Hasnt caused others avgs to dip.Darth Vader wrote: ↑Mon 29 Jun 2020 5:05pmI wonder if game time being down 20% has anything to do with his disposals being down 20% ....?SAINT-LEE wrote: ↑Sun 28 Jun 2020 7:18pmI guess Gresham is under more scrutiny because he was a 1st round pick with almost 90 games under his belt and the defense that people have is, " hey he's averaging 20 disposals"....yet the same people smash Ross who has higher disposals and significantly better efficiency. If stats are the support for him playing, its not good - avg disposals 17, for 2020.skeptic wrote: ↑Sun 28 Jun 2020 2:21pmI respectfully disagree.SAINT-LEE wrote: ↑Sun 28 Jun 2020 1:11pmKent or Lonie? Why not Gresham? He's had 1 decent game out of 4. Statistics show Gresham besting Lonie....just. But Lonie is scoring more.
Gresham vs Kent shows Kent beating Gresham in many areas - goals, marks, inside 50'S, tackles, etc.
Gresham is more efficient than both of them but he just seems flat. Not a 1 game situation....Gresham will be close to 100 games at season end and he's still playing B- / C+ ball.
Maybe Gresh needs a refresh or some damn passion out there, fight a bit, scrap for it ....Lonie will never be better but he's more feral and scores.
With Jones out who stays?
Gresham didn’t have a great game yesterday but he’s been north of 20 possessions for the last 2 weeks and IMO his contribution has been a lot better than what he’s been credited with.
I think he’s being marked very harshly by the brush of what people want his performance to be versus what it actually is. My view is that whilst not as tidy... he’s working hard, getting a bit of it and contributing.
On Lonie,
Rd1 - 6 possessions for 0.1
Rd2 - 15 possessions for 1.1
Rd3 - 9 possessions for 0.1
Rd4 - 16 possessions for 2.0
On Kent
Rd1- 14 possessions for 0.2
Rd4 - 10 possessions for 2.0
Now it’s harder to judge Kent on just 2 games but I think those numbers, in my opinion, demonstrate how much less we’re inclined to scrutinise players when we’re winning.
Both have been very mediocre in the games that we’ve lost and simply aren’t contributing enough when/if the teams not dominating. Further to that, we’ve seen from both that they can player better in terms of tackles, pressure and just plain getting hands on the ball
The challenge with both at the moment... the difference in measuring their contributions is heavily reliant on whether or not they hit the scoreboard and make the most of their limited opportunities and that’s really a concern.
Kent’s two games are a reflection of that. He had actually had less ball yesterday then rd1 but made the most of the opportunities hence his game has a positive rub to it.
The reality IMO, harsh as this might be is that whilst his last goal was a ripper, he was extremely lucky to get the first one which was gifted to him after King dropped what he really should have taken.
If we were 0-4... both guys would be under a lot more pressure
Compare there output to a guy like Butler whose gotten 15-16 possessions and 2-3 goals in each of the last 3 games and note the difference. Goals aside , his impact is very noticeable. The guy has presence and seems to make this happen IMO due to his work rate and getting to contests.
In terms of team balance, IMO there is enough room for 2 of Butler, Lonie and Kent... obviously Butler is a lock. For me it’s a flip between the other 2
Almost every stat has dipped by 20-40% lower than 2019.
Either he's being more heavily tagged after teams realise he's a B grade player with 17 disposals and 59% efficiency (Im not using sarcasm, more pure asshole than anything) or his confidence, passion, work rate, or something is affecting him. He's had 85+ games of which 15 were awesome and 23 were average and the rest very average. What he "could be" better hurry up...
If we are doing the Cho in 2020...giving him 3-5 more seasons to prove himself, what makes him more worthy than anyone else waiting?
I like him. I want him to be great...hell, to be the greatest ever but if 85 games hasn't revealed his attitude and game what are you watching? I'd take Lonie 3.3 goals or Kent's 2.2 over Gresham 0.3.
Out: Gresham, Kent
In: Dunstan, Hind
It's hard to really compare him because we dont have other mids at 85-90 games. But if we are dropping Lonie for poor play Gresh has to be considered....He's piss poor compared to last year.
Try comparing him at the same age with Dunstan - similar build, both pick #18. Dunstan absolutely smashes Gresh at the same age....so if Gresh has NEVER statisticallly been as good as Dunstan EVER in his career so far...why are we sh1ting on Dunstan but patting Gresham on the poo poo?
I think its a combo of his confidence, new players, new coach
