interestingly, Sloane's rankings improve on this metric - he has been ranked in the top 100 for effective posessions in each of the past three seasons.
Now an important reason why Dangerfield's effective possessions are down is because a larger proportion of his posessions are contested. But the average ranking decline is seems larger than can be explained by that alone. For example, Kennedy's average ranking decline is 15 places compared to more than 40 for Dangerfield.
Another area where Dangefield appears to fall short is in goal assists. He has never ranked in the top 100 in the competition on this metric. Every one of the other mids in my comparison list have done so on multiple occasions, with Ablett, Pendlebury and Johnson doing so in each of the four years. Sloane has ranked in the top 100 twice. So, Dangerfield scores more goals than other comparable mids but this is partially offset by the fact that he contributes less to others. I don't watch enough of his games to judge whether that fact is attributable to selfishness or to other factors.
Finally, Dangerfield does not appear to be a committed tackler. The only year of the four that he has been in the top 100 in the competition for average tackles per game is 2014 and even then he only ranked 90th. Again, almost all the other top mids are higher up in the tackle rankings. Ablett, Pendlebury, Selwood, Kennedy and Sloane have been ranked in the top-100 every year. The only other top mid not to appear in the top 100 in any year is Swan. I was surprised by this finding as usually there is a high correlation between contested ball winning and tackling.
In summary, what you get from Dangerfield is one of the best contested ball winners in the competition, who drives the ball into the forward line and scores more goals than other top midfielders. If you were judging the best mids in the comp on that basis alone he would probably be ranked top five. However, those positive attributes are somewhat offset by the fact that he doesn't get as much of the ball as the other best mids in the game and disposes of it much less effectively. While his high contested posessions point to a strong team player, his low tackle count and goal assists may be suggestive of a selfish streak. He also has a high variance in his posessions from game to game compared with many other mids.
On balance then I think it is difficult to argue that he is currently one of the top-5 mids in the competition, though he is clearly a great player that would add a lot of value to any team in the competition, including Port! To get there I think he needs to raise his effective disposals and get more involved in tackling and giving off goals to others. Beams comes out better on those categories, though not in some others.
Of course, he is only 24 and so probably has not reached his peak yet (despite the fact that 2012 was his best statistical season so far). Nearly all of the other mids I identified are older and will start to drop down the rankings over the coming years. The question is whether Dangerfield will rise up or other, even younger mids, will overtake him.
This is not meant to be a complete list of the best mids over that timeframe and so don't be offended by individual inclusions or exclusions (Judd, Murphy, Boyd, Jones, etc). My aim was simply to see if Dangerfield could be thought to be in the top-5 among a particular group of midfielders that many would regard as the competition's benchmarks over the period. I threw Sloane in because I wanted to compare Dangerfield to Adelaide's other current top midfielder.
Two caveats before I start. First, the indicators I focus on - total disposals, effective disposals, contested disposals, the variance of total disposals, goals, goal assists, tackles, and inside-50s - do not fully summarise what a player adds to a team. I only had so much time to put this together and am happy to see others add other indicators that they think are relevant to the discussion (1%ers, metres gained, hard ball gets, etc). Second, yes, I am a Port supporter. However, as you can see from the rarity of my posting, I'm not involved in the daily BF flame wars. So, judge me on my analysis, not the team that I support.
Let me begin with Dangerfield's relative strengths. First, he is arguably the best goal kicking midfielder in the game. In three out of the last four years he has been in the top-100 players in the competition for average goals per game. Ablett, Swan and Beams have also been in the top-100 three times but Dangerfield's goals per game is slightly higher. Steve Johnson has a higher average over the past four years but that is driven by his 2011 numbers. Since he became more of a full-time mid his numbers have dropped below Dangerfield's averages.
Dangerfield's value forward of centre can also be seen by comparing his inside-50 stats. In 2012 he was ranked second in the competition for average inside-50s per game and in 2013 he was eighth in the competition. He is down this year but it is still early in the season and so the sample is too small to make strong inferences. Other players that excel in this area are Griffin, Ablett, Swan, Selwood and Johnson, though Dangerfield's averages over 2012 and 2013 are second only to Griffin over that time frame.
Dangerfield's other key strength is in contested posessions. He was ranked second in the comp for contested posessions per game in 2012, sixth in 2013 and fourth so far this year. Indeed, over that three year period his average ratio of contested posessions to total posessions has been 60%. The only top mid with a better ratio is Kennedy from the Swans and even then only just. For comparison, Ablett and Pendlebury both have ratios below 50%. As an interesting aside, in 2011 Dangerfield was ranked 32nd in the comp for contested posessions despite not even being in the top 100 in the competition for total posessions.
Now for the weaknesses. First, Dangerfield simply gets less of the ball than the other top midfielders in the game. His best result for average posessions per game over the past four years is his ranking of 14th in 2012. He then dropped to 47th in 2013 and is 61st so far this year. He averages 8 fewer posessions per game than Ablett over the past three years, six less than swan, 5 less than Pendlebury, 4 less than Mitchell, 5 less than Beams, 4 less than Watson, and the list goes on.
Unfortunately, he does not appear to make up for getting less of the ball by using the ball more effectively. His best ranking for total effective disposals is 48th in 2012 and he was ranked only 99th last year. His average ranking decline between total disposals and effective disposals is larger than for any of other top midfielders in the competition besides Cotchin. This is where his reputation for burning the ball comes from. Other players whose ranking slides on the basis of effective disposals are Johnson, Swan and Kennedy. Interestingly, Sloane's rankings improve on this metric - he has been ranked in the top 100 for effective posessions in each of the past three seasons.
Now an important reason why Dangerfield's effective possessions are down is because a larger proportion of his posessions are contested. But the average ranking decline is seems larger than can be explained by that alone. For example, Kennedy's average ranking decline is 15 places compared to more than 40 for Dangerfield.
Another area where Dangefield appears to fall short is in goal assists. He has never ranked in the top 100 in the competition on this metric. Every one of the other mids in my comparison list have done so on multiple occasions, with Ablett, Pendlebury and Johnson doing so in each of the four years. Sloane has ranked in the top 100 twice. So, Dangerfield scores more goals than other comparable mids but this is partially offset by the fact that he contributes less to others. I don't watch enough of his games to judge whether that fact is attributable to selfishness or to other factors.
Finally, Dangerfield does not appear to be a committed tackler. The only year of the four that he has been in the top 100 in the competition for average tackles per game is 2014 and even then he only ranked 90th. Again, almost all the other top mids are higher up in the tackle rankings. Ablett, Pendlebury, Selwood, Kennedy and Sloane have been ranked in the top-100 every year. The only other top mid not to appear in the top 100 in any year is Swan. I was surprised by this finding as usually there is a high correlation between contested ball winning and tackling.
In summary, what you get from Dangerfield is one of the best contested ball winners in the competition, who drives the ball into the forward line and scores more goals than other top midfielders. If you were judging the best mids in the comp on that basis alone he would probably be ranked top five. However, those positive attributes are somewhat offset by the fact that he doesn't get as much of the ball as the other best mids in the game and disposes of it much less effectively. While his high contested posessions point to a strong team player, his low tackle count and goal assists may be suggestive of a selfish streak. He also has a high variance in his posessions from game to game compared with many other mids.
On balance then I think it is difficult to argue that he is currently one of the top-5 mids in the competition, though he is clearly a great player that would add a lot of value to any team in the competition, including Port! To get there I think he needs to raise his effective disposals and get more involved in tackling and giving off goals to others. Beams comes out better on those categories, though not in some others.
Of course, he is only 24 and so probably has not reached his peak yet (despite the fact that 2012 was his best statistical season so far). Nearly all of the other mids I identified are older and will start to drop down the rankings over the coming years. The question is whether Dangerfield will rise up or other, even younger mids, will overtake him.
