lame duck or nicky dal

[stinger]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/p ... 5880557078


be nice for a few sainters to join in the debate.....even if it is a silly comparison....

[Dan Warna]

why bother?

Dal is a gun, who cares about dane swine?

[stinger]

why bother?

Dal is a gun, who cares about dane swine?

see ya point....

[Thinline]

Has Swan paid his damages bill yet?

Seriously, no comparison.

Dal circa '10 wins hard ball, tackles like a madman, kicks goals and is a fantastic field kick in the open.

Swan lurks around the back half and plays loose doesn't he?

[Moccha]

Luke Ball!

[Moods]

I saw this comparison in The Hun and thought, "dal will win this one easy.' I was stunned when I got to the end of the article and the author had chosen Swan. What really sh*ts me is that people seem to have this perception of Dal being a weak tackler. It's crap, he's one of the best tacklers in the league. The knock on Dal is that when he's not interested, (Carlton game and Richmond game) he's virtually non existent. I could imagine nothing worse than having some pain the ar*e tagger hassling me all day, but that's life as an elite midfielder. Swan rarely get's under 25 possessions and probably works harder, but his possessions are rarely the quality of Dal's.

[Saintsfan]

Dane Swan is an all around good midfielder who does not have one attribute that stands out. That being said he does everything in the game pretty well.

Dal is Dal case closed.

[meher baba]

I've always been highly impressed by Swan, and I think he's having his best ever season.

He has short legs and great lower body strength which enable him to burst through contests, stay on his feet, get the ball in his hands and move it forward to dangerous positions. He wins a lot of ball in contests all around the ground.

Dal is a better kick and a more evasive runner. So, on purely aesthetic grounds, Dal is the better player. But each are highly effective and Swan is probably a little bit more difficult for opponents to blot out of the game.

OK, I know, I know I shouldn't write this sort of stuff, I should say "what a joke, Dane Swan isn't fit to tie NDS's shoe leather, bloody Herald-Sun is out to get us, who cares about filthy black and white scumbags, etc."

Sorry about that: I prefer to talk about football seriously.

[meher baba]

P.S. All that said, I agree that the comments about NDS's tackling were crap. NDS on his worst day is a far better tackler than Swan will ever be.

[Leo.J]

It's like comparing apples and oranges.

Swan is an accumulator, Dal gets alot of it, but its his ball use that is what he is renowned for.

Joey would be a better comparison with Swan.

And Dal with Pendlebury.

TBH I rate Joey, Dal, Lenny, and BJ above Swan. He get heaps of it but his use and penetration are average...he also chokes in front of goal more often than not.

Anyway it is the HS, of course they'll pick the filth... hey plugger.

[older saint]

Swan may win more ball but Dal will win more games.

Swan accumulates but needs others around to get the result. Dal can accumulate but 15 of possessions will be more damagnig than 25 of Swans.

Swan is more consistant where as Dal still get tagged out of games too easy ( although has improved significantly on that)

Key point - Swan is the main accumulator for Collingwood and has Pendelbury , Didak, Davis? Sidebottom to make him look better. Hayes plays this role for Saints and Dal is 2nd or 3rd option on that

Swan is more consistant in performance week in week out however Dal will win you more games.

[Leo.J]

...But each are highly effective and Swan is probably a little bit more difficult for opponents to blot out of the game...

If Swan get 30, and Dal gets 20, Dal will have a greater influence on the game.

Swan needs big numbers for him to be a match winner, Dal can have half the disposals and have a bigger influence.

[Leo.J]

To add to that, If Dal get 30+ we win.

During Dals career we've only lost twice when he's had 30+.

During Dals career, we've only lost 11 games when he's got 25+.

During Swans career, the Pies have lost 25 games when Swan has had 25+.

For example Swan had 38 on Monday.

Give Dal the ball 38 times, and we'd win by 10 goals.

[samoht]

it's like comparing a rolls royce vs a beaten up and graffitied ute.

[Moods]

It's like comparing apples and oranges.

Swan is an accumulator, Dal gets alot of it, but its his ball use that is what he is renowned for.

Joey would be a better comparison with Swan.

And Dal with Pendlebury.

Agree with this.

[Thinline]

To add to that, If Dal get 30+ we win.

During Dals career we've only lost twice when he's had 30+.

During Dals career, we've only lost 10 games when he's got 25+.

During Swans career, the Pies have lost 25 games when Swan has had 25+.

For example Swan had 38 on Monday.

Give Dal the ball 38 times, and we'd win by 10 goals.

Where on earth do you get this stuff??

That's outstanding!

[Mr Magic]

Why not l;et the Coaches decide it.

How ,any coaches bother to tag Swan?
How many tag Dal?

There's a reason they tag Dal and not Swan.

Dal hurts you when he has the footy in his hands.
Swan gets the footy a lot, but doesn't seem to hurt you.

[Leo.J]

But wait there's more...

Dal career = 97 goals 62 behinds @ 61%

Swan = 85 goals 93 @ 47.8%

Dal 3.5 tackles agame for his career

Swan 2.8

Last year Dal had 21 more tackles.

Another interesting one

Career frees for and against

Dal = Frees for 204 / Against 85

Swan = 92 / 57

IMO this stat would suggest that Dal gets alot of his own ball in heavy traffic, which would account for alot of his free kicks.

Thats just my take on it.

Jon Anderson, tell him he's dreamin.

[Thinline]

But wait there's more...

Dal career = 97 goals 62 behinds @ 61%

Swan = 85 goals 93 @ 47.8%

Dal 3.5 tackles agame for his career

Swan 2.8

Last year Dal had 21 more tackles.

Another interesting one

Career frees for and against

Dal = Frees for 204 / Against 85

Swan = 92 / 57

IMO this stat would suggest that Dal gets alot of his own ball in heavy traffic, which would account for alot of his free kicks.

Thats just my take on it.

Jon Anderson, tell him he's dreamin.

Well he is a drunk.

[SainterK]

Why not l;et the Coaches decide it.

How ,any coaches bother to tag Swan?
How many tag Dal?

There's a reason they tag Dal and not Swan.

Dal hurts you when he has the footy in his hands.
Swan gets the footy a lot, but doesn't seem to hurt you.

I chimed into the debate and said that, and his response was "well Ling tags Swan when they play Geelong"

[Beekay]

For the love of God do NOT tell us where you got those stats from!

I thought I might actually see some sunlight due to the split round.

[samoht]

All possessions are not alike - we usually tag someone else ahead of Swan in recognition that someone else's possessions have more impact.

So applying all weightings and adjustments - and the fact that Dal gets regularly tagged -

the exchange rate is

1 Dal = 3 Swans

[Mr Magic]

Why not l;et the Coaches decide it.

How ,any coaches bother to tag Swan?
How many tag Dal?

There's a reason they tag Dal and not Swan.

Dal hurts you when he has the footy in his hands.
Swan gets the footy a lot, but doesn't seem to hurt you.

I chimed into the debate and said that, and his response was "well Ling tags Swan when they play Geelong"

I'd find that a strange reply - I think Ling goes to Didak, Pendlebury before Swan:-
just like
we use Jones
Freo use Crowley
Port use K Cornes
Blues use Carrazo
Bulldogs use Picken
etc.

Swan is similar to Luke Ball in that oppositions haven't historically worried too much about him getting the footy, unlike GAblett, Judd, Hodge, Dal - who all attract teh opposition's prime tagger.


Have a look at the last few games we've played against the Filth.
Who did we use to tag Swan?
IIRC we tagged Didak, Davis, Shaw, Pendlebury but not Swan?

[SainterK]

Why not l;et the Coaches decide it.

How ,any coaches bother to tag Swan?
How many tag Dal?

There's a reason they tag Dal and not Swan.

Dal hurts you when he has the footy in his hands.
Swan gets the footy a lot, but doesn't seem to hurt you.

I chimed into the debate and said that, and his response was "well Ling tags Swan when they play Geelong"

I'd find that a strange reply - I think Ling goes to Didak, Pendlebury before Swan:-
just like
we use Jones
Freo use Crowley
Port use K Cornes
Blues use Carrazo
Bulldogs use Picken
etc.

Swan is similar to Luke Ball in that oppositions haven't historically worried too much about him getting the footy, unlike GAblett, Judd, Hodge, Dal - who all attract teh opposition's prime tagger.


Have a look at the last few games we've played against the Filth.
Who did we use to tag Swan?
IIRC we tagged Didak, Davis, Shaw, Pendlebury but not Swan?

He compared Bartel and Hayes, and went for Bartel
He compared Hodge and BJ, and went for Hodge
He compared Dal and Swan, and went for Swan

He just hates St Kilda and our players, isn't that right plugger66?

[stinger]

I've always been highly impressed by Swan, and I think he's having his best ever season.

He has short legs and great lower body strength which enable him to burst through contests, stay on his feet, get the ball in his hands and move it forward to dangerous positions. He wins a lot of ball in contests all around the ground.

Dal is a better kick and a more evasive runner. So, on purely aesthetic grounds, Dal is the better player. But each are highly effective and Swan is probably a little bit more difficult for opponents to blot out of the game.

OK, I know, I know I shouldn't write this sort of stuff, I should say "what a joke, Dane Swan isn't fit to tie NDS's shoe leather, bloody Herald-Sun is out to get us, who cares about filthy black and white scumbags, etc."

Sorry about that: I prefer to talk about football seriously.