Is Charlie Dixon THAT Good?

[bulldogtragic]

Yes, he’s good. But is he that good?

3 Games this year vs WBFC, for 4 Goals. 2 losses, one win by 2 points.

Or, do we defend him really well?

[ReLoad]

Yes, he’s good. But is he that good?

3 Games this year vs WBFC, for 4 Goals. 2 losses, one win by 2 points.

Or, do we defend him really well?

Its realistically not his fault, the way the power play means he is often the lone tall, and when their one paced mids cant get it in quick hes doomed.

The last couple of years their smalls have what has given everyone a heartache, but they have also fallen off a cliff, Gray is an incredible footballer, but its passed him now, Motlop the same. Some great up and coming kids; Rozzee and butters are awesome, but they need to do a bit of a refresh.

I cant see them challenging again for a while.

[GVGjr]

Yes, he’s good. But is he that good?

3 Games this year vs WBFC, for 4 Goals. 2 losses, one win by 2 points.

Or, do we defend him really well?

North Melbourne supporting WOOF member Roscoe_G reached out to me last night posing the same question and we agreed that he is a player that occasionally turns it on for 10 or 15 minutes a game.
It's hard for forwards now but Dixon has an inflated profile when compared to many of his performances.

[dog town]

He has done his job on the night, days of key forwards running rampant are long gone. He isn’t in the elite category but you know what you get from him.

[jazzadogs]

F
R
A
U
D

I have no time for Charlie.

[comrade]

I mean, he was up against the dream team of Zaine and Gardy. He never had a chance, poor bloke.

[Testekill]

He's not an elite full forward; he was very good for a few years but he's got some obvious vision issues and can't get near it in a twilight or night game.

[whythelongface]

We both defend well against him but also cut off his supply. Our mids ran themselves into the ground last night making it very difficult for Port to have any clean supply to their forward line. There was only a period for 5 minutes where they got on top. Dixon is a decent enough player but if it ain’t coming in the way he likes then he is shown up. Now compare that to Naughton who can make something out of nothing. No comparison.

[azabob]

This article really sums up Charlie...

WHAT IF… CHARLIE DIXON


Basically it says he has all the tools, height, weight, aggression and ends with this paragraph

In any case, as the biggest true key position player in the AFL, if Dixon can put together the tools he’s been gifted, plays with a bit of menace and uses that size to his full ability to ‘grit and grind’ his way to four or five marks inside 50, you’d back him to make the most of those opportunities. He’s averaging two goals a game for the year, but playing with some more aggression to really make the use of those gifts? Could be five. Could be more. Could be the difference, if it all comes together.

https://themongrelpunt.com/afl-season-2021/2021/09/10/what-if-charlie-dixon/

[bornadog]

Yes, he’s good. But is he that good?

3 Games this year vs WBFC, for 4 Goals. 2 losses, one win by 2 points.

Or, do we defend him really well?

most contested marks for year (just above Naughton and kicked 48 goals - so he is pretty good, but we had a plan

[bulldogtragic]

most contested marks for year (just above Naughton and kicked 48 goals - so he is pretty good, but we had a plan

3 times this year. Other clubs might want to analyse what we are doing to him.

[Happy Days]

Dixon gets so much credit for his physique but how many games does he actually dominate? He’s a charismatic guy and clearly a *good* player but he’s drastically overrated.

He’s also got that Hawkins thing going where he’s allowed to push guys in the back one on one under the guise of bodywork, so good for him I guess.

[jeemak]

Dixon gets so much credit for his physique but how many games does he actually dominate? He’s a charismatic guy and clearly a *good* player but he’s drastically overrated.

He’s also got that Hawkins thing going where he’s allowed to push guys in the back one on one under the guise of bodywork, so good for him I guess.

I didn't realise he was such a big man just by looking at him or via the information readily available to me in print and online. I've needed James Brayshaw and a few other weirdos to repeatedly and excitedly tell me he is.

[EasternWest]

Yeah he's a good player. But being a good big forward is so dependent on what your midfield gives you.

He's no Aaron Naughton, that's for sure.

[Go_Dogs]

He double grabs too many marks.

He’s a good honest key forward, but he isn’t a match winner.

[Bulldog Joe]

Charlie is good enough, but a bit one dimensional.

When his marking is taken away he doesn't contribute anywhere near as much as he should.

[SonofScray]

Wat hung the replay, he rarely posed a threat. A far cry from previous outings against us.

[bulldogtragic]

Wat hung the replay, he rarely posed a threat. A far cry from previous outings against us.

One of his two was a downfield wasn’t it?

[boydogs]

He's good just a bit one trick pony-ish. Not like Naughton & Weightman

[SquirrelGrip]

He's good just a bit one trick pony-ish. Not like Naughton & Weightman

You're spot on. Naughty and Cody are unicorns.

[Mofra]

Rumoured he has not been offered another contract and will be told to explore his options. He's been linked to a return to the Suns for a few months.
Hamish Hartlett also let go by Port.

[Axe Man]

Rumoured he has not been offered another contract and will be told to explore his options. He's been linked to a return to the Suns for a few months.
Hamish Hartlett also let go by Port.

He's still got 2 more years to run on his current contract.

[jeemak]

He's still got 2 more years to run on his current contract.

You're hardly an authority on contracts though.........

:)

[Axe Man]

You're hardly an authority on contracts though.........

:)

https://i.postimg.cc/zGgWyR1v/cartman.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[mjp]

He's good just a bit one trick pony-ish. Not like Naughton & Weightman

If you look at Naughton's stats 95% of his goals come from set shots - so he is a bit of a 1-trick pony.

Luckily for us that trick is flying at the footy from 7 deep, crunching packs and taking ridiculous marks.

[Twodogs]

If you look at Naughton's stats 95% of his goals come from set shots - so he is a bit of a 1-trick pony.

Luckily for us that trick is flying at the footy from 7 deep, crunching packs and taking ridiculous marks.

Naughton is still in the contest when the ball hits the ground though. He's quite neat below his knees. I don't know how goal assist stats but I suspect they'd be pretty respectable.

[Mofra]

If you look at Naughton's stats 95% of his goals come from set shots - so he is a bit of a 1-trick pony.

Luckily for us that trick is flying at the footy from 7 deep, crunching packs and taking ridiculous marks.
Naughton's defensive efforts to chase and harass are unlike any I've seen from a KPF. That's a pretty handy second trick that makes him unique.

[hujsh]

Outside of this year he'd have a decent number of non-set shot goals wouldn't he?

[comrade]

Outside of this year he'd have a decent number of non-set shot goals wouldn't he?

He's also given away a few Joe the Gooses to team mates running into goal.

[Topdog]

So I absolutely love Naughton and he is probably my fav Bulldogs player but I'm guessing these stats will surprise some of the last few posters here. They are 2021 stats.

Naughton vs Dixon

6 score involvements a game 6.3
0.5 goal assists 0.5
1.6 tackles 2.1
0.9 tackles inside 50 0.9
9.2 pressure acts 11.4
3.3 marks inside 50 1.8
2.7 Contested marks 2.5

[Mofra]

So I absolutely love Naughton and he is probably my fav Bulldogs player but I'm guessing these stats will surprise some of the last few posters here. They are 2021 stats.

Naughton vs Dixon

6 score involvements a game 6.3
0.5 goal assists 0.5
1.6 tackles 2.1
0.9 tackles inside 50 0.9
9.2 pressure acts 11.4
3.3 marks inside 50 1.8
2.7 Contested marks 2.5
Easier to rack up a few tackle/pressure numbers when you chop out in the ruck.

Naughton is 21 years old. At the same age it was no contest:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=14&playerStatus2=A&tid2=8&type=A&pid1=3612&pid2=6491&fid1=O&fid2=O

[josie]

It’s easy to shoot down other team’s players. Dixon is a damn good forward and I like the way he takes marks around the ground as well as being a pretty accurate kick for goal. I’d take our Naughts over him every day of the week as Naughts is something else again - once in a generation marking, ground level, pressure, follow up efforts & excitement m/c every time even though Naughts at this early stage in his career may not be as good a goal kick, but Dixon is still a damn good forward.

[Bulldog Joe]

Easier to rack up a few tackle/pressure numbers when you chop out in the ruck.

Naughton is 21 years old. At the same age it was no contest:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=14&playerStatus2=A&tid2=8&type=A&pid1=3612&pid2=6491&fid1=O&fid2=O

Hypothetical
You are needing to pick a player for the next game and 1 game ony.

You only have a choice of Naughton or Dixon.

You only have the stat sheet as your guide.

While I would take Naughton based on what I see, Dixon would have to get the nod from the stats.

[jazzadogs]

Hypothetical
You are needing to pick a player for the next game and 1 game ony.

You only have a choice of Naughton or Dixon.

You only have the stat sheet as your guide.

While I would take Naughton based on what I see, Dixon would have to get the nod from the stats.

Would he? I would take the guy who is averaging more marks inside 50.

[Topdog]

Would he? I would take the guy who is averaging more marks inside 50.

Even if they average less goals (yes its by 0.1 but it is less)?

It's pretty crazy how similar the numbers are for the 2 and I agree that Dixon is a good forward.

The fact that Naughton is 21 makes me very very happy.

[Happy Days]

There’s simply no way you can argue Dixon is a better pressure forward than Naughton. Naughton also would create far more of his goals than Dixon does.

Those stats are very misleading to say the least.

[Bulldog Joe]

There’s simply no way you can argue Dixon is a better pressure forward than Naughton. Naughton also would create far more of his goals than Dixon does.

Those stats are very misleading to say the least.


Stats are designed to be misleading and always have been

I refer to the following quote from Benjamin Disraeli

There are lies, there are damned lies and there are statistics

[Mofra]

Hypothetical
You are needing to pick a player for the next game and 1 game ony.

You only have a choice of Naughton or Dixon.

You only have the stat sheet as your guide.

While I would take Naughton based on what I see, Dixon would have to get the nod from the stats.
Naughton. His attack on the ball in the air is better and I prefer his pressure work when he doesn't have the ball.
Dixon is certainly a 'straightens them up' type forward and someone we were probably crying out for, for at least two decades. We're just lucky a generational forward landed in our lap by sheer dumb luck as an intercepting KPD with a dodgy kick.

[Bulldog Joe]

Naughton. His attack on the ball in the air is better and I prefer his pressure work when he doesn't have the ball.
Dixon is certainly a 'straightens them up' type forward and someone we were probably crying out for, for at least two decades. We're just lucky a generational forward landed in our lap by sheer dumb luck as an intercepting KPD with a dodgy kick.

You haven't answered my hypothetical.

I agree with you from watching them, which also highlights the fallibility of stats.

However, the stats show Dixon has had a pretty good year. Our ability to assess him is coloured by his poor form against us.

I would also think that Naughton's averages have declined over the latter half with 2 games where he was subbed out and also him being below par for a few games on his return from the concussion.

[Topdog]

There’s simply no way you can argue Dixon is a better pressure forward than Naughton. Naughton also would create far more of his goals than Dixon does.

Those stats are very misleading to say the least.

I don't think anyone is saying that more just highlighting the fact that Dixon has had a good year even though he was poor against us.

I suspect that Mofra is right and some of the defensive stats for Dixon are inflated because he is doing ruck work in the f50.

[Mofra]

You haven't answered my hypothetical.

I agree with you from watching them, which also highlights the fallibility of stats.

However, the stats show Dixon has had a pretty good year. Our ability to assess him is coloured by his poor form against us.

I would also think that Naughton's averages have declined over the latter half with 2 games where he was subbed out and also him being below par for a few games on his return from the concussion.
I did with my first word - Naughton.
Dixon is a better body on body player but if our F50 entries rely on forwards' body on body work we're not playing the way we want and losing the game anyway (ball movement too slow).

[Bulldog Joe]

I did with my first word - Naughton.
Dixon is a better body on body player but if our F50 entries rely on forwards' body on body work we're not playing the way we want and losing the game anyway (ball movement too slow).

My hypothetical was based on only having the stats and your choice of Naughton is based on what you see.

I would always choose Naughton based on what he brings, but you only get that from watching him play.

[Mofra]

My hypothetical was based on only having the stats and your choice of Naughton is based on what you see.

I would always choose Naughton based on what he brings, but you only get that from watching him play.
Based on those stats, Naughton creams him for marks inside 50 and is close in the other areas.
Even ignoring the eyeball test Naughton would be ahead.

[Bulldog Joe]

Based on those stats, Naughton creams him for marks inside 50 and is close in the other areas.
Even ignoring the eyeball test Naughton would be ahead.

Their stats are pretty close but Naughton trails in most of them for the season averages.

[Mofra]

Their stats are pretty close but Naughton trails in most of them for the season averages.
Marginally, except for contested marks where Naughton is marginally ahead. I think aerial prowess fits our forward needs better than someone who gets an extra kick a game.

You seem really adamant about this. Why would you take Dixon even if based only on stats?

[Bulldog Joe]

Marginally, except for contested marks where Naughton is marginally ahead. I think aerial prowess fits our forward needs better than someone who gets an extra kick a game.

You seem really adamant about this. Why would you take Dixon even if based only on stats?

Personally I wouldn't, but the stats overall favour Dixon.

I guess I am trying to highlight the inherent failings of a purely statistical approach.

[hujsh]

Personally I wouldn't, but the stats overall favour Dixon.

I guess I am trying to highlight the inherent failings of a purely statistical approach.


I think we've had that discussion around the value of statistics pretty comprehensively since a certain poster joined

[jeemak]

I think we've had that discussion around the value of statistics pretty comprehensively since a certain poster joined

It's odd that we haven't seen statsbot this week.........

[boydogs]

If you look at Naughton's stats 95% of his goals come from set shots - so he is a bit of a 1-trick pony.

Luckily for us that trick is flying at the footy from 7 deep, crunching packs and taking ridiculous marks.

Naughton almost starts chasing after the ball before he hits the ground after a marking contest, he's like a cat

[Mofra]

Personally I wouldn't, but the stats overall favour Dixon.

I guess I am trying to highlight the inherent failings of a purely statistical approach.
Well I disagree on the first point (as per F50 marks), and have never made the second point.