Bye Bye Bate?

[e25 5]

Have you ever considered ... "if Bate goes, Miller wont get a reprieve."

Then GWS have a massive go at Watts ... How would our "structure" look then? Now I'm not saying it would happen.

Remember we can never "out-bid" the GC & GWS it all comes down to loyalty, just like Geelong cant "out-bid" the GC on Ablett.

Not sure what you're getting at here...

Have I ever considered our club would be screwed if GC17 or GWS18 took one of our best players?

No, it's not something I spend a lot of time worrying about, although it is obvious.

[Inner Demon 1]

It interests me that a lot of people don't tend to look at list management in terms of a list of 38 players. If players aren't in someone's Top 25 they seem to dismiss them as extraneous and unnecessary.

Depth is absoultely crucial to a list. Injuries & suspensions happen in this game. It's just as important to have better depth players on the list than other teams as it is to have better 1st choice players on the list.

For all the knocks on players like Bate & Miller, they have more runs on the board playing AFL than a lot of other depth players in their position across the league. This makes them valuable, not in terms of trade compensation, but in terms of team stability, and importantly, competition for spots.

[jayceebee31 671]

I'd take Bate in a second over Miller. Bate's a good player. Out of form sure, but say what you like about him, the kid can play, and would stroll comfortably onto any list in the AFL for the right price... no matter what the sookie know it alls on here think.

If we got anything lower than 25, it'd be a loss. And considering they were only going to offer a couple of picks in that range for Ablett, you'd have to assume we'd cop a loss here.

But whatever. Worry about it when it's official.

agree

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Disagree. Bate does not play tall - it's hard for me to believe he's over 190cm. Besides, we'd still have Dunn at 192, Jurrah at 190+ (is he still growing) and Petterd takes a good grab.

Playing tall... I would argue that the player that "plays tall" the most out of those is Petterd. Dunn still struggles overhead and gets most of his ball up the ground. Jurrah takes a lovely mark, but body-on-body seems to juggle them pretty much every time. Bate we know about. Petterd takes some great contested marks out of position, in packs... Jurrah crumbs where a FF would bust a pack. I don't think "playing tall" is that big of a deal anymore. The Pies seem to be smashing it, and their talls aren't that great. Cloke plays up the ground, Leigh Brown is... well... Leigh Brown. Dawes is the only FF type there. If Bate takes the ball outside fifty more often, then shows the capability to kick them from outside 50 pretty regularly... Who cares how tall he plays?

Ideally we'd like Bate as he is + the skill to go deep and sail over packs, take big marks, and kick bags. If Bate was this player though, he'd be the only one of his kind in the side. As it stands it's only a dip in form, coupled with increased competition for that HF spot that's taken him out of the side.

Running with the 'dozens' assertion, Bate has played 24-36 good games out of 82 @ 16 disposals and 1 goal. He has 61 games with 1 goal or less, 74 with 2 goals or less. Looking at your own take on Bate, a <66% percent chance on 'good' game isn't a great endorsement. Saying all that, I hope he keeps working hard and gives himself every opportunity to succeed.

Classic case of rigging stats to suit your point.

- Bate has played 24-36 good games out of 82 @ 16 disposals and 1 goal.

He's a KP forward who's under 25. There's nothing wrong with averaging 16+ touches as a forward. Averaging a goal a game gets you 22 goals a year. Nothing to scoff at.

- He has 61 games with 1 goal or less, 74 with 2 goals or less.

Since when is he required to kick 4 goals in EVERY game. His last 4 rounds of last year he averaged 25 touches, and only kicked 4 goals in that period.

- Looking at your own take on Bate, a <66% percent chance on 'good' game isn't a great endorsement.

So what you're saying is he has to kick X amount of goals for it to be a "good" game? Many of those games he kicked no goals in, he would have played well. I remember early on, he actually played some time in the midfield.

Also, who else played better during this time? We've been incredibly bad during the last 3 years (the majority of these games), and I reckon if a forward can get anywhere near a bag in this time, they're doing ok.

Some other stats for you:

Dunn has played 15 less games than Bate, and has averaged about 3 less disposals, less goals, less marks, and no Brownlow votes.

In his career, Bate has kick 3 goals 5 times, and 4 goals 3 times. Dunn has kicked 3 three times, and 5 once.

It would take me a fair amount of time to go through the possessions stats, but I'd suggest Bate has cracked 20 touches many more times than Dunn. I'd also love to see assists.

My point being, stats can be useful at times. But if you're going to just gloss over them and quote goals kicked, without a comparison to another player, without any mention of how the midfield was going during that time, without mentioning whether or not he was competing with other forwards, or was playing up the ground... then they're just useless.

We watched Fevola and possibly even Riewoldt this year win Colemans in bottom placed sides. Why is this? Because these sides have no-one else to go to. Bate has played only small amounts of times inside forward fifty, and when there he's competed with Miller, Robertson, Green at times, Jamar, Neitz very early on.

I agree that he's been inconsistent. His form seems to peak and trough, but then so does most players. So did Green's for the longest time. For a KP player who's only just turned 23, surely you're not expecting him to average 50 goals a year, 25+ touches and look like Nick Riewoldt?

As far as I'm concerned, if he's been good at all (despite the patchiness) it's absolutely worth persisting with him. I'm not kidding when I say many outside the club rate him highly.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Dappa,

It's just a case of opinion for the player. You rate him higher than I do and stats can work with him and against him.

You seem to think that all my posts are negative. I have written many about players who excite me and I am extremely

happy with the way thing's are going at the dees.

You and a few other's seem to think I am a bit harsh on a couple of players because your opinion differs to that of mine.

I have shared what I believe about Bate and there are plenty that don't rate him as highly as you. Just as there are plenty who

rate him as highly as you !

The fact is that he is currently playing VFL football and is not in our current best 22. I am not saying that won't change but it

is worrying for him.

Let's see what happens Dappa. Him along with Morton who I am constantly told will become a 'superstar'.

[Trisul 640]

"So what you're saying is "

No, I said what I said. I'd debate each of your lines but really can't see the point.

You're imagining arguments that aren't there as well as missing points entirely - all in too many words.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

"So what you're saying is "

No, I said what I said. I'd debate each of your lines but really can't see the point.

You're imagining arguments that aren't there as well as missing points entirely - all in too many words.

I was more than content writing that amount of words.

Yes I can't see the point debating each of his lines because a ) It will just ignite further debate and b ) I really can't be bothered/don't have time.

He can rate him as highly as he likes. I don't see him as part of our future, unless he adds another dimension to his game.

Edited August 13, 2010 by stevethemanjordan

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Yeah. That might have seemed a bit harsh. Apologies. I meant it in a good natured, fun way.

And yeah, Bate's not in the side, and is out of form... I never argued this. In fact, I agreed completely. What I object to though, is how after he's dropped and Dunn has found form, people jump on his back and say he's played less than ten good games, or is on the way to GC, or has been taken over by Dunn... These things are patently untrue (Except maybe the Dunn one... and even then, it'll only take a handful of poor games for it to be reversed again). It's in these cases that we're not talking "opinions," like you and I so often do. If it's just opinions, I wouldn't waste my time... everybody has one. We're talking about giving the kid credit for what he's done so far... which many people just aren't doing. In that respect, I reckon I'm within my rights coming on and challenging their positions, wouldn't you say?

It's probably no different from me saying in Cale's half-a-dozen good/great games, he's shown the skillset required to go a long, long way as a player. You can look at that and say that while he has high stats, he doesn't do that much with them... and that in the past he's not shown enough. The argument is over what HAS happened, even though the end result is just the usual crystal-ball gazing...

Oh... And the misuse of stats really grinds my gears. That's just a rule.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

"So what you're saying is "

No, I said what I said. I'd debate each of your lines but really can't see the point.

You're imagining arguments that aren't there as well as missing points entirely - all in too many words.

Imagining arguments?

You've lost me there, chief.

And if you can't "see the point" in debating the lines, then your original point mustn't have been worth making in the first place. Which begs the question, why waste everyone's time?

Next time you feel like responding to one of my posts, have the balls to engage in discussion instead of taking the easy route and making a pissweak snipe.

[old55 21,404]

That's just plainly not true.

I heard that interview, and the 7 players were: Gablett, Habrow, Campbell Brown, Armitage, Brennan, Grigg and Nathan Krakour

FMD, that's a motley crue - if true they will get smashed week-in-week out in the first 2 years.

[Guest hangon007]

It interests me that a lot of people don't tend to look at list management in terms of a list of 38 players. If players aren't in someone's Top 25 they seem to dismiss them as extraneous and unnecessary.

Depth is absoultely crucial to a list. Injuries & suspensions happen in this game. It's just as important to have better depth players on the list than other teams as it is to have better 1st choice players on the list.

For all the knocks on players like Bate & Miller, they have more runs on the board playing AFL than a lot of other depth players in their position across the league. This makes them valuable, not in terms of trade compensation, but in terms of team stability, and importantly, competition for spots.

Really nice reply but I suspect plenty around here wouldn't "worry" about that either.

Edited August 13, 2010 by hangon007

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Really nice reply but I suspect plenty around here wouldn't "worry" about that either.

[old55 21,404]

It interests me that a lot of people don't tend to look at list management in terms of a list of 38 players. If players aren't in someone's Top 25 they seem to dismiss them as extraneous and unnecessary.

Depth is absoultely crucial to a list. Injuries & suspensions happen in this game. It's just as important to have better depth players on the list than other teams as it is to have better 1st choice players on the list.

For all the knocks on players like Bate & Miller, they have more runs on the board playing AFL than a lot of other depth players in their position across the league. This makes them valuable, not in terms of trade compensation, but in terms of team stability, and importantly, competition for spots.

I think you're on the right track with your take on the topic. But what's the depth for? Quite frankly for all Miller's endeavour he's never going to be a premiership player and if he had to come into our GF side as depth I'll be looking away. In the development years up to then I think it's more productive to improvise some variation in forward structure with a mix of better quality players than persist with known inadequacy. I note that this may seemingly contradict my previous case for retaining PJ on the list as depth for Jamar - but if you've got no ruckman it really does destroy structure - forward structure is more maleable. But to take the good essence of your argument and run with it I'd be inclined to think that if Bate left it may improve the chances of say Newton or Hughes being retained - with Miller WYSIWYG, the jury is ever so slightly out on Newton and if Hughes could get fit ...

Edited August 13, 2010 by old55

[Deetective Sgt. Taggert 380]

I'll take Garry Lyon's opinionon Bate over most of the near-sighted views on this post. Bate came into the season injured so his preparation was not good and it took him a few games to get going this year then he had some more minor injuries affecting his performance so its not surprising he is on the sidelines at present especially with the team going well and other players stepping up. Either as a starting forward or as a depth player at this stage I would consider him to very much be a required player on out list and we don't exactly have too many forward options on our list - Before Dunn started playing well how many of you would have considered Bate disposable?

I would consider it a bad loss to lose him to another Club at least for the foreseeable future (i.e. at least the next 2 seasons while the younger player develop or we recruit)

[gOLLy 401]

Will Bate play in our next flag???? I think not! nuff said.

[agent_orange 0]

This is turning into the great dee-bate

[Redleg 37,891]

I would consider it a bad loss to lose him to another Club at least for the foreseeable future (i.e. at least the next 2 seasons while the younger player develop or we recruit)

Agree!

[Al`s DEMONS 0]

Edited for accuracy. Hope that explains it.

cheers

[Inner Demon 1]

I think you're on the right track with your take on the topic. But what's the depth for? Quite frankly for all Miller's endeavour he's never going to be a premiership player and if he had to come into our GF side as depth I'll be looking away. In the development years up to then I think it's more productive to improvise some variation in forward structure with a mix of better quality players than persist with known inadequacy. I note that this may seemingly contradict my previous case for retaining PJ on the list as depth for Jamar - but if you've got no ruckman it really does destroy structure - forward structure is more maleable. But to take the good essence of your argument and run with it I'd be inclined to think that if Bate left it may improve the chances of say Newton or Hughes being retained - with Miller WYSIWYG, the jury is ever so slightly out on Newton and if Hughes could get fit ...

Far worse players than Bate or Miller have premiership medallions. When you consider that poor players like Hawkins, Lonergan & Nathan Ablett are Premiership players but neither of Nick Riewoldt or Matthew Pavlich are it should give you some perspective.

[Trisul 640]

Imagining arguments?

You've lost me there, chief.

And if you can't "see the point" in debating the lines, then your original point mustn't have been worth making in the first place. Which begs the question, why waste everyone's time?

Next time you feel like responding to one of my posts, have the balls to engage in discussion instead of taking the easy route and making a pissweak snipe.

So you really didn't understand that when I quoted your "So what you're saying is ", I was referencing your imagined argument?

How about "Since when is he required to kick 4 goals in EVERY game"? Or perhaps "who else played better during this time?"?

I made a couple of simple observations about Bate that, off the bat, you saw fit to distort / ignore / imagine to suit your agenda.

That is the reason why there is little point engaging with you (determined btw after the post) - there's more imagining than discussion.

"What is it with demonlanders?" Clearly we're all pissweak snipers that rig stats.

Btw I'll respond to posts how I see fit, thanks. Anything further here though will be PMs.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

I'll take Garry Lyon's opinionon Bate over most of the near-sighted views on this post. Bate came into the season injured so his preparation was not good and it took him a few games to get going this year then he had some more minor injuries affecting his performance so its not surprising he is on the sidelines at present especially with the team going well and other players stepping up. Either as a starting forward or as a depth player at this stage I would consider him to very much be a required player on out list and we don't exactly have too many forward options on our list - Before Dunn started playing well how many of you would have considered Bate disposable?

I would consider it a bad loss to lose him to another Club at least for the foreseeable future (i.e. at least the next 2 seasons while the younger player develop or we recruit)

Ahh man the old "Gary Lyon" opinion on Bate. You just do that sir.

Gary wouldn't be the only "expert" to be wrong about a player.

[Deetective Sgt. Taggert 380]

Ahh man the old "Gary Lyon" opinion on Bate. You just do that sir.

Gary wouldn't be the only "expert" to be wrong about a player.

Yeah of course, I don't Lyon's opinion as gospel thats for sure. I was justing trying to make the point that Bate is being underrated I believe by a number of poeple on this post and that earlier in the year they probably would have thought differently about his role/future in the side. I'm sure the club takes a much longer term view and takes more than just form over the last few months into account when making list management decisions.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Ascobar

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

So you really didn't understand that when I quoted your "So what you're saying is ", I was referencing your imagined argument?

How about "Since when is he required to kick 4 goals in EVERY game"? Or perhaps "who else played better during this time?"?

T, let me simplify it for you.

Your overall point - "Looking at your own take on Bate, a <66% percent chance on 'good' game isn't a great endorsement."

This was a position you came to quoting ONLY stats on goals kicked. To which I replied, with a good deal of statistical analysis, that goals kicked doesn't paint the whole picture. Certainly not with a player who plays Bate's role.

What could be simpler? What am I "imagining" as you put it? It's perfectly straightforward. But hey, if you don't think your points hold up to being proven wrong on the boards, by all means... concede.

I made a couple of simple observations about Bate that, off the bat, you saw fit to distort / ignore / imagine to suit your agenda.

Again. What have I distorted? I read them. I understood them. I realised they're a simplified/surface analysis of a player. Again, straightforward.

"What is it with demonlanders?" Clearly we're all pissweak snipers that rig stats.

No. Not all. There's a handful that know about their footy, and importantly know when are where stats are useful. More importantly when stats can paint the wrong picture. Like your "<66% good games" garbage. There are those that are WILLING to discuss the ins and outs, on a more detailed and profound level. But you're not doing that are you? You'll take your position, be proven wrong, but you won't accept that. You'll claim you "couldn't be bothered" then come up with some tripe about post length. To which I reply, again, why bother in the first place?

Btw I'll respond to posts how I see fit, thanks.

More power to you. And I'll label trolls who are only willing to throw out generalised trash-statswithout following them up, as such... thanks. You may or may not be one, but given your contributions to this discussion so far, what other position am I to take?

Anything further here though will be PMs.

By all means. I look forward to it.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Ahh man the old "Gary Lyon" opinion on Bate. You just do that sir.

Gary wouldn't be the only "expert" to be wrong about a player.

Oooh. Is that a crack at Gary? Not a popular guy in these parts at times, is he?

I would suggest that Gary isn't the only one who rates Bate in the media. He's probably one of only a few to write an article, though. And certainly probably over-did it when he said he's in the 50 most important players in the league.

Having said that, how many journalists/coaches/players/punters does it take until you ARE convinced a player is better than you have suggested? Obviously, you trust your own eyes first, but still... I realise Gary's words have to be taken with a grain of salt, but his point has STILL been made. You can't just gloss over it completely Steve... People are talking here (as they are wont to do) as though Bate's at the crossroads, or that he was NEVER any good. You're one of few to have given him some credit where it's due...

[daisycutter 28,635]

I'll keep it brief

I like Matty Bate, he's been one my favourites

His development at this stage is below my expectations

I rate him but not as high as Dappa Dan

He has obvious strengths and weaknesses. He needs to minimise his weaknesses and be more consistent with his strengths

He is only 23 and has a good upside

He is worth keeping for depth reasons and his potential to take the next step

I expect he will be around at least the next two years

I'd be disappointed if he went to GC but we could live with it