Position Midfielder Discussion

[jarrad_]

Great discussion re Dunkley. I’m pretty keen on him myself and think he’s a break even at worst pick and a clear trade out candidate if his role changes significantly.

I still have Libba at the back of my mind when it comes to expectation of what the Big 3 (is that what we’re calling them) might be able to average together but at this stage I’m triple-dogging too. It looks odd and doesn’t feel especially right but think 120 ave through the first 7 rounds where they have 5 at Marvel is possible. Having all 3 also eliminates any guesswork about which 1 or 2 to start as well

so do I its the only reason why I don't have Dunkley if libba was going to be injured I would be in big trouble trying to get Dunkley in

 

[NT.Thunder]

The Libba issues certainly still lingers and something I haven't really given enough thought to. Libba's knee is still an issue so do we know what the timeline is for his return? I was under the impression he's not in particpating in match simulation.

 

[Eagling]

When you start your team, the first four midfielders you pick should be Rowell, Pickett, Macrae and Dunkley.

 

[pizza safety]

He's an "exception" for me as there's a very limited number of players who have improved their average the season following a +20ppg breakout season to 110+. The only one, that's immediately done a 120+ season after a +20ppg breakout to 110+, is Gary Ablett (91 -> 114 -> 132). Two (from what I found) have improved on their average in the following season after a +20ppg breakout to 110+:
Dane Swan (102 -> 123 -> 127)
Oliver (70 -> 111 -> 115)

There are far more examples where a player did not improve their average after a +20ppg breakout to 110+ for the first time:
Rockliff (86 -> 114 -> 97)
Dangerfield (80 ->119 -> 113)
Beams (101 -> 123 -> 102)
M.Crouch (92 -> 111 -> 102)
Z.Merrett (88 -> 111 -> 109)
Bartel (105 -> 126 -> 116)
JPK (96 - > 119 -> 106)
Cripps (98 -> 119 -> 117)
J.Kelly (87 -> 114 -> 114)
Macrae (107 -> 127 -> 123)
L.Parker (87 -> 110 -> 99)
Montagna (97 -> 125 -> 115)
S.Johnson (97 - > 116 -> 107)
S.Thompson (91 -> 111 -> 110)

Also were close to my +20ppg improvement criteria but still did not improve after first hitting 110
T.Cotchin (101 -> 116 -> 102)
M.Duncan (92 -> 110 ->106)

Another interesting point about Dunkley's final 16 games is his average with and without Libba (in the without Libba I'm not counting the game where Libba got injured with <25%TOG).
Without Libba (playing more than 25%TOG) - 140 from 8
With Libba - 116 from 8

You can find reasons such as the R7 midfield move to suggest he's an exception and could do 120+, but there has to be some doubt whether he indeed does get that uninterrupted role for the duration of the season (Dunkley himself said he was happy to play more fwd if needed for the team). Even Macrae briefly found himself out the midfield brigade last season. Enough doubt to wait and see for me along with the history of breakout players.

@Rowsus has to get credit for the original analysis though, which is available here "Chasing last year's points". Uncanny how the point still holds true after 6 more seasons!

Great stats Bomber and also from Rowsus.

I understand that the evidence against that score jump is fairly convincing but I still don’t think any of those players had a role change in their season that led to a significant split in their score. Mostly this is true because players would struggle to average 110+ and go up 20ppg if they were in a disadvantageous role for a significant period of time (in Dunkley’s case 6 games). Also I think the jump in scoring and the failure to average 120+ is due to how difficult it is to get to that level and I think most players ceiling is not in this range. Dunkley averaged 128 in 16 games in the midfield, so I’m confident his ceiling is in that range. Like Oliver I think Dunkley is a unique case given he’s just had the 3rd highest average of any player in their first 4 seasons and has circumstances that can buck the trend. Nevertheless, the stats you bring up are significant and do cast some doubt on him as a selection.

The Libba point you bring up is very relevant and something I’d not realised the extent of. The Draft Doctors website shows that he and Bont had lower CBA’s from rounds 18-20 with Libba in the team, so that’s something to watch out for. From memory in the game where Libba got injured in Q2 against Carlton Dunkley was on 70 at QT so it’s likely that game would have seen Dunkley significantly improve his average with Libba in the team (to about 120). We know Libba will probably miss round one but he’s one to keep an eye on.

Comparing him to other picks I see Fyfe being not as good value as he’s been recently and with a bad bye and injury history I don’t want to start him . Neale is potentially overpriced following a breakout season as a super premium, with a 115 average from rounds 5-23 even with the 190 in round 23. JKelly has the ceiling that Dunkley has already shown in the midfield but only in theory, and hasn’t actually done it before and is a big injury risk. He’s more proven as a 115avg player and he has upside and I like him as a pick but I think he’s less likely to average 125/22 than Dunkley.

Somebody else who almost breaks the rule but just misses out on doing so is Docherty. He went 87>108.7>114.

 

[pizza safety]

I’m not sure that’s how it works but I guess you can see it how you want to see it.

IIRC Bont was all the fuss one preseason as he averaged 117 from his last 12 games (2016). Following two seasons were only 105, 104.

The way I see it is as well is that Dunkley averaged 140 without Libba in his midfield role and 116 with Libba in his midfield role. Libba will be back early season and there is most definitely a question mark on the effect of that. Makes the most sense to wait and see at 630k.

There wasn’t a role change with Bont though, Dunkley swapped to being a pure mid and the sample size is 4 games bigger. Even if Dunkley got to play another 6 games as a pure midfielder and averaged 118 (10 points below his first 16) for those games - he’d have averaged 125 in a full season as a midfielder.

 

[Bomber18]

I should have prefaced my comment in that he’s not in my starting side for exactly the reasons you’ve pointed out. 125 is infinitely harder to achieve than 117. He is next in line if Josh Kelly falls out of favour for whatever reason though.

The Libba addition backs up my statement that even with him in the side he’s a break even prospect with significant upside. To be completely fair I reckon that there’s an argument to be made Libba isn’t even best 22 anymore.

That being the case, as you said the wait and see approach seems to make the most sense with him. We’re likely going to have to pay an absolute premium for mids this year and there’s scope for a dip in his scoring.

Would I be right in assuming Bont is in your side?

That’s good to know. I agree that 120-125+ is not an easy task. I think stats show that even 115+ is hard to backup or achieve.

Could be right with Libba re best 22. Could use him at the Dons if he’s not wanted at the doggies.

Bont is in and out for me. Depends on structure. Don’t like that Bont will face De Boer twice before his bye.

I’m giving Treloar a bit more thought to be honest as he actually has a better scoring history than both Bont/Dunkley. Similar Dunkley arguments could be made for Treloar as Treloar averaged 124 post bye. He’s just less “shiny” I guess.

 

[manyproblems]

I’m not sure that’s how it works but I guess you can see it how you want to see it.

IIRC Bont was all the fuss one preseason as he averaged 117 from his last 12 games (2016). Following two seasons were only 105, 104.

The way I see it is as well is that Dunkley averaged 140 without Libba in his midfield role and 116 with Libba in his midfield role. Libba will be back early season and there is most definitely a question mark on the effect of that. Makes the most sense to wait and see at 630k.

Bont had hip issues, he never spoke about it but was questioned in the media on it and didnt really deny it. This was 2018, but not sure about 2017. 2019 he had a full preseason.

 

[PC]

Some good Dunkley groupthink going on here. Almost convinced he should be in 100% of teams

 

[Bomber18]

Great stats Bomber and also from Rowsus.

I understand that the evidence against that score jump is fairly convincing but I still don’t think any of those players had a role change in their season that led to a significant split in their score. Mostly this is true because players would struggle to average 110+ and go up 20ppg if they were in a disadvantageous role for a significant period of time (in Dunkley’s case 6 games). Also I think the jump in scoring and the failure to average 120+ is due to how difficult it is to get to that level and I think most players ceiling is not in this range. Dunkley averaged 128 in 16 games in the midfield, so I’m confident his ceiling is in that range. Like Oliver I think Dunkley is a unique case given he’s just had the 3rd highest average of any player in their first 4 seasons and has circumstances that can buck the trend. Nevertheless, the stats you bring up are significant and do cast some doubt on him as a selection.

The Libba point you bring up is very relevant and something I’d not realised the extent of. The Draft Doctors website shows that he and Bont had lower CBA’s from rounds 18-20 with Libba in the team, so that’s something to watch out for. From memory in the game where Libba got injured in Q2 against Carlton Dunkley was on 70 at QT so it’s likely that game would have seen Dunkley significantly improve his average with Libba in the team (to about 120). We know Libba will probably miss round one but he’s one to keep an eye on.

Comparing him to other picks I see Fyfe being not as good value as he’s been recently and with a bad bye and injury history I don’t want to start him . Neale is potentially overpriced following a breakout season as a super premium, with a 115 average from rounds 5-23 even with the 190 in round 23. JKelly has the ceiling that Dunkley has already showed in the midfield only in theory, but hasn’t actually done it before and is a big injury risk. He’s more proven as a 115avg player and he has upside and I like him as a pick but I think he’s less likely to average 125/22 than Dunkley.

Somebody else who almost breaks the rule but just misses out on doing so is Docherty. He went 87>108.7>114.

There wasn’t a role change with Bont though, Dunkley swapped to being a pure mid and the sample size is 4 games bigger. Even if Dunkley got to play another 6 games as a pure midfielder and averaged 118 (10 points below his first 16) for those games - he’d have averaged 125 in a full season as a midfielder.

I think I’ve made all the points I can make without making them again. Sounds like you’re pretty bullish on him and will start him, will be interesting to see how he fares against the theory in hindsight and whether he joins Ablett.

 

[THCLT]

I'm not going to add to the history and precedent debate on Dunkley as it is what it is.

That aside, when I look at Dunkley, the one most similar example I use to compare him to is Tom Mitchell. An out and out midfielder who never got to fully realise his full potential at the Swans until he moved to the Hawks, we all know how that story goes. I see and view Dunkley in similar vein though he's not changing clubs as such, but still has uncapped potential if used in his optimum role. That 'if' is what coaches need to decide for themselves and he's not the exception with respect to that as we all have those 'if's & but's' in many of our choices.

What I will say is, take him (or any players for that fact) because you want to and not because he's being talked up or making all the headlines as a 'must have' type of player.

 

[Juzzo]

Anyone starting Jelly, worried he only has one home ground game in first 7 rounds? This might not matter, he probably scores well anywhere.

 

[pizza safety]

I think I’ve made all the points I can make without making them again. Sounds like you’re pretty bullish on him and will start him, will be interesting to see how he fares against the theory in hindsight and whether he joins Ablett.

I don’t think I’m overly bullish on him, I’ve been trying to figure out if I prefer him to JKelly this past week, I think I do.

I just put forth the case of why he could buck the trend due to circumstances but also said that the stats you’ve pointed out do cast doubt on him as a selection.

In general I don’t think all of these players (like Beams who has been injury ravaged) can be mentioned without context, all I’m doing with Dunkley is applying context which I think goes some way in deconstructing the solidity of the rule.

 

[Bomber18]

There wasn’t a role change with Bont though, Dunkley swapped to being a pure mid and the sample size is 4 games bigger. Even if Dunkley got to play another 6 games as a pure midfielder and averaged 118 (10 points below his first 16) for those games - he’d have averaged 125 in a full season as a midfielder.

Bont had hip issues, he never spoke about it but was questioned in the media on it and didnt really deny it. This was 2018, but not sure about 2017. 2019 he had a full preseason.

I thought there was some injury/role related thing with Bont in 2016. Thought he was underdone and couldnt play mid early 2016 and then did much better when given a full time mid role in the later two thirds.

Not sure how it affected him later. Started 2017 averaging 120 but then averaged 95 as soon as I brought him in during 2017

 

[pizza safety]

I thought there was some injury/role related thing with Bont in 2016. Thought he was underdone and couldnt play mid early 2016 and then did much better when given a full time mid role in the later two thirds.

Not sure how it affected him later. Started 2017 averaging 120 but then averaged 95 as soon as I brought him in during 2017

IIRC Bont’s hip issue began mid 2017 but I don’t think we can blame injury on his failure to go to the next level straight away, he’s just an example of non-linear progression.

Not sure about his role, I thought he’s only ever been a 70%+ midfielder but I might need to check that.

 

[Bomber18]

IIRC Bont’s hip issue began mid 2017 but I don’t think we can blame injury on his failure to go to the next level straight away, he’s just an example of non-linear progression.

Not sure about his role, I thought he’s only ever been a 70%+ midfielder but I might need to check that.

May have been an ankle in the 2016 preseason. So many various niggles with Bont that I don’t remember. Maybe that could be a reason to not select him this year if you were being really picky!

 

[Bomber18]

The Libba issues certainly still lingers and something I haven't really given enough thought to. Libba's knee is still an issue so do we know what the timeline is for his return? I was under the impression he's not in particpating in match simulation.

In rehab but expected to play in the first month of the H&A season.




Tom Liberatore (knee) did not play in the game, but completed all the non-contact work in the training session beforehand.

The club expects him to return to full training soon to be in the mix within the first month of the home and away season.

 

[jobeywatto]

I think the Libba factor is being overstated. Macrae, Dunkley and Bont is an elite midfield 3 and they were responsible for most of the Dogs impressive end of season form in 2019. They would be stupid to mess with this setup. If anyone is going to play more forward it's Libba. He'll obviously take some CBAs but I don't think it'll be enough to affect any of the other 3.. Dunkley still put up some massive scores with Libba in the team last year.

I still think Macrae is easily the safest pick and will go 120 again. Bont less risky than other years... they've brought in Bruce and have emerging talls in Schache and Naughton so Bont probably won't have to play forward as much as other years. Think Bont can push 120 this year as well. Dunkley the riskiest - only has half a season of premium form behind him - but I can genuinely seeing him finishing with the highest average. It's going to be a tough choice.

 

[Erich1036]

Dunkley the riskiest - only has half a season of premium form behind him

Dunkley had premium form for the second half of 2018 too, hence why a lot of teams (myself included) started him in 2019.

 

[Grundogging]

Looks like a midfield spot just opened up at the Giants for the first part of the season - shocking luck for Taranto to have his shoulder pop out so innocuously. Makes me think there must have been something going on in there already because that just doesn't happen if your shoulder is structurally sound.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Interesting the amount of strapping he went into the game on that shoulder, not unusual for guys to where strapping but coincidental it’s popped. He’s always worn strapping though I thought but I’m not aware he’s had shoulder issues unless it was as a junior