Just now, Radar Detector said:

I'm not sure 700k is quite as far "overs" as everyone else is suggesting. He makes some mistakes, sure, but he's in the best handful of young KPDs in the comp.

hence my wondering about the context of the new cba.

The way he's playing at the moment, the longer he doesn't sign, means the more his contract value should drop.

Just now, Demon Disciple said:

The way he's playing at the moment, the longer he doesn't sign, means the more his contract value should drop.

I had pondered that he's not taking the 'clever' road to player negotiations 

49 minutes ago, Radar Detector said:

I'm not sure 700k is quite as far "overs" as everyone else is suggesting. He makes some mistakes, sure, but he's in the best handful of young KPDs in the comp.

Tom's a pretty big guy and is obviously as fit as anyone on the list, but his core strength seems to be poor.  I've seen him lose position, get pushed out of the way and fall over in the contest, too many times for it to be just bad luck and its not always by gorilla forwards, he gets out bodied by much smaller players

If Tom wants the big bucks he needs to play like a big defender not some medium back who gets caught out against the bigger forwards.

 

3 minutes ago, Dante said:

Tom's a pretty big guy and is obviously as fit as anyone on the list, but his core strength seems to be poor.  I've seen him lose position, get pushed out of the way and fall over in the contest, too many times for it to be just bad luck and its not always by gorilla forwards, he gets out bodied by much smaller players

If Tom wants the big bucks he needs to play like a big defender not some medium back who gets caught out against the bigger forwards.

 

He'll NEVER be 'THAT" big defender.. he's really cut out to be the 2nd def.. Hes ok ( without brilliance ) at this . Needs a real General down there to sort things out and give direction etc.  This is NOT  Tom's forte.. So just let him do what he can

9 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

He'll NEVER be 'THAT" big defender.. he's really cut out to be the 2nd def.. Hes ok ( without brilliance ) at this . Needs a real General down there to sort things out and give direction etc.  This is NOT  Tom's forte.. So just let him do what he can

My problem is that he doesn't seem strong enough to hold even the second or third defender out.

Tom has a lot of good attributes, he can take a great intercept mark, he can come from behind and spoil well, he's fast enough and get's the ball a bit, unfortunately when he gets the ball you wonder what he's going to do with it, when he takes off for a run he quite often gets caught because he doesn't have the strength to break tackles. I love players that take the game on but you have to know your limitations and after getting caught with the ball so many times, you'd think that Tommy would realise that that's one of his.

16 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

He'll NEVER be 'THAT" big defender.. he's really cut out to be the 2nd def.. Hes ok ( without brilliance ) at this . Needs a real General down there to sort things out and give direction etc.  This is NOT  Tom's forte.. So just let him do what he can

spot on.  A 'general' would take some of the pressure off.  

12 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

spot on.  A 'general' would take some of the pressure off.  

The 'general' will be H.  He seems to be our forgotten defender with posters.

He will be back as soon as he recovers and gets some match fitness at Casey. 

H may not be the most favoured on DL but is well suited to the 'general' role.

26 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The 'general' will be H.  He seems to be our forgotten defender with posters.

He will be back as soon as he recovers and gets some match fitness at Casey. 

H may not be the most favoured on DL but is well suited to the 'general' role.

But we're still exposed without that other big, seasoned defender. Hurley would be a god send and even Nathan Brown would bolster our back line considerably.

700k?

His manager must be as dumb as Howe's .

i don't really believe the talk about how much players are asking for and whatever, i mean context is a wonderful thing sometimes, mostly i think the numbers are probably a long way off, but an example could be Tom is a long way down the path to re-signing but if someone was to offer that much money he'd have a look at the offer but nothing less?

if anyone follows what i'm saying.

I don't like to buy into crap like "contract negotiations/uncertainty are becoming a distraction" but how many times do we hear "the players didn't come to play" or "they're not on today". How hard can it be....

Whatever the reason he isn't replicating his early form from last year.

9 hours ago, Dante said:

My problem is that he doesn't seem strong enough to hold even the second or third defender out.

Tom has a lot of good attributes, he can take a great intercept mark, he can come from behind and spoil well, he's fast enough and get's the ball a bit, unfortunately when he gets the ball you wonder what he's going to do with it, when he takes off for a run he quite often gets caught because he doesn't have the strength to break tackles. I love players that take the game on but you have to know your limitations and after getting caught with the ball so many times, you'd think that Tommy would realise that that's one of his.

Do you mean he gets caught holding the ball or just getting tackled and disposing of it? His stats show him averaging 0.54 frees against per game so it can't be that he's getting caught all that much. I know stats don't always tell the story but I think in this case, it's pretty clear that your assertion is a bit shaky.

23 minutes ago, The Reverend said:

Do you mean he gets caught holding the ball or just getting tackled and disposing of it? His stats show him averaging 0.54 frees against per game so it can't be that he's getting caught all that much. I know stats don't always tell the story but I think in this case, it's pretty clear that your assertion is a bit shaky.

Do you get to many games?  If you do I'm sure that you've seen him try to take on his opponent and get caught, with the resultant free usually resulting in a goal.

I'm sure that if you speak to anyone that's watched a few games they will agree with that. It has happened enough times to be noticeable. 

McDonald is a gun KPB for his age. If he had signed already everyone would be content. Our backline looks light on with him in it, and t would be even worse without him!

Because he hasn't signed everyone is pulling his game to pieces and trying to make his contract situation less of a big deal.

Sure he has flaws but so do most backs. Hell even when Chip was at his peak for us we'd still lament the odd brain fade. ( used to get caught holding the ball all the time trying to run the ball out of defence)

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Dante said:

Do you get to many games?  If you do I'm sure that you've seen him try to take on his opponent and get caught, with the resultant free usually resulting in a goal.

I'm sure that if you speak to anyone that's watched a few games they will agree with that. It has happened enough times to be noticeable. 

I've been in Beijing since Feb. so haven't seen a live game this year. I've watched every game live via the AFL Global feed. The stats say he gives up half a free kick per game. he's given up 5 this year so far. This doesn't tie in with your view of his game. Even if every free kick he's given up came from a holding the ball decision and resulted in an opposition goal he would have conceded 5 goals for the season so far. Not a bad average I'd suggest given that umpires tend to look after forwards. Am I missing something?

If true.  He is showing as much awareness in this contract as he does streaming out of the backline. 

 

To answer discussion above. He doesn't get penalised as much, he usually gets a disposal add he gets tackled, but they usually go straight to the opposition who waltz in for a sausage roll.  

I guess we know why Roos is pursuing with the likes of Omac, Wagner and Hunt, in the same way he pushed Frawley forward: preparing for the worst.

And the word is Michael Hurley will sign with Essendon this week.

 

Edited June 7, 20169 yr by iv'a worn smith

20 minutes ago, praha said:

I guess we know why Roos is pursuing with the likes of Omac, Wagner and Hunt, in the same way he pushed Frawley forward: preparing for the worst.

Hmmmm 

11 hours ago, Dante said:

Do you get to many games?  If you do I'm sure that you've seen him try to take on his opponent and get caught, with the resultant free usually resulting in a goal.

I'm sure that if you speak to anyone that's watched a few games they will agree with that. It has happened enough times to be noticeable. 

 

5 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

If true.  He is showing as much awareness in this contract as he does streaming out of the backline. 

 

To answer discussion above. He doesn't get penalised as much, he usually gets a disposal add he gets tackled, but they usually go straight to the opposition who waltz in for a sausage roll.  

This is not what Dante and others have been claiming. I'm still not sure there is any real evidence to support the assertion that he costs us a lot of goals. His average for clangers is 2 per game which seems to be consistent with other key defenders. I'd just like to see the hard stats to support the hysteria of some on here that he is a liability and that he costs us a lot of goals. he currently sits in second place on AFL Overall Standings behind Alex Rance and his stats compare pretty favourably. I think it's important to speak with some accuracy instead of making claims that aren't supported by evidence. There are 9 other clubs ahead of us for points conceded from defensive half turnovers. It's not as if we are bleeding goals from turnovers in the back half.

Maybe this is all a case of "frequency illusion", that phenomenon where we are told something and then start noticing it everywhere. 

I'm happy to trust the club to have a pretty clear understanding of his value to the team and to make the right decision about how much he is worth in dollar terms. 

Edited June 8, 20169 yr by The Reverend
additional thought.

I think we all have to get used to two things about AFL in 2016.

- A large percentage of good players will search out the best offer and if that means going to the brink so be it.

- Right now there is a discussion under way about the new players agreement and how much money they  will get in total and until that is resolved don't expect players like T Mac to sign early.

1 hour ago, praha said:

I guess we know why Roos is pursuing with the likes of Omac, Wagner and Hunt, in the same way he pushed Frawley forward: preparing for the worst.

Probably trying to get games into promising young players

1 hour ago, The Reverend said:

 

This is not what Dante and others have been claiming. I'm still not sure there is any real evidence to support the assertion that he costs us a lot of goals. His average for clangers is 2 per game which seems to be consistent with other key defenders. I'd just like to see the hard stats to support the hysteria of some on here that he is a liability and that he costs us a lot of goals. he currently sits in second place on AFL Overall Standings behind Alex Rance and his stats compare pretty favourably. I think it's important to speak with some accuracy instead of making claims that aren't supported by evidence. There are 9 other clubs ahead of us for points conceded from defensive half turnovers. It's not as if we are bleeding goals from turnovers in the back half.

Maybe this is all a case of "frequency illusion", that phenomenon where are told something and then start noticing it everywhere. 

I'm happy to trust the club to have a pretty clear understanding of his value to the team and to make the right decision about how much he is worth in dollar terms. 

Stats only tell you a small part of the story, the rest is actually watching the game and seeing what a player does with the ball when he disposes of it and why he stuffs up when, seemingly, under no pressure. Kicking the ball to a contest when there are other options, is not a clanger stat but it is a mistake none the less. I don't base my criticism on what others say or think, I base me criticism on what I see and I see most games in Melbourne live and the rest on TV.

Don't get me wrong, I like Tom and have a high regard for him as a player, but I'd like to see him eliminate the obvious mistakes from his game and if he did he could be one of the best in the competition. I'd also like to see him play down forward where his mistakes wouldn't cost us goals against.  

I was at the game on Saturday and behind me was a former champion Melbourne CHB, he spent quite a lot of the time saying, "Tommy" and it wasn't when he'd done something special it was when he'd made a mistake, he wasn't openly critical but you could tell by the tone of his voice that her was disappointed. There are many things that don't show up in the stats columns, either for or against a player and if there was a wrong option column, Tommy would feature heavily.

I like Jack Grimes, but I know he makes bad decisions at times and I know that he will, at least once a game, kick the ball out on the full when he is under no pressure. I know that Tommy will fall over in a contest at least once a match and that will usually result in the opposition marking unopposed and goaling, I know that he gets out-bodied by the forwards quite regularly, but that doesn't show up as a stat either. I know he will regularly kick the ball out to a contest and it will bounce back quite often and result in a goal against us. 

If Tommy wants the big bucks and wants to be one of the best, he needs to work on his faults.

2 minutes ago, Dante said:

Stats only tell you a small part of the story, the rest is actually watching the game and seeing what a player does with the ball when he disposes of it and why he stuffs up when, seemingly, under no pressure. Kicking the ball to a contest when there are other options, is not a clanger stat but it is a mistake none the less. I don't base my criticism on what others say or think, I base me criticism on what I see and I see most games in Melbourne live and the rest on TV.

Don't get me wrong, I like Tom and have a high regard for him as a player, but I'd like to see him eliminate the obvious mistakes from his game and if he did he could be one of the best in the competition. I'd also like to see him play down forward where his mistakes wouldn't cost us goals against.  

I was at the game on Saturday and behind me was a former champion Melbourne CHB, he spent quite a lot of the time saying, "Tommy" and it wasn't when he'd done something special it was when he'd made a mistake, he wasn't openly critical but you could tell by the tone of his voice that her was disappointed. There are many things that don't show up in the stats columns, either for or against a player and if there was a wrong option column, Tommy would feature heavily.

I like Jack Grimes, but I know he makes bad decisions at times and I know that he will, at least once a game, kick the ball out on the full when he is under no pressure. I know that Tommy will fall over in a contest at least once a match and that will usually result in the opposition marking unopposed and goaling, I know that he gets out-bodied by the forwards quite regularly, but that doesn't show up as a stat either. I know he will regularly kick the ball out to a contest and it will bounce back quite often and result in a goal against us. 

If Tommy wants the big bucks and wants to be one of the best, he needs to work on his faults.

The problem as I see it Dante is that players like T Mac believe their value is above what the club thinks right now.

They are keen ( egged on by their managers ) to get the max. right now.

If they improve that will mean a bigger pay next contract.

It is all about right now.

I also expect there is a club out there offering better right now.

T Mac knows he can get more.

It is now a game of brinkmanship.