10 hours ago, xiss said:

This thread was obviously started as a result of last weeks game.

Watching him at the Saints game to me he looked like he was playing hurt, nowhere near his normal pace. The 2 weeks before lets no forget he was awesome

Reiwoldt was playing sore also . 

There are no excuses once you take the field of battle.

He needs to play his role with more accountability.

If he can't take instructions from the coaches box he will be moved on.

Edited May 4, 20169 yr by Biffen

58 minutes ago, praha said:

McDonald is both a massive liability and a required asset. He still has a long way to go but he's ( a coherent  accountable defense ) is an integral part of our rise up the ladder.

fixed 

11 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Interesting responses.

So let's say his decision making doesn't improve throughout the course of the season and we're at Round 23, and he's still making the same sorts of errors: does anyone reconsider? I totally get the argument that we've got one KPD with elite attributes and it's easier to stick with him given these, but at what point do these elite traits get overshadowed by turn overs?

At the point at which another player is banging down the door who is better. 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

At the point at which another player is banging down the door who is better. 

Simple really isnt it.

McDonald has missed one game in three seasons, and the last time he played for Casey was in 2011(his first season) - I doubt he's going to suddenly be surplus to requirements at the end of this year.  We've got one tall defender cooking at Casey in Oscar, but he isn't good enough yet and there's no certainty he ever will be - big brother Tom was a lot further advanced at the same age.

He has his limitations, but I think the bottom line is he's our best tall defender.  As DA pointed out, we wouldn't be able to bring in a better one, but I'd go one further - there's room for a better one and Tom in the side still; Dunn would be the defender that got pushed out. 

He'll be a 100 game player by the end of this season.  I suppose I don't know what we would receive in this hypothetical trade, but it feels like a total waste of development if we gave up now.  I'd be livid if we traded him for draft picks.

Quite frankly the relevant factor is what would you get as a result ? If it betters our side then THAT alone is the criteria. 

2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Quite frankly the relevant factor is what would you get as a result ? If it betters our side then THAT alone is the criteria. 

Of course, but "betters the side" is subjective and hard to measure.  It would have to obviously better the side a lot in order to be worth the risk I think, but I doubt too many clubs are going to be lining up for a trade that involves giving us such a boost at their own expense.

I have never seen a player with such amazing qualities, but with such glaring deficiencies, which explains why his good games are great, and his poor games are woeful.

The ability to run and rebound out of defence goes hand in hand with being able to then deliver it. Problem for Tom is, while his run is his big strength, his kicking is his weakness. Saying he should just dish off a handball is an over simplification and a player who rebounds like Tom will always have to kick the footy.

I'm trying to think of another club in more serious need of tall defenders, whether in the short, medium or long term.

Nope.

He's certainly 'tradeable' in the sense that just about every club would love to add him to their list.

I get that people are being driven mad by his errors but can we please not turn him into the new Jack Watts?

 

 

8 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Of course, but "betters the side" is subjective and hard to measure.  It would have to obviously better the side a lot in order to be worth the risk I think, but I doubt too many clubs are going to be lining up for a trade that involves giving us such a boost at their own expense.

Maybe not directly , maybe provide currrency to shop eleswhere.

It's a maybe

11 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Interesting responses.

So let's say his decision making doesn't improve throughout the course of the season and we're at Round 23, and he's still making the same sorts of errors: does anyone reconsider? I totally get the argument that we've got one KPD with elite attributes and it's easier to stick with him given these, but at what point do these elite traits get overshadowed by turn overs?

Toms defencive work far outways his poor offencive efforts, he is not alone in his bad turnovers hell in the last 2 weeks i think Viney has had 2 of the worst turnovers, the one on sunday was embarassing, but id have a heart attack if someone suggested trading him (im sure you would too). The reality is Tom needs to keep it simple with the ball and understand leadership isnt doing it all which is what he tries to do at the minute.

Given his ability to win 1 on 1s when out of position why would you trade him? I think if we sat down and counted you would find he stops more scoring opportunities than he causes. The mistakes he makes can be fixed remember just a couple of years ago we were hearing about "rance" moments and now he is arguably the best KPD in the comp.

I think we need to realise how good it is to finally be in a position that we need to polish off the rough edges of players rather than desperately find talent. I want to see success quickly too but throwing talent away for a quick fix just cos the player has a flaw is a bit dangerous. 

Does poor offensive work become very much more a matter when combined with resultant opposition scoring ?

Im not alone in observing that in training and 'easier' games he seems more on the mark (sts) Step up the pressure and his offensive game goes to shlt.

What use is that.....really.... In all seriousness.

McDonald is a frustrating player, but he has attributes that aren't readily found around the league.  He has good pace, endurance, intercept marking ability and when in form spoils well.  We're all well aware of his sometimes poor decision making and disposal.

At a time when quality key defenders have never been more valuable I wouldn't trade him.  

With a player like McDonald you back your coaches and club environment to improve the player and tighten his game.  Get him to play within his limitations.  Great coaching groups don't trade out young defenders and leaders of McDonald's ilk.  They back themselves to get the best out of him. McDonald has played 88 games.  His best football will be from 100 +.

Just now, beelzebub said:

Quite frankly the relevant factor is what would you get as a result ? If it betters our side then THAT alone is the criteria. 

Bub, there is surely a balance. Clubs have to be very selective and careful in trading players, particularly young players with plenty of upside. Even older players that have been seen to give loyal service when they could have walked to other clubs. Players like Junior and Cam Bruce come to mind. In Tom's case he has a brother who plays with the club and no doubt has a lot of mates. The perception of how the club treats it players affects team morale and culture. The club has to have a soul and cant be totally ruthless in its decision making process. I want to see the MFC improve but not at any cost.

There is no way I'd trade him - a value exchange wouldn't be there.

I don't think decision making is a big problem - I suspect he and the team are being instructed to take the game on and he's following instructions.  It's skill execution that's the problem.  He does need to work on this.

I've seen some references to his "pace" in this thread.  I'm unconvinced about that - I think that's his other weakness - he's a bit slow for the modern press and struggles to close on the opposition but it's not a fatal flaw if he's surrounded by quicker players.

I think he's flexible too - when he was out of form last year he played a bit of ruck-fwd and showed something.  If we had competent KPD replacements e.g. Oscar and Frost then I think he could address this hole for us - which IMO is our biggest deficiency.

They need someone running off him when he marks he's a shocking kick .

4 minutes ago, Middymalt said:

They need someone running off him when he marks he's a shocking kick .

Yes, but that becomes very predictable and quickly negated by the opposition 

A friend of mine had a sponsors "inner sanctum" day with a top four club recently and had incredible access to the club. He trained with the team and spent the entire day tagging along with the coaching staff. One of the things that coach said to him that really resonated was that good clubs approach trading by looking at players who have desirable elite attributes and their flaws are almost irrelevant to the decision. Good clubs back themselves to exploit the positive traits and iron out any faults the player may have.

This, to me, is the right approach with Tom. His "good attributes" are extremely desirable. By the time we are really challenging, the club should back itself to improve his weaknesses. Many players, our captain included, have managed to overcome issues with disposal and decision making over time.

2016 Stats ONLY!!
Player	Avg Disposals	Avg Turnovers	% Turnovers
Dunn	13.8	3.8	27.5%
Lumumba	17.2	4.2	24.4%
Viney	29.2	6.8	23.3%
Vince	25.4	5.4	21.3%
Watts	14.5	2.7	18.6%
Tyson	22.7	4	17.6%
N. Jones	26.7	3.8	14.2%
T Mac	16.3	2.2	13.5%
Garlett	11.3	1.5	13.3%
Gawn	14.7	1.8	12.2%

These are our top ten players in the afl player ratings ordered by thier turnovers. I understand that some of these will be free kicks which wont be registered as disposals however disposals is just indication of how much they have the ball. The point is Tom is far from the worst. When you look at the only 2 better than him on this list, Garlett is kicking for goal alot meaning he wont register many turnovers and Gawn handballs to a bloke 2/3m away or takes a mark and kicks under little to no pressure. So all things considered i think Tom is doing alright. I would like to see each individual's scores off turnovers but i cant find that stat anywhere, if somone has it or can link me to it id much appreciate it.

Side notes:
- I know the player ratings arn't exactly the greatest but it gave me a nice little sample set
- Tom is averaging over 1 turnover less per game than last year.
- Numbers are copied from "player stats" section on the AFL App
- Jones' % is pretty incredible based on his disposal count!
- Yes stats are not everything but they can help put into perspective the number of mistakes Tom actually makes especially compared to a coupe of his fellow (and more senior) defenders looking at you H and Dunn.

No way hose' 

59 minutes ago, Middymalt said:

They need someone running off him when he marks he's a shocking kick .

A bit hard when nearly all of them are forward of the ball.

13 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Interesting responses.

So let's say his decision making doesn't improve throughout the course of the season and we're at Round 23, and he's still making the same sorts of errors: does anyone reconsider? I totally get the argument that we've got one KPD with elite attributes and it's easier to stick with him given these, but at what point do these elite traits get overshadowed by turn overs?

So on your logic you would have traded Alex Rance years ago. 

80% disposal efficiency is a very good number. He is a champ. Find another topic to debate, This one is ridiculous.

Just now, Redlegs Too said:

80% disposal efficiency is a very good number. He is a champ. Find another topic to debate, This one is ridiculous.

Fair point, although his turnovers seem worse than most as he makes them in the defensive part of the ground.  When he gets it in our back fifty, centres it and turns it over, it looks horrible and sticks out like a sore thumb.  If you kick inside 50 and miss the target it doesn't look nearly as bad and, most of the time, doesn't instantly result in a goal for the opposition.

On that note I wouldn't consider trading TMac.  Key position players in the back half of the ground with good one on one skills, elite endurance and good hands don't just grow on trees.

this topic has revealed 22.83% of us are morons