Patrick Dangerfield - potential GOAT?

[Sttew]

sure, well then, as the commentators put it, 'the one part of the game that can let him down'

I think it's because he is all energy and hustle and bustle, absolutely all of the time, maybe barely takes a breath before disposing.

The hammer for whom every footy situation looks like a nail!

Gross exaggeration! He’s kicked 14 so far this year and is averaging a goal a game across his career

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Gross exaggeration! He’s kicked 14 so far this year and is averaging a goal a game across his career

Always been a good set shot

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Strongly assisted by his role as AFLPA chair . No-one in the game gets the umpire assistance that Dangerfield gains

Pfffft. Righto.

 

[Toump Ass]

His best is nowhere near the best of other players IMO but he's got to gets points for longevity.

I don't understand why people say he is a "flog"? He seems a like a really solid bloke to me, saved someone's life at the beach a few years back. Imagine Chris Judd saw someone drowning, he'd just keep walking while his horse-faced wife jumps on instagram to blame the Labour party for the rip in the water.

 

[bigfarter]

His best is nowhere near the best of other players IMO but he's got to gets points for longevity.

I also don't understand why people say he is a "flog". He seems a like a really solid bloke to me, saved someone's life at the beach a few years back? Imagine Chris Judd saw someone drowning, he'd just keep walking while his horse-faced wife jumps on instagram to blame the Labour party for the rip in the water.

Yeah, I don’t get the “flog” thing either - and it’s not out of Geelong bias as there’s been plenty I would describe as such over the journey! Danger seems self-deprecating and to take things in good stead.

As far as GOAT? Nah. From this century I’d have GAJ, Franklin and Dusty ahead. Probably Enright too. Judd I could see being arguable at this point that Danger’s gone past him.

 

[Dtennent94]

Yeah, I don’t get the “flog” thing either - and it’s not out of Geelong bias as there’s been plenty I would describe as such over the journey! Danger seems self-deprecating and to take things in good stead.

As far as GOAT? Nah. From this century I’d have GAJ, Franklin and Dusty ahead. Probably Enright too. Judd I could see being arguable at this point that Danger’s gone past him.

Will Daicos ever approach Enright’s legacy?

 

[bigfarter]

Will Daicos ever approach Enright’s legacy?

Daicos is excellent but I think talk of GOATs can be far too midfield-centric. I personally have Enright as one of the best this century. 3 flags, 6 AAs and two B&Fs in flag years ain’t bad.

 

[Dtennent94]

Daicos is excellent but I think talk of GOATs can be far too midfield-centric. I personally have Enright as one of the best this century. 3 flags, 6 AAs and two B&Fs in flag years ain’t bad.

Enright couldn’t do what Daicos does in the midfield and Daicos will never hold a candle to Enright as a defensive player. Silly to compare, I agree.

 

[Sully111]

Have to tip my hat to Danger with the way he's going about it this year.

 

[Seeds]

Daicos is excellent but I think talk of GOATs can be far too midfield-centric. I personally have Enright as one of the best this century. 3 flags, 6 AAs and two B&Fs in flag years ain’t bad.

Thats ridiculous. Enright isnt even the top 10 geelong players ive seen (possibly not even in the top 15). Not even the best half back flanker ive seen at geelong. Tom stewart is better with 5 all australians from far less games.

Daicos will be a vastly better player then enright. The best players dont play half back for long because they are more valuable as midfielders, unless they cant shake a tag. If n.buckley, andrew mccleod, shane crawford and koutifidies stayed as half back flankers they all would of been better at that role then enright and all would have 6-8 all australians. But they were too good for that position. Enright probably never even plays much half back if it wasnt for the fact we had so many gun midfielders in the one team. Instead he would of been a solid unremarkable midfielder who time would of already forgotton.

 

[bigfarter]

Thats ridiculous. Enright isnt even the top 10 geelong players ive seen (possibly not even in the top 15). Not even the best half back flanker ive seen at geelong. Tom stewart is better with 5 all australians from far less games.

Daicos will be a vastly better player then enright. The best players dont play half back for long because they are more valuable as midfielders, unless they cant shake a tag. If n.buckley, andrew mccleod, shane crawford and koutifidies stayed as half back flankers they all would of been better at that role then enright and all would have 6-8 all australians. But they were too good for that position. Enright probably never even plays much half back if it wasnt for the fact we had so many gun midfielders in the one team. Instead he would of been a solid unremarkable midfielder who time would of already forgotton.

Okay dude.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Okay dude.

Seeds has two weird hills he'll die on.

Stewart over Enright.
Blicavs being crap.

Both very disagreeable viewpoints.

 

[Acinath]

Feel like in previous years, he tried to do too much and it was detrimental to his performance. This year it looks like he's playing to his strengths a lot more and he looks so much better, been absolutely dominant so far.

 

[PhatBoy]

Seeds has two weird hills he'll die on.

Stewart over Enright.
Blicavs being crap.

Both very disagreeable viewpoints.

And that Stewart and Enright played the same position

 

[DopeMaster]

Dangerfield and GOAT in the same sentence...

Is this one of those joke threads like Urqhardt being better than Pendlebury?

 

[Sttew]

Dangerfield and GOAT in the same sentence...

Is this one of those joke threads like Urqhardt being better than Pendlebury?

You need to ask the OP

 

[DopeMaster]

You need to ask the OP

That would involve me interacting with the mind that spawned this thread…

I’ll politely pass.

That said, Danger looking imperious as a forward at the tender age of 35. I love it. A few other geriatrics around the comp in close to career best form too. (Thinking Sidey from my club) - Makes me wonder if we’ve retired off players 5+ years too early in decades gone…

 

[PhatBoy]

That would involve me interacting with the mind that spawned this thread…

I’ll politely pass.

That said, Danger looking imperious as a forward at the tender age of 35. I love it. A few other geriatrics around the comp in close to career best form too. (Thinking Sidey from my club) - Makes me wonder if we’ve retired off players 5+ years too early in decades gone…

Unless someone’s body lets them down by way of injuries when they get older - Judd seemed to never be fully fit later on, like Fyfe now - I think most of the genuine top tier greats (with respect to Sidey who’s playing great footy, he’s nowhere near that category), most of them seem to from memory have been able to play really good footy well into their 30s.

Ablett Sr, Lockett was still a force, kicking a tonne and 80-odd at 32/33, the Harveys (Robert and Boomer) were both guns still well past 30, McLeod, Jarman, Hawkins, Gawn, Pav, Nick Riewoldt, Carey probably would have been barring all the personal shit (even his Adelaide numbers were decent), Voss, Aker was still a very good footballer at the Dogs - just an idiot, Barry Hall was too, Stevie J was excellent still at the Giants. Pendlebury has never missed a beat.

Ablett Jr probably wasn’t the player he was after his shoulder went but was still very good, just lost that contested ability.

Buddy I guess as he lost some pace came back to the pack a bit.

But yeah as a bit of a broad rule I think the guys who didn’t get too many injuries have been able to play within reason maybe not to their ‘peak’ but at a really elite level well past 30 for a while

 

[Lingsface]

Unless someone’s body lets them down by way of injuries when they get older - Judd seemed to never be fully fit later on, like Fyfe now - I think most of the genuine top tier greats (with respect to Sidey who’s playing great footy, he’s nowhere near that category), most of them seem to from memory have been able to play really good footy well into their 30s.

Ablett Sr, Lockett was still a force, kicking a tonne and 80-odd at 32/33, the Harveys (Robert and Boomer) were both guns still well past 30, McLeod, Jarman, Hawkins, Gawn, Pav, Nick Riewoldt, Carey probably would have been barring all the personal shit (even his Adelaide numbers were decent), Voss, Aker was still a very good footballer at the Dogs - just an idiot, Barry Hall was too, Stevie J was excellent still at the Giants. Pendlebury has never missed a beat.

Ablett Jr probably wasn’t the player he was after his shoulder went but was still very good, just lost that contested ability.

Buddy I guess as he lost some pace came back to the pack a bit.

But yeah as a bit of a broad rule I think the guys who didn’t get too many injuries have been able to play within reason maybe not to their ‘peak’ but at a really elite level well past 30 for a while

Buddy kicked over 50 in 21 (from 18) and 22.

Age 34 and 35 I think.

 

[Lunchtime]

Unless someone’s body lets them down by way of injuries when they get older - Judd seemed to never be fully fit later on, like Fyfe now - I think most of the genuine top tier greats (with respect to Sidey who’s playing great footy, he’s nowhere near that category), most of them seem to from memory have been able to play really good footy well into their 30s.

Ablett Sr, Lockett was still a force, kicking a tonne and 80-odd at 32/33, the Harveys (Robert and Boomer) were both guns still well past 30, McLeod, Jarman, Hawkins, Gawn, Pav, Nick Riewoldt, Carey probably would have been barring all the personal shit (even his Adelaide numbers were decent), Voss, Aker was still a very good footballer at the Dogs - just an idiot, Barry Hall was too, Stevie J was excellent still at the Giants. Pendlebury has never missed a beat.

Ablett Jr probably wasn’t the player he was after his shoulder went but was still very good, just lost that contested ability.

Buddy I guess as he lost some pace came back to the pack a bit.

But yeah as a bit of a broad rule I think the guys who didn’t get too many injuries have been able to play within reason maybe not to their ‘peak’ but at a really elite level well past 30 for a while

Martin too - "old age" caught up to him in footy terms but that Kidney injury he got messed things up too.

 

[PhatBoy]

Martin too - "old age" caught up to him in footy terms but that Kidney injury he got messed things up too.

He probably couldn’t do what he did at his peak but yes he was still more than capable of playing good footy

 

[PhatBoy]

Buddy kicked over 50 in 21 (from 18) and 22.

Age 34 and 35 I think.

Well actually what stands out looking at his numbers during those seasons is that his age probably DID catch up with him a bit in terms of being able to get as many shots on goal - under 4 when he’d been close to, or over 5 for most seasons before that.

But suddenly he was kicking 2 goals to every behind. His accuracy, relatively speaking, went through the roof.

103.52 across those 41 games

In his previous 53 games he managed
157.121

 

[Lingsface]

Well actually what stands out looking at his numbers during those seasons is that his age probably DID catch up with him a bit in terms of being able to get as many shots on goal - under 4 when he’d been close to, or over 5 for most seasons before that.

But suddenly he was kicking 2 goals to every behind. His accuracy, relatively speaking, went through the roof.

103.52 across those 41 games

In his previous 53 games he managed
157.121

Maybe playing closer to goal?
But imagine that accuracy throughout his career would of been pushing for Dunstall spot.

 

[Lingsface]

Unless someone’s body lets them down by way of injuries when they get older - Judd seemed to never be fully fit later on, like Fyfe now - I think most of the genuine top tier greats (with respect to Sidey who’s playing great footy, he’s nowhere near that category), most of them seem to from memory have been able to play really good footy well into their 30s.

Ablett Sr, Lockett was still a force, kicking a tonne and 80-odd at 32/33, the Harveys (Robert and Boomer) were both guns still well past 30, McLeod, Jarman, Hawkins, Gawn, Pav, Nick Riewoldt, Carey probably would have been barring all the personal shit (even his Adelaide numbers were decent), Voss, Aker was still a very good footballer at the Dogs - just an idiot, Barry Hall was too, Stevie J was excellent still at the Giants. Pendlebury has never missed a beat.

Ablett Jr probably wasn’t the player he was after his shoulder went but was still very good, just lost that contested ability.

Buddy I guess as he lost some pace came back to the pack a bit.

But yeah as a bit of a broad rule I think the guys who didn’t get too many injuries have been able to play within reason maybe not to their ‘peak’ but at a really elite level well past 30 for a while

Also 6 players over 30 currently sit within 5 goals of the Coleman medal. I’m saying that the top 5-8 are very young this year.
The top 8 has two aged 26 and the rest not above 24.

 

[Seeds]

Seeds has two weird hills he'll die on.

Stewart over Enright.
Blicavs being crap.

Both very disagreeable viewpoints.

I have a lot more than two weird hills i will die on.

Dangerfield is a better footballer than dustin martin is another one.