Traded #42: Massimoe D'Ambrosioe - Thank you for your service

[boncer34]

One of them is an Essendon player, one of them is D'Ambrosio.

I was unaware you couldn't have more than 1 player on the list.

 

[boncer34]

I thought it was about a main list spot? They couldn’t offer a longer contract without committing to upgrade

Delist Weidemann and rookie list him. Or any one of another 40 things we could've done to accommodate.

 

[faible]

I was unaware you couldn't have more than 1 player on the list.

I think people are overrating D'Ambrosio.

Yes he can be a nice kick, no he's not setting the world on fire at Hawthorn in a completely unaccountable role.

 

[boncer34]

I think people are overrating D'Ambrosio.

Yes he can be a nice kick, no he's not setting the world on fire at Hawthorn in a completely unaccountable role.

He's an AFL quality player.

 

[Mercurial89]

I think people are overrating D'Ambrosio.

Yes he can be a nice kick, no he's not setting the world on fire at Hawthorn in a completely unaccountable role.

He has a skill, a skill many of our currently listed players do not possess.
He was young (so there is growth opportunity).

We got rid of him and kept -

• an old breaking down Hep who is not part of our next flag team but brings leadership.
• hind, older player who has pace and not a whole lot else.
• Weidman a flawed player with no confidence and no future with the team

-shiel, a player who reportedly wanted out and is a shell of what he was.

All list spots that could have been used and not lost much arguably.

The reasons given are mostly regarding his inability to defend.
omitting the fact that many young players learn to defend over the course of their careers.
We currently have plenty of senior players who don't defend.
And we moved a similar lacking defense player out of his high damage suited role into a defensive death by a thousand cuts role where the mistakes he does make kill us on the scoreboard.

We then get regular updates from bombers fans who criticize Mass and discredit whatever he does because he plays for another team to help justify why he's no longer here.

 

[boncer34]

He has a skill, a skill many of our currently listed players do not possess.
He was young (so there is growth opportunity).

We got rid of him and kept -

• an old breaking down Hep who is not part of our next flag team but brings leadership.
• hind, older player who has pace and not a whole lot else.
• Weidman a flawed player with no confidence and no future with the team

-shiel, a player who reportedly wanted out and is a shell of what he was.

All list spots that could have been used and not lost much arguably.

The reasons given are mostly regarding his inability to defend.
omitting the fact that many young players learn to defend over the course of their careers.
We currently have plenty of senior players who don't defend.
And we moved a similar lacking defense player out of his high damage suited role into a defensive death by a thousand cuts role where the mistakes he does make kill us on the scoreboard.

We then get regular updates from bombers fans who criticize Mass and discredit whatever he does because he plays for another team to help justify why he's no longer here.

Heaven forbid we accept the club made a mistake.

 

[DapperDon]

Heaven forbid we accept the club made a mistake.

Just add it to the list

 

[Vindicater]

He has a skill, a skill many of our currently listed players do not possess.
He was young (so there is growth opportunity).

We got rid of him and kept -

• an old breaking down Hep who is not part of our next flag team but brings leadership.
• hind, older player who has pace and not a whole lot else.
• Weidman a flawed player with no confidence and no future with the team

-shiel, a player who reportedly wanted out and is a shell of what he was.

All list spots that could have been used and not lost much arguably.

The reasons given are mostly regarding his inability to defend.
omitting the fact that many young players learn to defend over the course of their careers.
We currently have plenty of senior players who don't defend.
And we moved a similar lacking defense player out of his high damage suited role into a defensive death by a thousand cuts role where the mistakes he does make kill us on the scoreboard.

We then get regular updates from bombers fans who criticize Mass and discredit whatever he does because he plays for another team to help justify why he's no longer here.

Shiel, Hind and Weideman were all contracted.

Heppell I will give you.

 

[faible]

He has a skill, a skill many of our currently listed players do not possess.
He was young (so there is growth opportunity).

We got rid of him and kept -

• an old breaking down Hep who is not part of our next flag team but brings leadership.
• hind, older player who has pace and not a whole lot else.
• Weidman a flawed player with no confidence and no future with the team

-shiel, a player who reportedly wanted out and is a shell of what he was.

All list spots that could have been used and not lost much arguably.

The reasons given are mostly regarding his inability to defend.
omitting the fact that many young players learn to defend over the course of their careers.
We currently have plenty of senior players who don't defend.
And we moved a similar lacking defense player out of his high damage suited role into a defensive death by a thousand cuts role where the mistakes he does make kill us on the scoreboard.

We then get regular updates from bombers fans who criticize Mass and discredit whatever he does because he plays for another team to help justify why he's no longer here.

I reiterate;

I think people are overrating D'Ambrosio.

Yes he can be a nice kick, no he's not setting the world on fire at Hawthorn in a completely unaccountable role.

He's fine. If he had stayed that would have also been fine. The club could probably have kept him and used him in a completely unaccountable role like Hawthorn are and that would have been fine too.

 

[boncer34]

I reiterate;



He's fine. If he had stayed that would have also been fine. The club could probably have kept him and used him in a completely unaccountable role like Hawthorn are and that would have been fine too.

Which part of Mercs post overrated him?

 

[boncer34]

Shiel, Hind and Weideman were all contracted.

Heppell I will give you.

You can delist and rookie list contracted players. You of course run the risk of a Hugh Greenwood scenario but if we delisted Hind or Weidemann and someone else swooped.... oh no.

 

[Vindicater]

You can delist and rookie list contracted players. You of course run the risk of a Hugh Greenwood scenario but if we delisted Hind or Weidemann and someone else swooped.... oh no.

We would have had to fully delist them though to create the list spot for Mass. (Or not taken Vigo in the rookie draft)

I would have been okay with that but was more just pointing out you can't just throw names up.

 

[BrunoV]

Heaven forbid we accept the club made a mistake.

There are no mistakes until it is hindsight talking.

 

[BrunoV]

I have to add that I'm glad for him that he's gone.

He is the sort of player who will not realise his potential unless the team he plays for commits to using him as a playmaker.

I doubt he will ever bed down a tradition role (as would appear on paper), certainly not before he matures as a hardened pro. He is very similar to Liam Baker

7

Liam Baker

Age

26

Ht

173cm

Wt

72kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.7

4star

K

7.8

3star

HB

7.9

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

2.6

4star

MG

222.2

3star

D

14.6

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

7.9

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

1.8

3star

MG

191.9

3star

D

14.4

4star

K

6.2

3star

HB

8.2

5star

M

1.6

2star

T

1.8

4star

MG

224.2

4star

and Caleb Daniel

35

Caleb Daniel

Age

27

Ht

171cm

Wt

72kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

11.5

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.4

4star

D

19.5

4star

K

11.1

4star

HB

8.4

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

CL

1.0

3star

D

16.4

4star

K

7.2

3star

HB

9.2

5star

M

3.4

4star

T

2.6

4star

CL

0.2

2star

in that regard (though without the endurance that made Daniel immediately viable).

We were focused on his defence because we were already committed to playing Heppell and, I suspect, the plan was always to move Martin back. They can't defend. In the middle Parish accumulates and doesn't defend. A lot of the ball for Mass is gone so it heightens focus on his defence.

In fairness to the people who make these flawed decisions they are correct to be concerned about adding a 4th non-defender to the mix in this part of the ground.

But that's what happens when you're a poorly balanced side. You can't integrate talent for its strengths and absorb its failings. On the flip side, Geelong looks like it is recruiting genius when in reality it's core allows for the inclusion of talent.

As an aside, I think AFL generally lacks the vocabulary to discuss positions within positions. In soccer it's much more obvious. There are guys who would have been top level strikers 20 years ago, scoring lots of goals but who were fundamentally second strikers working off the centre forwards in a front 2. Front 2s are pretty rare these days with sides generally opting for front 3s with a single striker and 2 wingers. Unless he can play as a false 9 the support striker gets badly exposed in a front 3 because you need to be a physical freak to deal with the attention in the traditional centre forward areas on the ground. It becomes very hard to get close enohgh to goal to score. Lautaro Martinez is a prime example who scores prolifically when working of massive 9s playing in a front 2 for Inter did nothing for Argentin during the WC it won. In the middle there are 4/6s who are the defensive mids. The 8s are box to box mids - some are naturally more defensive and some more attacking. The 10s are the attacking mids.

Italy coaches had 3 of the best players in the world as 10s through the 90s and didn't even try to play 2 of them together let alone 3. While I still believe they should be tried for crimes against humanity, for not trying to find a way to make it work for at least 2 at a time, it was never really contested that only 1 of the 10s could play as an AM (at least in the formation played) at any one time.

In AFL there is no neat way to discuss positions are a matter of team balance.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

its not just about amassing as much "AFL ready" players its about balancing your list. Most of the players listed above dont play the same role as Mass (other than Hind).
I dont like weideman but he is a mature aged KPP.
Sheil an insider mid (who we actually were happy to trade out but St Kilda got cold feet due to injury).
Heppell is has been doing a mountain of work as a third/4th tall in the backline in the absence of reid/Ridley. There is no scenario where I would have preferred Mass over him this year.
The players you need to look at are small running defenders/wingers: McGrath, Duursma, Martin, Kelly, Lual, Roberts, Hind, Durham.

Would you replace any of those guys other than Hind with Mass? And is that really a game changer having Mass over Hind?
theyre both fringe squad depth players, and Hind offers more speed which we are severely lacking in.
Just feels like a "grass is always greener" viewpoint.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

I have to add that I'm glad for him that he's gone.

He is the sort of player who will not realise his potential unless the team he plays for commits to using him as a playmaker.

I doubt he will ever bed down a tradition role (as would appear on paper), certainly not before he matures as a hardned pro. He is very similar to Liam Baker and Caleb Daniel in that regard.

We were focused on his defence because we were already committed to playing Heppell and, I suspect, the plan was always to move Martin back. They can't defend. In the middle Parish accumulates and doesn't defend. A lot of the ball for Mass is gone so it heightens his defensive frailty.

In fairness to the people who make these flawed decisions they are correct to be concerned about adding a 4th non-defender to the mix in this part of the ground.

But that's what happens when you're a poorly balanced side. You can't integrate talent. On the flip side, Geelong looks like it is recruiting genius when in reality it's core allows for the inclusion of talent.

As an aside, I think AFL generally lacks the vocabulary to discuss positions within positions. In soccer it's much more obvious. There are guys who would have been top level strikers 20 years ago, scoring lots of goals but who were fundamentally second strikers working off the centre forwards in a front 2. Front 2s are pretty rare these days with sides generally opting for front 3 with a single striker and 2 wingers. Unless he can play as a false 9 the support striker gets badly exposed in a front 3 because you need to be a physical freak to deal with the attention in the traditional centre forward position. It becomes very hard to get close enohgh to goal to score. In the middle there are 4/6s who are the defensive mids. The 8s are box to box players. The 10s are the attacking mids.

Italy coaches had 3 of the best players in the world as 10s through the 90s and didn't even try to play 2 of them together. While I still believe they should be tried for crimes against humanity, for not trying to find a way to make it work, it was never really contested that only 1 could play as an AM (at least in the formation played) at any one time.

I really dont see him as similar to Baker and Daniel other than in size and role he plays. They are tough little bastards who never give up a contest, Mass' biggest knock are his competitiveness and accountability.
The game that really sticks out for me last year was the Saints game, he was completely exposed by Higgins and Butler and didnt really offer much going the other way. Dont think he player another game down back after that with us trialling him in a small forward role.

 

[Ambrosia]

I really dont see him as similar to Baker and Daniel other than in size and role he plays. They are tough little bastards who never give up a contest, Mass' biggest knock are his competitiveness and accountability.
The game that really sticks out for me last year was the Saints game, he was completely exposed by Higgins and Butler and didnt really offer much going the other way. Dont think he player another game down back after that with us trialling him in a small forward role.

Agree Baker is excellent defensively that’s how he forced his way into the AFL. Daniel is a weird player. Incredibly talented at pretty much anything but is 168 cm tall

 

[BrunoV]

I really dont see him as similar to Baker and Daniel other than in size and role he plays. They are tough little bastards who never give up a contest, Mass' biggest knock are his competitiveness and accountability.
The game that really sticks out for me last year was the Saints game, he was completely exposed by Higgins and Butler and didnt really offer much going the other way. Dont think he player another game down back after that with us trialling him in a small forward role.

Both were defensive liabilities in their first 50 games. There was no surer thing than each conceding multiple entries into 50 being beaten for height and grunt in marking and ground contests. Baker ran around accumulating, that was his job.

D'Ambrosio's issue is not competitiveness, certainly not based on anything I've seen. Tactical awareness, defensive technique and accountability are not the same things as a lack of competitiveness. I'd say his attack on the ball has been a feature of his play with Hawthorn to date

 

[Howard Moon]

I have to add that I'm glad for him that he's gone.

He is the sort of player who will not realise his potential unless the team he plays for commits to using him as a playmaker.

I doubt he will ever bed down a tradition role (as would appear on paper), certainly not before he matures as a hardened pro. He is very similar to Liam Baker and Caleb Daniel in that regard (though without the endurance that made Daniel immediately viable).

We were focused on his defence because we were already committed to playing Heppell and, I suspect, the plan was always to move Martin back. They can't defend. In the middle Parish accumulates and doesn't defend. A lot of the ball for Mass is gone so it heightens focus on his defence.

In fairness to the people who make these flawed decisions they are correct to be concerned about adding a 4th non-defender to the mix in this part of the ground.

But that's what happens when you're a poorly balanced side. You can't integrate talent for its strengths and absorb its failings. On the flip side, Geelong looks like it is recruiting genius when in reality it's core allows for the inclusion of talent.

As an aside, I think AFL generally lacks the vocabulary to discuss positions within positions. In soccer it's much more obvious. There are guys who would have been top level strikers 20 years ago, scoring lots of goals but who were fundamentally second strikers working off the centre forwards in a front 2. Front 2s are pretty rare these days with sides generally opting for front 3s with a single striker and 2 wingers. Unless he can play as a false 9 the support striker gets badly exposed in a front 3 because you need to be a physical freak to deal with the attention in the traditional centre forward areas on the ground. It becomes very hard to get close enohgh to goal to score. Lautaro Martinez is a prime example who scores prolifically when working of massive 9s playing in a front 2 for Inter did nothing for Argentin during the WC it won. In the middle there are 4/6s who are the defensive mids. The 8s are box to box mids - some are naturally more defensive and some more attacking. The 10s are the attacking mids.

Italy coaches had 3 of the best players in the world as 10s through the 90s and didn't even try to play 2 of them together let along 3. While I still believe they should be tried for crimes against humanity, for not trying to find a way to make it work for at least 2 at a time, it was never really contested that only 1 could play as an AM (at least in the formation played) at any one time.

In AFL there is no neat way to discuss positions are a matter of team balance.

If I were comparing massimos skillset and role in a football sense he'd be Pirlo, classic deep lying play maker who had no pace, stamina, physicality, defensive acumen or even workrate but what he did have was an eye for a pass and a magic wand of a leg that made up for everything else and some (and the facial statue of a Roman god). Of course most think of the 'Makelele role' as the classic deep lying midfielder shielding the defence with grit, but the 'Pirlo role' was another way. Just goes to show if you have a player with a unique attribute or ability they can create their own role that can change the game. I guess we were not in a position to explore that with the mass weapon

 

[ant555]

Working well for them .
A side that can not defend adds another player who can not defend and allow him to hunt the footy off half back.
I said in the round 1 match thread he would run around and get 25 to 30 possessions. He can play offence . No doubt about it.
The issue with his defense is not as simple as he can not defend. His issue is he does not react / transition quick enough. Did not improve at all with us and it has not improved with them either.
As for the Martin comparison. Well you can not have a lot of them in the side if you want to go anywhere so they backed Martin to be a better option than Mass.
To keep Mass then we had to give away Martin or Parish .
Agree with Bruno. Mass competes but he just doesn't transition to what he has to do in defense quick enough.
He can play but it is only 1 way.

 

[faible]

Daniel is a weird player. Incredibly talented at pretty much anything but is 168 cm tall

I think that's the point though, to make the AFL at that height you have to be pretty much elite at football skills.

He's very clean, a good kick, good tank, but his height means he's giving away a lot of size against pretty much anyone he has to defend.

 

[boncer34]

It feels like we're now comparing Daniel and Mass height.

Mass isn't that small.

 

[mcgrath_truther]

I think that's the point though, to make the AFL at that height you have to be pretty much elite at football skills.

He's very clean, a good kick, good tank, but his height means he's giving away a lot of size against pretty much anyone he has to defend.

always thought that caleb provided a lot of physicality too, he's a nugget of a man

 

[faible]

always thought that caleb provided a lot of physicality too, he's a nugget of a man

I think within the limitations of his size he's reasonably physical, but when you're giving away ~ 10cm and ~ 10kg to a lot of smaller forwards let alone the medium sized guys and up it's pretty difficult.

 

[DERO]

Just subbed off with 9 touches and 0 tackles. Can kick well tho.