satyricon:

I don't recall saying that I wanted to "throw an physically underdeveloped teenager on some of the competitions most dangerous small fowards".

To be honest, I don't particularly know what it is that you thought I was saying/meaning/implying. Could you please explain what you thought I was trying to say? Cheers.

Edited November 17, 201014 yr by Axis of Bob

Oh great, I was thinking sanity had prevail...........let's throw an physically underdeveloped teenager on some of the competitions most dangerous small fowards.....triple sigh......can we at least wait until after the final siren of the first game of the season to at least make some judgements........

Did you miss the words "long term" in the post?

Did you miss the words "long term" in the post?

What I do miss is.........that Bartram had a bloody good consistent season, he got a good review from Josh Manhoney, but they are also looking for improvement, so let him have a good pre season and first crack at the possy coz he has earnt it from last year.......he could probably be there long term....or is he not a premiership player, which I have asked people to define before.....oh I know you mean Jarryd Blair....now there's a recognisable premiership player

I have no problem with you thinking that Bartram should get first crack. I agree that he is currently our best defensive small player and is should be played there next season.

I agreed with old55 and Rhino that a real A grader (like Alan Johnson or Corey Enright) as a small defender could be a real positive in the make up of our side. Bartram is not an A grader (and is unlikely to further develop into one) because he isn't damaging enough with the footy. So I said that I would be prepared to draft one at 12 that could become an A grade small defender.

It has nothing to do with being a premiership player. I was looking to draft an A grade small defender. I have no intention of replacing Bartram with a draftee at the start of next year as Bartram did a really good, honest job this year. Hopefully we draft someone who, later on, develops to surpass Bartram.

I agree with what you say, but I'm not sure you quite understand my position still.

I'd be happy to have an A grade mid down back because it's such an important role. Possibly moreso now. Just look at how Geelong used to set up down back with Enright (among others). I don't think Bartram is the long term answer and I'd be prepared to draft for that role at 12. More than prepared.

In addition when Josh Hunt was out in 2009 they played James Kelly down back. IMO they lost plenty when Hunt, who I do not rate defensively at all, came back and Kelly went back to the midfield.

I think Bartram's stats are pretty good because he's a smart and disciplined payer who generally plays within his limitations. But we are limited by those limitations - his ROI is good but it's low I so low R - 70+% of SFA.

I agree. Kelly did really well because he was disciplined, but once the ball was there to be won he basically played as a midfielder and won the ball. Hunt played more of a straight line game which was limiting. Bartram defends well because he's always been a midfielder, so he plays well in 360 degrees rather than just straight line.

The thing about the dangerous forwards, too, is that they are generally so worried about being dangerous that they can be easily run off. When your opponent isn't dangerous (a la Bartram or Steven Baker) then you only have to worry about attacking. But if your opponent is Corey Enright (or Heath Shaw, or Luke Hodge) then you have to play defensively too.

Bartram does well in that he doesn't make many mistakes. He realises he's not much of a kick, so he limits his mistakes by taking safe options. Problem is that it slows the game down and we're a better team when we rebound quickly, requiring us to take risks coming from defence.

Really.

If you disagree, who do you think would be worse than Bartram?

I don't consider Newton as he's on the rookie list.

Agree with e25. Reality is there is no-one worse at the moment. However, he does provide strengths in other areas.

I agree. Kelly did really well because he was disciplined, but once the ball was there to be won he basically played as a midfielder and won the ball. Hunt played more of a straight line game which was limiting. Bartram defends well because he's always been a midfielder, so he plays well in 360 degrees rather than just straight line.

The thing about the dangerous forwards, too, is that they are generally so worried about being dangerous that they can be easily run off. When your opponent isn't dangerous (a la Bartram or Steven Baker) then you only have to worry about attacking. But if your opponent is Corey Enright (or Heath Shaw, or Luke Hodge) then you have to play defensively too.

Bartram does well in that he doesn't make many mistakes. He realises he's not much of a kick, so he limits his mistakes by taking safe options. Problem is that it slows the game down and we're a better team when we rebound quickly, requiring us to take risks coming from defence.

Yeah I agree. We're competent enough coming out, but not competent enough to be a top side, yet. You're right to rebound quickly you cannot have short safe options - well you can have them, but it limits your attack in taking risks. So in this aspect there is room for improvement by addressing it, hopefully at the draft. And if you're talking a 'A' grader, you're looking at pick 12.

To clarify my view in case some think its an assasination I like Barty. I like his application and that he can dig dwon and do the hard stuff. That he was a bit off the mark then reapplied himself shows great character and determination. But he lacks in certain areas and these areas are the ones that might hurt him 'long term' . A great defensive and close in game is marred by little in terms of a rebounding ability. So much starts these days off of the half back line that his 'dosposal' can hurt us. It turns what ought to be the start of an attack into a 50/50 'no-ones-too-sure' scenario.

There are players now and for sure to come who have better offensive skills and if they can add a good negating defensive arrow to their quiver then they will usurp ol' Barty without doubt. The question then becomes will Bartram adapt and grow his decisions/disposal ability to add to hius already good defensive game QUICKER than some other adapt a defensive ability to a good attacking game ?

The short answer is we just dont know. I think Bail ( like others ) has the real potential to devvelop such a role. In his hands something happens and one tends to feel confident about it. he has that dash , that entrpeneurial confidence with the pill. Then there are the up and coming tide of mids who might well apprentice their roles in the back arc.

Bartram is good but thats not where we need to set the bar if we are to be serious flag contenders. Thats the tent of all this. Not that he isnt any good but that as a team we need to be better !!

Disposal efficiency/inefficiency tells you virtually nothing.

A disposal can be efficient despite it selling a team-mate down the river. For example, Bruce streams out of defence, then stops, handpasses to someone flatfooted, who is tackled and possession is lost. That handpass was still 'efficient'

It also says nothing about the decision that was made. Was it the right call or not?

exactly.

disposal efficiency and clanger count are the most useless stats

Very simple:

The ruckmen with their suspect disposal often take the safe option and handball off to Davey.

Bartram does not do this.

He uses his suspect disposal and often picks the wrong option.

Therefore... I'd rather the ball not be in his hands more than anyone else.

Sometimes Bartram makes a dinky little handball to a teammate 3m away under more pressure than he is.

This is the wrong option, but still deemed an effective disposal.

Edited November 17, 201014 yr by E25

As the great George Costanza says, "It's not a lie if you believe it".

For the rest of us, it's still pure hyperbole.

Sit down and watch him closely some time.

Unfortunately it's not all hyperbole.

Sit down and watch him closely some time.

Unfortunately it's not all hyperbole.

I agree generally with E25 in this thread (though I don't agree he's the worst user of the footy on our entire list, that's a bit of hyperbole).

Bartram often lets himself down in skill execution, decision making and creativity. HOWEVER, he improved vastly this season for one reason only. There appears to have been a very clear message from the coaches instructing Bartram to take the sensible first option. Bartram used to try to hit targets that he simply wasn't capable of hitting. This year he generally took the sensible option, immediately passing it on to a player in a better position than him.

Bartram now plays within his limits and it has seen him improve as a player. He has accepted his limitations and embraced his strengths. Bartram's role should never be to thread a beautiful 40m pass through the corridor, pinpointing a leading player who is between 3 opposition players. That can be left to Davey, Sylvia and Trengove.

I have a lot of time for Bartram. He has some outstanding attributes, including work ethic, strength, speed, endurance and tackling. As long as he plays within his limitations, i will keep a spot in my best 21 for him.

Well put, sylvinator.

I have a lot of time for Bartram. He has some outstanding attributes, including work ethic, strength, speed, endurance and tackling. As long as he plays within his limitations, i will keep a spot in my best 21 for him.

That's all well and good but if any, some or all of Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Pick 12 2010, maybe even Maric and Strauss come along then people are going to lose their spots. Chances are Bartram will be one of them and the reasons for that will be his decision making under pressure and his disposal. The second sentences is spot on, the third just won't hold up under pressure.

Edited November 17, 201014 yr by Roost It