Introduction.
This review serves as a companion to my earlier analysis of *The Essendon Midfield of 2024*
where I explored the team’s strategies and execution for 2024.
In this piece, part two of a two part series, the focus shifts to the individuals that form Essendon’s midfield. I'll be examining their strengths, areas that need improvement, and how these factors might influence the team’s overall performance moving forward.
At times, the critique will be harsh, as certain aspects of players' games require significant development. In other cases, it may simply be an acknowledgment that some players have likely reached their peak and may not be able to propel Essendon to the next level.
You can read Part One of the player reviews here. https://thebombersblog.wixsite.com/thebombersblog/post/the-midfielders-part-one
Draper.
There’s good.
The next three reviews focus on Essendon's three ruckmen, and it’s fitting that they should be a third the usual length, just as the ruckmen split their role this season.
Injuries once again limited Draper’s time rucking across the ground, but when he was fit, his impact was undeniable.
Draper finished the year as the 7th ranked ruckman for percentage of hitouts to advantage, maintaining his consistency of over 30% for the third consecutive season. His standout performances came in rounds 15 (West Coast), 19 (Adelaide), and 21 (Sydney), where he averaged five starting chains leading to scores. Of course, no one will forget his crucial tap in round 21 against Fremantle which led to the match-winning score.
As expected, Draper's assets are in the air. Over 12% of his possessions were earned via the old-fashioned way for ruckmen, through contested marks. This is the second-highest percentage among all ruckmen this year.
It's rare to see rucks impact in the air in the modern game, but Draper was still able to take intercept marks to win the ball back for his teammates. Ranking 9th best of all ruckmen in intercept marks per time on ground (minimum six games played.)
There’s bad.
However, Draper has struggled to play a full season, managing more than 20 games only once in his career.
Over the past two seasons, he played 14 and 16 games, respectively, and this year saw him spending even less time in his natural ruck position.
Due to injury and fitness issues, Draper played alongside Bryan or Goldstein in 12 games. He attended just over half of Essendon’s ruck contests, down from 60% in 2023 and 65% in 2022. Much of his 61 minutes per game was spent as a forward, but he isn’t the long-term solution as a key target in the forward line. He’s not even in the top 200 players for marks inside 50 per time on ground, and his forward craft remains limited. Though he competes well in the air and tries to bring the ball to ground, his predictability hurts Essendon’s forward entries, and his finishing skills certainly have limitations.
Where to now?
Next year is make or break for Draper. He’s entering the final year of his contract, unless a new deal is signed in the off-season.
Like many of his teammates, Draper falls into the category of “are they good enough to take the team further.” With Goldstein signed on for 2025 and Bryan turning 24, Essendon needs to determine if Draper has more levels to unlock.
The team needs to move away from relying on two dedicated ruckmen who spend significant time in the forward line. Even with potential changes to the substitute rule, a more versatile player with speed and ground-level skills would offer better balance.
Of all the ruckmen on the list, Draper has the most impact in contests at stoppages due to his size and aggression. However, he needs to spend more time on the ball than he currently does.
Goldstein.
Old is gold.
Goldstein’s season paralleled Essendon’s overall trajectory in many ways.
After the first eight games, Essendon boasted a +40 clearance differential, with +19 coming from the centre square. During this period, Goldstein attended over 61% of Essendon’s centre bounces. His ruck work was a key factor in the team’s +48 point differential in scoring from clearances, as Essendon converted a clearance into a shot at goal 24% of the time, 9% better than their opposition.
When Draper was sidelined through injury, Goldstein was forced to step up and do the majority of ruck work alone, attending just over 87% of centre bounces, only O’Brien would average more over the course of the season.
New is new.
Whether due to age, fitness, or both, Goldstein found himself rotated out of the number-one ruck role after the bye.
Between rounds 8 and 13 (he was rested in round 12), Goldstein averaged 68.2 ruck contests per game, which would rank him 12th overall if sustained throughout the season.
After that stretch, he played just two more senior games and three in the VFL, totaling five appearances out of a possible 10.
Among Essendon’s three ruckmen, Goldstein was clearly behind Draper and Bryan in hitouts to advantage per contest.
His ability to follow up at stoppages to assist his midfielders at ground level contests dropped to its lowest level since 2010, and let’s be honest, it isn’t going to hit a new peak from here.
Unlike Draper, Goldstein struggled to impact in the air, ranking 24th in intercept marks per time on ground among ruckmen who played at least six games for the year.
Limited future.
Looking ahead, how much game time can be realistically expected from a 36-year-old (turning 37 in July) ruckman?
While Goldstein’s experience and leadership are still valuable, especially for mentoring Draper and Bryan, the focus must now shift to the next generation. Draper and Bryan need to be the priority moving forward.
Given Goldstein’s limited versatility to play in other roles, his appearances in the main 23 really should be limited.
The onus is now on Draper and Bryan to prove that Essendon can succeed with just one ruckman, as the team’s balance in the forward half needs adjustment for future success.
Bryan.
On an upward trend?
After only one appearance in the senior lineup in Round 12, Bryan was finally rewarded for his consistency in the VFL and selected again with the season still on the line and four games to go. His reselection signaled confidence that he could have more impact than Goldstein during this critical part of the year.
Despite only playing five games, Bryan attended the most ruck contests per time on ground for Essendon, followed by Goldstein and then Draper.
His potential to connect with the midfield was best displayed in Round 21 against Fremantle, where he initiated the team's first four scores, contributing to 19 of Essendon's 27 points for the quarter. By the end of that round, he was tied as the top-performing ruckman in this metric, despite playing just 58% of the game — 18-30% less than other top-performing rucks.
I expect Bryan finished the year with confidence, given his ability to consistently get his hands on the ball, averaging just over 12 disposals in his last three games against Witts, Grundy, and McInerney. He competed strongly at centre bounces against Grundy, winning three centre clearances, and followed up with two centre clearances against McInerney the next week.
Bryan averaged over 65% of Essendon's ruck contests per game, the most of any Bomber. In addition to attending the most ruck contests per time on ground for Essendon, he ranked 20th in this metric across the league for rucks who played five or more games, and he was the second-youngest on that list.
Is there enough in the tank?
While Bryan's connection with the midfield was impressive against Fremantle, his performance in other games didn't match that standard, and it's an area that requires significant improvement.
Among Essendon's three primary ruckmen, Bryan ranked lowest by far in starting scoring chains from his ruck contests per time on ground. In fact, he was 24th in the competition for rucks who played five games or more.
Experience with his midfield group should help in this regard, but the only way to foster that connection is with more time on field. Bryan averaged just 55 minutes per game across his five appearances, ranking 22nd for all rucks who played a minimum of five games this season.
Improving his fitness to run out games will be crucial, as it will allow him to have more impact. If he can become more involved in possession chains around the ground, he can force opposition rucks to be aware of his positioning, rather than him having to constantly adopt a defensive mindset. Experienced rucks like Tom De Koning, Grundy, English, and Marshall have mastered the art of becoming a link between defence and attack during transitions.
Hardball gets aren't just for midfielders at ground level—they apply to ruckmen as well. With a stronger physique and more maturity, Bryan can lift his hardball wins per ruck contest from one of the lowest in the league closer to the top, where Gawn, Briggs, Tom De Koning, Xerri, and Draper currently rank.
Can he be the one?
Bryan's success in 2025 will depend on two factors: how he trains and performs in next year's preseason, and the balance of the selected 23 each week.
As I've written previously, selecting two dedicated ruckmen will not be a long-term recipe for success. This issue has particularly impacted Essendon's forward line but also affected other areas. Jones, for example, spent a lot of time in an unfamiliar wing role due to Draper’s extended minutes as a forward, which also disrupted Wright's continuity week to week.
However, time is still on Bryan's side. This year, only six ruckmen aged 23 or younger played in the AFL, with Jackson the only one to play more than 10 games. The other five were Moyle with eight, Bryan and Conway with five, Visentini with three, and Barnett of West Coast with one. Similarly, in 2023, only Jackson and Williams (West Coast) played 23 games, while another six, including Bryan, played no more than eight. The real question is whether Bryan has the patience to capitalise on the time available to him.
He finished the year strongly, playing 85% of the game against Brisbane—the highest percentage of his 19-game career so far. If he can lift his average time on ground from just over 69% to closer to 80%, he’ll not only impact more for his teammates but also help neutralise opposing ruckmen.
It’s tough to create a definitive baseline for his career, given his sporadic senior appearances of one, five, eight, and five games, but I believe Bryan is still on an upward trend…well, I do hope so anyway.
Perkins.
This or that.
I've decided to review Perkins as a midfielder this year, but I have to question whether this will be his long-term position.
Let’s start with why he could succeed in the midfield, which really stems from his performances in Rounds one and two.
Based on Player Ratings, only two players had a better start to the season than Perkins, Heeney (opening round and round one) and Serong (round one).
Perkins’ 25.8 rating points, easily the highest of his career.
It wasn't about racking up possessions but how he won them and their impact. He had 22 possessions, with nine won contested and seven at ground level. Add to that 12 tackles and eight clearances, six from centre bounce—equal-most of any player for the round. At that point, you start to wonder if he’s finally delivering on his potential.
He gained 532 metres at 22 metres per disposal—this is Perkins at his best. When he wins or receives the ball, he uses his legs to spread from the area and carry the ball forward. With multiple disposals in possession chains, this makes him a valuable asset, winning the ball inside and punishing opponents on the outside.
This was noticed by both coaches, who awarded him 10 coaches' votes—the most of his career, surpassing the eight votes he received in Round 1 of last year. Once again Perkins started the season in top form.
That appreciation backed once again starting in the Essendon midfield the following week against Sydney, with another eight contested possessions, six at ground level, and seven clearances.
Unfortunately, Parish’s return from injury saw him start in the heart of the battle less come Round 3, and then suffering an injury in Round 4 put the brakes on his season for the next three weeks.
When he returned in Round 8 against West Coast, his role had shifted. No longer at the coalface of stoppages, he was pushed forward and wide.
From Round 8 to the bye, he averaged just over a third of Essendon’s centre bounces. Though in this different role, he was still able to influence scoring, with over 28% of his disposals coming in scoring chains.
Unfortunately, after the bye, much like Essendon, he completely lost form and confidence, spending a large part of his time on the wing a major reason, until he was demoted
to the sub role for two consecutive weeks and eventually spent three weeks in the VFL.
As a midfielder, Perkins can influence games. In his first three matches of the season, he kicked two goals, had four goal assists, and delivered 12 inside-50 entries. This shows that when he’s playing with confidence, he has the ability to finish his work up the ground.
Confidence.
In my view, there’s no harder position in Essendon’s setup than playing as a forward—specifically a half-forward who has to work up the ground to support the midfield. I’ll dive deeper into this in my review of the forward line soon, but briefly, this is why it hinders Perkins in the front half.
Because of Essendon’s methodical ball movement forward, relying on uncontested marks via short kicks, Perkins’ role as a half-forward will never fully reap the rewards or showcase what he is truly capable of. Perkins, along with his teammates in that area, requires faster transitions forward to have a greater opportunity to work in much more open spaces and win the loose ball or contests against direct opponents, rather than facing multiple opponents in a more confined environment due to the slow ball movement. This method doesn’t allow Perkins to showcase his strengths in contests he’s more likely to win, both in the air and especially at ground level. As I wrote earlier, this is one of Perkins' strengths and something he can use across all areas of the ground.
I’ve already discussed Perkins’ strength in contested and ground ball situations, which he’s shown as a midfielder. If he can incorporate more "easy ball" into his game, there’s another level he can reach.
Among Essendon's midfielders, Perkins averaged the fewest uncontested possessions, indicating he struggles to find dangerous positions in transition and isn’t used in chains often enough.
He tends to get caught between the layers of attack and defence in transition—not close enough to the immediate area and then too far from where the ball is ending up. As a result, the game goes on around him too much. He’s got to improve his positioning more consistently, stay on the move, and show better anticipation of what may or should happen.
Once he was moved out of the primary midfield mix, he struggled to assist Durham and Caldwell in the outer layer during stoppages or congestion. This new role caused him to lose his natural game and instincts, as he became too focused on his positioning and where to stand within the system. Consequently, he completely lost confidence.
He’s an easy player to read when his confidence is down. Earlier in the season, he would win or receive the ball and use his legs to create space before disposing of it. As the season wore on, he became more passive, opting for quick kicks or handballs instead of using his strengths to break lines and carry the ball.
Perkins' ratings on my midfield metrics slightly improved this year, boosted by his early-season form, but he remains just above average compared to his competition. The concerning part is that his overall rating hasn’t significantly progressed since his second year.
Potential to reality.
Perkins will be 23 by the start of next season, and by then would’ve completed his 5th preseason. If he’s going to cement himself as a midfielder in 2025 and beyond, he needs to focus on improving his fitness to play longer minutes on ball and sustain his form across the season.
I still see potential for him to become a key midfielder, especially with opportunities available for players who can match the competition’s best contested midfielders. However, now is the time for Perkins to turn his potential into reality. He’ll be competing with teammates also eager to prove they can fill that role.
Perkins strikes me as a player who benefits from simple instructions regarding his positioning and then thrives when allowed to play on instinct. His contract runs until the end of 2026, and if he wants to secure an extension, next year will be crucial in showing that he’s capable of more than what we’ve seen so far.
Setterfield.
Put your hand up.
You might expect a brief review of a player who only featured in four games this year and hasn’t yet signed a contract extension for 2025 and beyond, but Setterfield’s influence in his first two games was too significant to ignore. It could have been even more impactful had injury not cut his season short.
In his first two games of the season, Setterfield looked like he might be the missing piece Essendon has long sought—a contested midfielder who excels at ground level.
He racked up 11 and 17 contested possessions in those games, placing him 10th of all players in the competition at that point.
Only names like Rowell, Serong, Tom Green, Cripps, and Heeney were ahead of him, and of those, only Serong, Rowell, and Cripps matched or exceeded his groundball wins.
Setterfield won just over 50% of his possessions in contests, with only Rowell and Cripps having a higher contested rate among that group.
His 19.2 rating points for impact in Round 2 against Sydney was the highest of his 71-game career. In that match, Essendon won the groundball count by three against the eventual grand finalists, recording 100 groundball wins—their third-highest total for the year.
However, that was the extent of Setterfield’s impact on the season. After missing Round 3 due to injury, he returned in Round 4 but was sidelined again until Round 13, which would be his final senior game for the year. After that Round 13 game against Carlton, Setterfield played seven of a possible eight games in the VFL, only missing one because he was held over as an emergency for Round 22.
Can he deliver.
In his two years at Essendon, Setterfield has played only 14 of a possible 46 games, a disappointing return due to injuries. The most senior games he’s played in a season was 18, back in his third year.
When he’s been on the field, he’s shown he can positively impact the team, providing a balance to the midfield that allows others to excel in their roles. But his lack of selection later in the year raises questions.
Despite Parish and Perkins both missing games toward the end of the season, Setterfield remained in the VFL, where he averaged 27.5 disposals, with over 28% of those involved in scoring chains, 6.3 clearances, and 13.6 contested possessions across his last six games—figures that clearly justify consideration for a recall. Equally puzzling was overlooking his groundball-winning ability, a critical area where Essendon struggled, losing seven of their last nine games in that measurement with a total differential of -82.
What’s next.
While two games is a small sample size, there is a place for Setterfield in the starting 22—for now, at least. His one-dimensional role as an inside midfielder limits his versatility, and playing him on the wing, as was attempted against Carlton in Round 13, doesn’t suit his strengths. His job is to win, or at least halve, contests in congestion.
For now, his role is up for grabs while Essendon evaluates whether others can take it on. In a midfield built heavily on loose ball and outside receivers, Setterfield could provide the balance needed to help those players thrive—if his body can hold up.
Tsatas.
Imagine this.
This review should really focus on why the substitute rule needs to be abolished, as no player’s continuity was more disrupted by this rule than Tsatas.
On five occasions, he started the game as a substitute—the second most of any Essendon player this season.
His journey began in Round 1, followed by a full game in Round 2, only to be dropped to the VFL. When he returned in Round 6, he was once again named the substitute, playing only 13% of the game before being sent back to the VFL. He was promoted again three games later in Round 10, only to be the starting substitute in Rounds 11, 12, and 13.
It wasn’t until the coaches finally realised that this was a poor way for a young player to learn and gain experience that Tsatas was given consistent game time, playing the last eight games in the VFL.
During that stretch, he averaged 32.5 disposals, 6.7 stoppage wins, 15.1 contested possessions, and 7.8 score involvements. His skills by hand shown in Round 11 against Richmond, where he intercepted at ground level during stoppages, feeding out to start three scoring chains, showing glimpses of where he really belongs on the ground.
Hold your horses.
There are still many improvements to be made in his game, and that’s to be expected as he heads into just his third full preseason. However, he will need some assistance from the coaching staff.
A disappointing aspect of his year, which was largely out of his control, was his starting position.
Tsatas did not attend a single centre bounce all season, despite 11 other Essendon players, aside from the five ruckmen used, getting the chance to do so.
When he was involved in the midfield, it was as a winger, a position that simply doesn’t suit him. I’ve written before about how the wing role requires a specific type of player, and it’s clear that Tsatas isn’t naturally suited to it.
When he played that role, you could see the indecision in his positioning—unsure of whether to be a “sweeper” or an outside receiver. Like Perkins, he often found himself caught between two positions, unable to commit to one, which led to the game passing him by both defensively and offensively.
While some of these criticisms may seem harsh at this stage of his career, I’d like to see him become more involved in possession chains, find more “easy” ball, and take on the game with more run and carry to gain territory before disposal. Too often, he seems to feel obligated to hand off to teammates who are ultimately in worse positions than he is, when he should instead take the space ahead of him.
What is he?
Right now, that’s still up in the air. What I do know is that Tsatas is an on-ball midfielder—he’s not a winger or a half-forward. The question is whether he has a point of difference in a position that is currently overloaded with depth on Essendon’s list.
As an outside midfielder, he’s competing in the area where Essendon has the most depth, with players who have better foot skills and decision-making at this stage.
If there’s a spot for him, it’s as an inside midfielder—the type of player who is clean below his knees in congestion and can feed teammates on the outside. This appears to be his natural fit, with his quick hands and aggression at the ball. However, his size is a concern. While players like Neale, Liberatore, and Serong have shown that it’s possible to thrive as smaller inside midfielders, Tsatas faces the challenge of going up against larger, more mature bodies early in his development, which could be an issue.
If Essendon is serious about exploring its list to understand which players can take the next step, Tsatas needs the opportunity to press his case—provided there’s a position available that suits his strengths.
Hobbs.
Square peg, round hole.
Hobbs played 12 games this year, following up on his 18 last season, but much like last year—and Tsatas this year—the substitute rule significantly impacted his continuity and effectiveness.
His season began in Round 2 and continued through to Anzac Day in Round 7, during which he averaged just over 70% time on ground, nearly identical to his average over his first two seasons.
During that stretch, over 36% of his possessions were contested, with more than 70% of those coming at ground level. His work in Round 6 against Adelaide highlighted his strength in the contest, where he initiated two scoring chains directly from clearance wins.
Hobbs' strength lies in his contested work, averaging 4.6 tackles per game in his first six appearances—a rate that would have placed him 4th at Essendon over the course of the season.
After Anzac Day, however, he started as the substitute in consecutive games before an injury sidelined him for four matches. Upon returning, he played five of a possible six VFL games. When he was finally fit enough to return to senior selection in Round 22, he again started as the substitute, as he did in Round 24.
Hobbs' biggest impact this year came in groundball work, particularly hardball wins. Per time on ground, his hardball wins ranked only behind Setterfield (who played just four games), Durham, and Caldwell.
Among midfielders 21 years or younger who played three or more games, Hobbs ranked 4th in this category, trailing only Reid, Ashcroft, and Wardlaw, with over 10% of his possessions won in that manner.
More tricks.
Many of Essendon's midfielders have versatility in where they start during stoppages and how they impact the game when it transitions. Unfortunately, that’s not the case for Hobbs. His flexibility is quite limited, and he only truly excels in one position—the inside midfield.
The coaches' selection and positioning of him have often hindered his ability to make the most of his talents. In the first six games where he wasn’t a substitute, Hobbs attended just 8.5% of the team’s centre bounces, highlighting his lack of opportunity to start as a full-time midfielder.
Like other Essendon midfielders, Hobbs needs to get more involved during transitions—both when going forward and when the opposition has possession. Once the ball leaves his area, he needs to work harder to be an option, either as a link in possession chains or as a defensive aid. Of all Essendon’s midfielders, Hobbs averaged the fewest disposals per time on ground.
His kicking, in particular, needs to improve, as does his decisiveness with the ball. Hobbs has the highest turnover rate per disposal of any Essendon midfielder, with decision-making being a key factor. If he can improve this aspect of his game, he’ll contribute more to scoring, an area where he currently ranks the lowest among Essendon’s midfielders for score involvements per time on ground.
Is it me you’re looking for?
I’ve previously written about Hobbs’ limitations in terms of flexibility within the lineup and how his assets are best used. What he can provide is a weakness on Essendon’s list, meaning the opportunity is there for Hobbs to make the inside midfield role his own.
In this position, he’s competing with the likes of Caldwell, Durham, Setterfield (from earlier in the year), and potentially Tsatas for that role. None of them have yet claimed it as their own, so Hobbs needs to be proactive and show that, heading into his fourth preseason, he can be the solution Essendon is searching for.
Unfortunately, the coaches have often played him out of position throughout his short career, using him in roles such as half-forward or small forward, which don’t suit him at all.
As of now, he remains uncontracted for 2026, and with Essendon continually seeking to improve its list, a lot will depend on how well the coaches can extract the best out of Hobbs—and how much more Hobbs can extract from himself.
Comments