mattner

[kel14]

hey guys, i'm new to the forum, i enjoy the forum so thought i'd officially join.

something has been on my mind.... marty mattner get's a lot of the ball but golly gosh he turns it over a lot - is he a liability?

[JC 14]

i would tend to agree with that sentiment, he gets the football alot but IMO he is not in our best 22 when B2, Seabs and Bradshaw are back in.

He also goes to ground alot and opposition forwards tend to try and iso him one out in the square, saying all this it was hard to find a bad player yesterday...

[aardvark]

- is he a liability?

No. First game back from injury and had 2 "Clangers" for the game

[jono2707]

I think he's been a bit down on form lately but when he's at his best he's certainly in our best 22.

You framed your question well though and in his present form Marty isn't as effective as he could be.

[Bloody Hell]

No.

+ 1

[aardvark]

+ 1

If BH and i agree we must be right.....

[ScottH]

I'll 3rd the no.

As with other defenders, he's not one of our best defenders, but he is one of the go to guys when it is coming out, and his rebound one of his best qualities. Saw nothing that would make me awsnt to drop him on the weekend.

[royboy42]

Easily in our best 22..note he was straight back in the side after injury without the slightest hesitation from the selectors!

[Chookbilly]

At his best, Mattner is definitely in the best 22.
But, I think he has awareness issues. He often, gets run down as he isn't aware of the play around him, or of any perceived pressure from opponents.

Yesterday, at the game, I saw a few times that he didn't notice an open man to kick to, and ended up kicking to a contest.
Vision and awareness have never been his strong points, but they seem to be more prominent at the moment.

[magic.merkin]

No. Best 22

[Primmy]

No. His job is to run it out of defense and be a problem. He does this very well indeed. Good foil to the others down there. Keeper.

[stellation]

Here's an oddity- we all roll our eyes at Marty at times, but marvel at Malceski. Check out their DE% and Clangers for the year from Scotty's good work: RedandWhiteOnline 2010 Player Stats

Even factoring for stats not telling the full story, that's just odd!

[Triple B]

I'm a fan, but I thought he was amongst our worst yesterday.

Not saying he was terrible, but had a few shocking kicks and turnovers.

Still in our best 22 though.

[ugg]

Here's an oddity- we all roll our eyes at Marty at times, but marvel at Malceski. Check out their DE% and Clangers for the year from Scotty's good work: RedandWhiteOnline 2010 Player Stats

Even factoring for stats not telling the full story, that's just odd!

Backmen generally have the best DE% because of their constant chipping around in the back half. As you move further up the field the DE% begins to drop steadily as the possesions become more contested and the targets more narrow. I would suggest Malceski's inferior DE% is probably due to the fact he has more possessions up the ground than Marty, highlighted by his greater number of Inside 50s.

As a side note, it makes Jarred Moore's DE% of 78% look very very good considering the position he plays!

[stellation]

Backmen generally have the best DE% because of their constant chipping around in the back half. As you move further up the field the DE% begins to drop steadily as the possesions become more contested and the targets more narrow. I would suggest Malceski's inferior DE% is probably due to the fact he has more possessions up the ground than Marty, highlighted by his greater number of Inside 50s.

As a side note, it makes Jarred Moore's DE% of 78% look very very good considering the position he plays!

Oh, absolutely. My rule of thumb with backmen that have big disposal numbers is to subtract their uncontested marks from their total disposals to get an idea of how they were actually going.