Jump to content



  • Melbourne Recruitment Manager
    Jason Taylor Interview
    & Draft Wrap Up


    Melbourne Recruitment Manager Jason Taylor Interview & Draft Wrap Up
     
Cranky Franky

Dom Tyson - Yes or No ?

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Abe said:

Yep trade for me, I think he has some currency and his skills/decision making look like preventing him becoming the player he might be otherwise 

the most unemotionally accurate description I have seen of him thus far...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Garbo said:

What midfielder do you think we could get for a mid 2nd round pick who has at least 4-5 year left and who would exceed Tyson.

I would argue that if you could get such a midfielder then we're better of using our own 2nd round pick and getting them and keeping Tyson, bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.

I'd back the footy dept to work that out. Their track record is pretty good.

Tyson's value to us plummets if he keeps turing it over. It's like having James Magner. Couldn't run both ways, was not damaging and was 'uncoachable'. Or Shane Valenti. Number of possessions is not the be all and end all. Its what you do with them and how you defend. And how long you can do it for.

We know exactly what Tyson's upside is and we won't improve as a side with him in it. On the weekend all 6 frst quarter collingwood goals came from turnovers. It wouldn't have mattered if tyson had 25 possessions in the first quarter. Tyson turned it over twice in the first 3 mins.

Your strategy of bird in the hand is totally flawed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought when he came over he was great, but then we had players that were so woeful he may have looked the standout.

I still think he's (a bit more than) serviceable and can't see a trade for a pick being worthwhile if it just gives us another young un' who needs to develop when, given what happened this year and the expectations that we all will have for next year. We will need mature bodies.

IF it can be some complex trade that gives us a mature body that is even a slight upgrade, yeah for sure. But that's probably a yes from everybody.

So I'm not a yes or a no, I'm;

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We lack pace overall as a team which means decision making and skill execution become really important.

If we quicken up the squad Dom would fit in fine, i guess the issue is to quicken up the squad you need to trade something of value out. 

Not sure Dom is the problem, but like many others he could form part of the solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Adzman said:

We lack pace overall as a team which means decision making and skill execution become really important.

If we quicken up the squad Dom would fit in fine, i guess the issue is to quicken up the squad you need to trade something of value out. 

Not sure Dom is the problem, but like many others he could form part of the solution.

This post really doesn't make a lot of sense.

If we lack pace as a side, then the question to ask would be; which players through our midfield are most expendable?

As a pure inside mid, Dom sits way down the pecking order which is part of the reason why he has been playing on the wing in more of an outside role. He was brought to our club as a pure ball winner and that's where he was most effective and had his best year. That's his game. Winning inside ball. But like all sides, once your talent level and list quality grows and you bring in players with greater attribute diversity, then your lesser types and one trick ponies like Dom will be found out. 

Viney, Oliver, Jones, Lewis, Petracca, Brayshaw. All of them trump Tyson in most areas of the game. 

Dom Tyson playing on a wing at AFL level is nothing short of ludicrous. He is slow and lacks pace so he has a shocking ability to run two-ways. His footskills and decision making are bog ordinary. These facts are undeniable.

Whether or not we keep or trade him is not really something that bothers me too much. What bothers me is that he is playing in a position and role that is simply not cut for the type of player he is and he was just so incredibly ineffective in many games this year. He needs to either play a second-fiddle pure inside mid role if a Viney or Oliver get injured or he doesn't have a place in the side.

As for the 'ability to win possessions' call that is made by his constant defenders. I have three points for you:

1 - Being the AFL's number one side for disposals means you're going to see a higher average in individual numbers also.

2 - Given his outside role this year, his uncontested numbers were generally always more than his contested. Which means he was given the ball. Or picked it up with nobody around. This is not under 10's. That is not worthy of praise.

3 - The most important thing in all of this 'possession' talk ESPECIALLY as an outside type is what you do with the ball. The value of your possessions. The quality of the disposal. And by golly goodness, not only does he not damage the opposition. He damages his own side by turning it over. 

Dom is without any doubt whatsoever a problem when playing wing for the MFC. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree not a wingman. He is an inside/outside midfielder but not a pacy running wingman.  Build up Hunt or Stretch or draft in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a definite keeper for mine.  Regularly amongst our bests in the first halves of games when the heat is on and often in the bests when we lose.  Doesn't go missing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's seemed to have struggled with injuries the last two years.

2016 I think he played a large portion of the season under an injury cloud from my understanding and in 2017 he had an interrupted pre-season and an injury mid-season.

I hope we back him in as I think he is talented enough and has shown that at his best he is very good.

And I'm not just saying that because he is my username and avatar.

Also, he is still only 24 so still has a couple more years before he reaches his peak, think 27-30 yo.

Edited by Is Dom Is Good
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Is Dom Is Good said:

He's seemed to have struggled with injuries the last two years.

2016 I think he played a large portion of the season under an injury cloud from my understanding and in 2017 he had an interrupted pre-season and an injury mid-season.

I hope we back him in as I think he is talented enough and has shown that at his best he is very good.

And I'm not just saying that because he is my username and avatar.

Also, he is still only 24 so still has a couple more years before he reaches his peak, think 27-30 yo.

I think every year of his career he's had an injury with the exception of 2014 (his best season btw). Broke or fractured his leg at GWS I believe..??

At the Dees, he's either had a good preseason followed by an injury he's carried (2015,2016) or he's been injured preseason and missed final training blocks (2017).

It's not necessarily an excuse for a lot of his issues, but it certainly doesn't help.  The common denominator in any player being interviewed about their best year is 'I had a full preseason'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/08/2017 at 10:25 AM, nutbean said:

I am always for improvement.

Right here and now - who would you replace Tyson with that is on our list.

At this stage no-one. So it is like anything - if we can trade to advantage then fine. But at this moment Tyson is not keeping anyone out of the team.

I absolutely hope we can get better midfielders as this Saturday showed exactly where we fell down. We could not hit a target to save ourselves. One of the keys to winning any game is footskills and we are lacking. Tyson unfortunately sits in the "iffy disposal" category which is a shame as he doesn't have a problem getting the ball.

But he didn't play in the midfield! He was on the bloody wing. I've never seen him there before. Once he went into the middle we started to do better. With Viney out it was vital that he was getting first hand on the ball--instead we had Hannan, Melksham and Salem.  In my view he is much under rated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/08/2017 at 7:07 PM, jnrmac said:

I'd back the footy dept to work that out. Their track record is pretty good.

Tyson's value to us plummets if he keeps turing it over. It's like having James Magner. Couldn't run both ways, was not damaging and was 'uncoachable'. Or Shane Valenti. Number of possessions is not the be all and end all. Its what you do with them and how you defend. And how long you can do it for.

We know exactly what Tyson's upside is and we won't improve as a side with him in it. On the weekend all 6 frst quarter collingwood goals came from turnovers. It wouldn't have mattered if tyson had 25 possessions in the first quarter. Tyson turned it over twice in the first 3 mins.

Your strategy of bird in the hand is totally flawed. 

In the first quarter he was on the wing, and we were killed in the middle. Would u rather have Hannan, or Salem, or Melksham in the middle  if opponents are getting it out with ease. With Viney out Tyson had to be right in the middle . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/08/2017 at 2:57 PM, jnrmac said:

No tank, can't hit targets. You think he's a work horse? Not fit for purpose.

 

On 31/08/2017 at 5:45 PM, Abe said:

Yep trade for me, I think he has some currency and his skills/decision making look like preventing him becoming the player he might be otherwise 

 

On 31/08/2017 at 5:45 PM, Abe said:

Yep trade for me, I think he has some currency and his skills/decision making look like preventing him becoming the player he might be otherwise 

For heavens' sake, give him a preseason before u decide he has no tank. The first quarter is just as important. Many times he has dominated our possessions in the first half

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Farmer said:

 

 

For heavens' sake, give him a preseason before u decide he has no tank. The first quarter is just as important. Many times he has dominated our possessions in the first half

It's no good having 12 touches in the first quarter if 6 are turnovers. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of Tyson's flaws is his inability to kick well on his non-dominant foot. He would be a much better player if he could.  He is certainly not alone however.  It is a blight on the junior coaches of today that they don't enforce that most fundamental of skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tysons biggest flaw is he continually makes the same mistakes over again.There hasnt been any improvement in the 3 seasons he has been with  us.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Farmer said:

In the first quarter he was on the wing, and we were killed in the middle. Would u rather have Hannan, or Salem, or Melksham in the middle  if opponents are getting it out with ease. With Viney out Tyson had to be right in the middle . 

I don't think we had those three in the middle in the first quarter. Is that what you are saying?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Farmer said:

In the first quarter he was on the wing, and we were killed in the middle. Would u rather have Hannan, or Salem, or Melksham in the middle  if opponents are getting it out with ease. With Viney out Tyson had to be right in the middle . 

Haha.

I honestly don't know what you were watching, because it can't have been the game.

They didn't get on top in the middle until late in the first quarter thanks to the momentum they had built through kicking goals early due to our errors, lack of two-way running and therefore our accountability.

There was nothing wrong with our work in the middle for the majority of the first quarter. We broke even. The difference was our awful decision making and inability to hit the right kicks.

Tyson was an enormous liability in that first quarter. Have a look at his first handful of disposals. They were mostly shocking. Phillips (direct opponent) kicked the first goal of the game against Dom and he was caught out because of his lack of pace many times on the wing in the first quarter.

Edited by stevethemanjordan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Abe said:

It's no good having 12 touches in the first quarter if 6 are turnovers. 

His disposal by foot is iffy at best - but I have told you a million times before not to exaggerate.

He turns it over too much but he does not go at 50% and I would suggest that even if 5 kicks a game miss a target and really hurt us, if he averages close on 30 kicks then 15% are hurting us.

Having said that - Hawthorns success was pretty simple  - have players who can find the ball and can dispose it. We now have plenty who can find the ball. We need more that kick well and when we get those players they will go past Tyson in the pecking order.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, nutbean said:

 

He turns it over too much but he does not go at 50% and I would suggest that even if 5 kicks a game miss a target and really hurt us, if he averages close on 30 kicks then 15% are hurting us.

 

Ummm. What? I'm so confused by this post.

For his last two games, Dom went at something like 57% disposal efficiency. Most of his possessions are uncontested and with a mix of kicks and handballs. Anything below 60% for his numbers and split between kicks and handballs is truly awful. Truly, awful.

Suggesting that 5 turnovers from 30 kicks wouldn't be a big deal is completely ridiculous because he has not and will not average anything like that in his career let alone reach it once.. What a strange example.

 

Edited by stevethemanjordan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me he stays. I swear in his first year I thought he had so much better disposal efficiency. Sometimes I honestly wonder whether we do eventually Melbourne-ify players we trade in!

But seriously his contested ball winning is still important to the club. I think we need to look at trading in a player more outside run and class, which will compliment his play. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/09/2017 at 9:47 AM, stevethemanjordan said:

If we lack pace as a side, then the question to ask would be; which players through our midfield are most expendable?

As a pure inside mid, Dom sits way down the pecking order which is part of the reason why he has been playing on the wing in more of an outside role. He was brought to our club as a pure ball winner and that's where he was most effective and had his best year. That's his game. Winning inside ball. But like all sides, once your talent level and list quality grows and you bring in players with greater attribute diversity, then your lesser types and one trick ponies like Dom will be found out. 

Viney, Oliver, Jones, Lewis, Petracca, Brayshaw. All of them trump Tyson in most areas of the game. 

Dom Tyson playing on a wing at AFL level is nothing short of ludicrous. He is slow and lacks pace so he has a shocking ability to run two-ways. His footskills and decision making are bog ordinary. These facts are undeniable.

Whether or not we keep or trade him is not really something that bothers me too much. What bothers me is that he is playing in a position and role that is simply not cut for the type of player he is and he was just so incredibly ineffective in many games this year. He needs to either play a second-fiddle pure inside mid role if a Viney or Oliver get injured or he doesn't have a place in the side.

As for the 'ability to win possessions' call that is made by his constant defenders. I have three points for you:

1 - Being the AFL's number one side for disposals means you're going to see a higher average in individual numbers also.

2 - Given his outside role this year, his uncontested numbers were generally always more than his contested. Which means he was given the ball. Or picked it up with nobody around. This is not under 10's. That is not worthy of praise.

3 - The most important thing in all of this 'possession' talk ESPECIALLY as an outside type is what you do with the ball. The value of your possessions. The quality of the disposal. And by golly goodness, not only does he not damage the opposition. He damages his own side by turning it over. 

Dom is without any doubt whatsoever a problem when playing wing for the MFC. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Tried to edit an old post and that happened.

Demonland is broken. 

No delete option and no ability to edit an old post, as bad as Oscar if you ask me...

Jks, relax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Dom's biggest issue in the last two seasons has been fitness. I think he plays injured often which doesn't help his development.

I agree with others that we've probably seen Tysons ceiling in terms of his best football and what he can bring. I think he gets another season to see if he can improve his consistancy and as others have said if we can get more outside run in our midfield then I think Tyson's role as a release player will be really effective. Clayton with the short handball to tyson for the longer handball or kick to runners etc.. 

I don't know what we would get for him as I don't think other clubs would rate him too highly. Would like to see guys like Trac and Brayshaw really work hard to take Dom's spot in the side eventually. 

Edited by mongrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×