Tom Boyd 2016

[Remi Moses]

Wasn't really my point. It wasn't his best game, the falcon bit was a joke. Next time I will be sure to use an emoticon.

Not an issue axe man . I think that was a quiet game, but I reckon he's been pretty decent before that .
I think we're all nervy on Tom to be honest, and I'll make an assessment in a few years regardless of the salary .

[Twodogs]

I was listening to The Sounding Board podcast with Damien Barrett and Craig Hutchison. I know, I know, but it's actually a very interesting insight into the machinations of the footy media industry and funnily enough, they come across as much more likeable (Hutch more so) in this format than anywhere else they appear.

In the most recent episode (Episode 10), they did a segment called Spin City where they have a hypothetical conversation about a footy topic. Barrett wanted to talk about Boyd and so he played the role of Bevo, with Hutchy as PG.

The premise was that Bevo goes to PG, taking umbrage at the terms of Boyd's contract. Of course, Barrett took the position that the Boyd contract is ridiculous (Hutchy stated that he knows that Boyd is on roughly 1.8-2M this year, making him the highest paid player in the competition) and is potentially costing us trade opportunities. Hutchy argued that the money is the most insignificant thing about the deal, that we have to pay someone to make the cap and it's best to do it up front so when our guns are coming out of contract (he mentioned Stringer, Macrae & Bont), we've front loaded and will have the cap space to retain them. By the time 2018 roles around, he'll be on approx $700,000 and will be well worth that (and implying it will be unders).

Barrett just couldn't let go of the huge dollars and the fact we're contending and we may miss a player due to Boyd's contract and Hutchy said (in his role as PG) - "Ok, Bevo. You get a commitment from a Dustin Martin or a Dan Hannebery and I'll see if I can make it happen, until then it doesn't matter". Hutchy then had a crack at Barrett for his righteousness regarding his negativity over the Boyd deal.

It was an interesting segment and I give props to Hutchy for seeing the deal in a way that other journos like Barrett have been unable to. What was also insightful was a comment Hutchy made earlier in the podcast about 'good blokes' in the game getting a '20% discount' or leniency in how things are reported in the media, yet blokes who have been hard work get whacked the other way. Barrett agreed and said as he got older and more jaded, this happens more often.

Gives you an idea why Barrett goes so hard at Boyd and Bevo.

Well worth a listen for Doggies fans, if only to have some ammo the next time a peanut opposition supporter has a crack at the Boyd deal.

There's a show on SEN 9-11 Saturday mornings with Hutchinson, Liam Pickering and Dr Turf talking footy and media for two hours .its funny stuff.

[comrade]

There's a show on SEN 9-11 Saturday mornings with Hutchinson, Liam Pickering and Dr Turf talking footy and media for two hours .its funny stuff.

Yeah, I listen to it and it's not bad. A little too much drinking of their own bath water but they've got a good chemistry between the 3. One of the better sports programs getting around.

[Twodogs]

When you doubt just watch this and remember he is only 20.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/ne...ts-dogs-v-pies

I was walking around the ground and can remember seeing someone start to run toward the ball and thinking "oh I hope that's Tom Boyd" because the moment he took his first step toward the contest, even though he was 20 metres away from the pack, no one else was getting near that ball.

[Twodogs]

Yeah, I listen to it and it's not bad. A little too much drinking of their own bath water but they've got a good chemistry between the 3. One of the better sports programs getting around.

Off The Record? Is that what it's called?

Whoever decided the format listened to a lot of Punter to Punter on RRR back in the day.

[Go_Dogs]

Hopefully Boyd can get some consistency over the next few weeks.

It's going to be one of those great problems to have if all of Redpath, Campbell, Roughead and Boyd are deserving of spots in the 22. Whilst it may leave us a little top heavy on paper, I'd be interested to see how we went with all of them in the side for a stretch, particularly as we close in on September.

[Twodogs]

Hopefully Boyd can get some consistency over the next few weeks.

It's going to be one of those great problems to have if all of Redpath, Campbell, Roughead and Boyd are deserving of spots in the 22. Whilst it may leave us a little top heavy on paper, I'd be interested to see how we went with all of them in the side for a stretch, particularly as we close in on September.

With Crameri back next year are we going to have too many key forwards? Or tall forward targets or whatever.

Because they really are a commodity at trade time.

[Bulldog4life]

With Crameri back next year are we going to have too many key forwards? Or tall forward targets or whatever.

Because they really are a commodity at trade time.

You have to allow for injuries. Always need some in reserve.

[Go_Dogs]

With Crameri back next year are we going to have too many key forwards? Or tall forward targets or whatever.

Because they really are a commodity at trade time.

If they're all fit and firing, it may be a bit of a juggling act and I guess that's where Bevo's philosophy around versatility will be very handy, we can find roles for all of these guys to play given they can spend time in a number of positions.

I'd prefer to have the depth we've got than find ourselves left short, like we have been a little down back this year when we were hit with injuries to a number of running players at the one time.

[Rocco Jones]

The beauty of Crameri is he helps balance a forward line whether it's top heavy or not tall enough. It's pretty simple, he will just it better.

Height doesn't make you too heavy, a lack of mobility does. You could play 6 Buddies and not be top heavy.

[1eyedog]

With Crameri back next year are we going to have too many key forwards? Or tall forward targets or whatever.

Because they really are a commodity at trade time.

Crameri Boyd and Stringer are first string and Redpath in reserve. Your question does raise an interesting scenario re. the Camhead factor. I'd prefer Boyd didn't ruck but he may need to. Not sure we can play Camhead and Boyd.

[Twodogs]

Versatility is a good point. And Crameri brings gut running for a big guy. One thing we have missed this year is his ability to start a play in defence and finish it by taking a mark in the forward line. It's a neat trick. I had to text someone and check that it was Crameri that got the first kick out of defence after he'd kicked a goal from a mark deep in attack last year.

[jeemak]

With Crameri back next year are we going to have too many key forwards? Or tall forward targets or whatever.

Because they really are a commodity at trade time.

Crameri will play more of a high forward role I think, and Stringer will take more turns in the middle of the ground as he matures.

[bulldogtragic]

Tom Boyd at 27 games - vs - Kurt Tippett at 27 games

Goals - 29.13 vs 26.24 (Boyd is an outstanding kick for goal as I keep rambling about)
Disposals - 7.89 vs 8.59
Marks - 3.1 vs 2.7
CM - 1.07 vs .96
Tackles - 1.89 vs 2.07

Salary - $700,000 (after this year is done) vs $900,000

Boyd is ahead of Tippett on a like for like after 27 games. But Tom has considerably more growth and development in his game. This deal is a winner no matter Barrett screams about. Boyd is the real deal, he'll be better than Tippett and he will cost considerably less. I stand by my decision to recruit him from GWS.

Can't find anything to watch so thought I'd compare Joe Daniher (who some considered a top 3 pick if not FS). He had great service from a haulkingly strong midfield, much better than Tom has had thus far. Was a media darling too.

Tom Boyd vs Joe Daniher (First 27 Games)

Goals - 29.13 vs 28.20
Disposals - 7.89 vs 11.30
Marks - 3.1 vs 5.2
CM - 1.07 vs 1.22
Tackles - 1.89 vs 1.29

This is now Joe's career average. He's gone nowhere since in over 2 years for lots of reasons. Joe was talked about as the best young forward prospect, Boyd described generally as an undeserving thief. Despite their output being the same. Maybe footy journos can't tell on-field talent a part...

[bulldogtragic]

Tom Boyd vs Tom Hawkins (Hawkins with a premiership midfield and Mooney, Johnson, Ottens etc.) First 27 games.

Goals - 29.13 vs 37.12
Disposals - 7.89 vs 11.18
Marks - 3.1 vs 4.80
CM - 1.07 vs 1.14
Tackles - 1.89 vs 1.59

Very similar across the board. CM show power marking ability & tackles show work ethic. With Ablett, Bartell and co feeding him it's easy to see why he got nearly 2 extra marks and 3 extra disposals a game, with a few extra goals. It'd be interesting to guess whether Tom Boyd if given a midfield like that would've done more than what Tom Hawkins did.

The take home is Hawkins, Tippett, Daniher & Boyd can all be used in the same breath when talking about the output of talent to the first 27 games. That Boyd has pretty much matched them all despite not having the midfield the other three had should be cause for optimism. When Boyd gets a great midfield & delivery his output will rise accordingly. Tippett's on $900,000, Hawkins $800,000, Daniher will get stupid money not jump ship around $750,000+ & Tom Boyd $700,000 next year for 5 years. The only debate is when the media narrative turns to Boyd's increased output and his salary being under market rates.