Nathan Eagleton? [Archive]

bogan4life

11 Jul 2005, 20:31

paul scholes

11 Jul 2005, 21:26

when the heat is on i think he goes missing,is very tradeable imo.

The_Bulldogs_Bite

11 Jul 2005, 21:26

Some people seem to really dislike him here and i would like to no why?

He has been a great member of our team in the last 3 years, has played some great football and has been in the best 3 or 4 times.

He is being played out of postion because of our lack of talls and i wonder what more does he have to do to get respect?

It was not his fault that he was involved in the trade he was but ATM he is only 27 years old and can give us 5 years of good football, where as montie is 31 32 and is not playing any were near as good as eagle ATM.

When he goes on the ball he puts his head over it and really gives his all but he still gets bagged most weeks.

I think its time for us to start giving Eagle the credit he deserves because of the great footy he has been playing of late.

Granted, Eagleton HAS improved over the last 2 years but on top of that, he still doesn't always put his head over the ball. Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesnt. Against St. Kilda there were several times he didn't and stood back and watched as they took the ball away.

All in all; credit to him, he's become a good player. But in saying that - he's possible trade bait.

bulldogtragic

11 Jul 2005, 22:27

He cops flack because we all expected too much from him. And he hasn't lived up to peoples infaleted and wrong expectation about his performances. Montgomery and others in the trade have performed perhaps better than him and some - i'm not one - directly rate him against that and against the trade and see the trade as a loss and that inflates the discontent i think. I don't mind him he isn't the toughest but and the minute most of the side has the physical presence of a under 9's netball side. I'd like to keep him, but should a reasonable offer come along, players like him aren't in short supply so he's up yes. But i'd prefer him over B. Murphy.

Freezing

12 Jul 2005, 00:27

Granted, Eagleton HAS improved over the last 2 years but on top of that, he still doesn't always put his head over the ball. Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesnt. Against St. Kilda there were several times he didn't and stood back and watched as they took the ball away.

not defensive enough, plays too loose, he needs to learn from Robbins gamestyle.

Dog 36

12 Jul 2005, 09:16

when the heat is on i think he goes missing,is very tradeable imo.

Spot on.

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 11:01

Just think hes part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I dont think people hate him, its just that his game is one dimensional and he has no physical presence whatsoever. And its not even really that he shirks the contest really, just that he has no idea _how_ to go about it. he'll jump into the air and go into crash position at any hint of physical contact.

scooter600x

12 Jul 2005, 11:23

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 12:25

I like and admire guys who are prepared to put their head over the footy.

I like and admire guys who are tough at the opposition and the football.

I like and admire guys who are blessed with the ability to use both sides of the body.....not necessary to be brillant on both sides....but certainly able to use both sides....(and not just under extreme pressure...)

I admire and like guys who play accountable footy, who can both attack and defend when required........

I will leave it up to you out there to determine if NE fits any of those areas well enough!

MrChristo

12 Jul 2005, 12:26

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 12:34

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....

johno has also been part of the problem. too many downhill skiers. however johno is a fantastic overhead mark, and quite a good kick for goal inside 40m. not so one-dimensional as eagleton, johno can play HFF and be very dangerous.

but yeah, the born and bred bulldog also gives him a lot of cred that eagleton doesnt get for being tradee.

Dog Town

12 Jul 2005, 12:40

scooter600x

12 Jul 2005, 12:54

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....
Johnson does it better, though.

Johnson runs harder, is more consistant and is exceptional overhead.

There is nothing wrong with being an outside player, every side needs their share, as long as you put your head over the ball and wear one when it's your turn.

Johnson always has, Eagleton has over the last few years.

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 12:55

I tend to rate Eagletons games on how much he hurts the opposition.The style that he plays means that he needs to make most of his possesions count.Earlier in the year he was kicking alot of floaters and was missing some easy shots on goal but over the last 5 or 6 rounds he has started to hurt sides again and has begun kicking those long goals that he is capable of on a more regular basis.As long as he is doing more damage than his opponent then I think he is well worth a spot in the side.Bit of a barometer for us I think.

hes a barometer because receivers are always barometers. he can only function if other players are getting the ball to him, and if the opposition midfield isnt working hard enough to shut him down or hurt us the other way.

hes going to look a million bucks when the entire midfield is dominating and he is going to be a liability if it isnt.

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 12:57

Dog Town

12 Jul 2005, 13:16

hes a barometer because receivers are always barometers. he can only function if other players are getting the ball to him, and if the opposition midfield isnt working hard enough to shut him down or hurt us the other way.

hes going to look a million bucks when the entire midfield is dominating and he is going to be a liability if it isnt.Yeah I was going to mention that but I think there is a little more to it than that.Obviously it is a valid point that he gets more of the ball in the open when the rest of the team is switched on etc but I also think when he has a good game then generally his attack on the ball is usually a bit better and he is running himself into the ground.He is probably one of our hardest running players which takes courage in itself.Against Stkilda in the last quarter he kept a ball alive at half back and then got on the end of a Johnson pass in the goal square just seconds later.

I wonder how long he can hold off guys like Farren Ray?

Gooka

12 Jul 2005, 13:17

The reason Wallet got him to the dogs in the first place was because he could kick it across lines... kick it from half back to chf/ff to a marking forward 1on1 with their defender and beating any flood the opposition might have attempted. Obviously with our current stocks of big bodied forwards there's no point him doing that as there's no one to mark it.

We may find he comes into his own if we get a power-forward...however we may need to offload him to get that forward...

all in all... I don't think he's useless... I think he's doing pretty well for a guy who isn't able to utilise his no.1 strength.

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 13:32

hed be great for collingwood. they have too many tradesmen in the midfield, and they have tall forwards. I think he would kick on at collingwood and everybody would be saying how we were stupid to get rid of him. but if he went to a team without the hard players around him, he will look poor, like when headland to freo.

but yeah, we have macmahon, gilbee, ray and johno, thats enough recievers. of that lot, johno is probably the worst kick of the footy, but the HFF beckons for him.

if sheedy was coach of our team, you know hed move eagleton on. there are teams out there who would be a good fit for him, and his value isnt ever going to be higher.

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 13:45

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....

I think that is a really unfair comparsion. Johnson is a star, team of the century member, current captain, Best an Fairest winner, All Australian.....

Eagleton has nothing like the ability, courage or skill of Johnson.

I think you have an axe to grind. Declare your position and your bias immediately.

SCRAY72

12 Jul 2005, 13:58

Like too many of our players,suspect under pressure. Others who struggle in a pressure situation, Robbins,Cross (drops too many marks),Giansiracusa,Boyd etc.

footscray1973

12 Jul 2005, 14:03

Johnson is a star, team of the century member.....

Based on the timing of the TOFC selection, he was the luckiest member by a long way. Prior to his goal-kicking efforts of recent seasons, he did not deserve that accolade at that stage of his career. Steve Wallis was robbed, and Brad Johnson was appeased for political purposes. Don't get me wrong, he will probably still stand up for comparison when a TOFC is chosen covering 2001-2100, but he did not deserve a guernsey in the 1925-2000 team.

Borgsta

12 Jul 2005, 14:26

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....

Except that Brad runs the lines better, marks better, kicks more goals and can be used in more positions.

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 14:49

Based on the timing of the TOFC selection, he was the luckiest member by a long way. Prior to his goal-kicking efforts of recent seasons, he did not deserve that accolade at that stage of his career. Steve Wallis was robbed, and Brad Johnson was appeased for political purposes. Don't get me wrong, he will probably still stand up for comparison when a TOFC is chosen covering 2001-2100, but he did not deserve a guernsey in the 1925-2000 team.

My first post ever was about Steve Wallis missing out, so I certainly agree. As for Johnson, you make some very good points.

If it was held today he would have made the team. Unsure that anyone else would have put their hand up from the current crop though.....

acker

12 Jul 2005, 15:06

It always strikes me as very strange that a lot of people don't rate Eagleton, yet Brad Johnson is a club legend.

They are effectively the same player.....

I think the loss of Brett Montgomery for Eagleton still irks some Bulldog followers.
He still does'nt rate anywhere near Johnno.

Sedat!

12 Jul 2005, 15:10

I think the loss of Brett Montgomery for Eagleton still irks some Bulldog followers.
He still does'nt rate anywhere near Johnno.
And Stephen Powell as well. The way he was told of his demise was particularly harsh, especially after having such an excellent 1999 season.

saha

12 Jul 2005, 15:16

Nathan Eagleton is a cutey

fred cook

12 Jul 2005, 15:35

I think the loss of Brett Montgomery for Eagleton still irks some Bulldog followers.
He still does'nt rate anywhere near Johnno.

Powell is one of the biggest hacks running around in the comp
Monty a half foward flanker geez we are short of them :confused:

Eagle kicks goals and has been great this year

Go eagle

MrChristo

12 Jul 2005, 15:52

I think you have an axe to grind. Declare your position and your bias immediately.

wtf? :confused:

ok. So we've established that Johnson is a better mark. No question. Kicks more goals? Only because he plays deep forward much more often.
Runs the lines better? Don't think so.
Courage? Don't think so...which, given one is the club captain, is a bit of an indictment wouldn't you think?

I'm not trying to stir, I definately have no position or bias!...But watch any game this year and you will see Johnson pull out, miss targets, choose bad options as much as anyone, Eagleton included.

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 15:54

Powell is one of the biggest hacks running around in the comp
Monty a half foward flanker geez we are short of them :confused:

Eagle kicks goals and has been great this year

Go eagle

Too many drugs over a long period Freddie boy.

Monty, All Australian, Best and Fairest winner and premiership player.......

Eagle soft! Powell is similar to Eagle but a fair bit tougher.....but lets assume they cancel each other out......

Even the Tanned one acknowledges that the trade was a shocker.

Sedat!

12 Jul 2005, 15:54

Powell is one of the biggest hacks running around in the comp
Monty a half foward flanker geez we are short of them :confused:

Eagle kicks goals and has been great this year

Go eagle
Hindsight has (eventually) proven the trade to be worthwhile for us, but at the time, there was much angst with trading away 2 solid performing players and getting one streaky outside runner in return (and the Wiggo draft pick). The poor way in which the trade was handled for the out-going players was a factor in ruining the close team bond our team had in 97-99. It also started the over-supply of outside runners at the expense of inside midfielders, which I'm sure Scott West could attest to in 2003-4.

Eagle can run the lines and is an excellent running shot for goal: just wish he didn't flash in and out of the play on a weekly basis.

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 15:56

wtf? :confused:

ok. So we've established that Johnson is a better mark. No question. Kicks more goals? Only because he plays deep forward much more often.
Runs the lines better? Don't think so.
Courage? Don't think so...which, given one is the club captain, is a bit of an indictment wouldn't you think?

I'm not trying to stir, I definately have no position or bias!...But watch any game this year and you will see Johnson pull out, miss targets, choose bad options as much as anyone, Eagleton included.

i think you should do a poll and then prepare to have your pants pulled down.

You are clearly out there either by yourself or with very few mates on this one Mr......

Come on do a poll!!!!!!

I didn't think so!

Borgsta

12 Jul 2005, 16:15

wtf? :confused:

ok. So we've established that Johnson is a better mark. No question. Kicks more goals? Only because he plays deep forward much more often.
Runs the lines better? Don't think so.
Courage? Don't think so...which, given one is the club captain, is a bit of an indictment wouldn't you think?

I'm not trying to stir, I definately have no position or bias!...But watch any game this year and you will see Johnson pull out, miss targets, choose bad options as much as anyone, Eagleton included.

How about Johnson is far more consistent than TBE? He has had a bad year for his standards and is still playing better than TBE.

MrChristo

12 Jul 2005, 16:20

i think you should do a poll and then prepare to have your pants pulled down.

You are clearly out there either by yourself or with very few mates on this one Mr......

Come on do a poll!!!!!!

I didn't think so!

Here's an idea....Instead of starting a pointless poll (pointless, because I have no great doubt that Johnson would be 'voted' the better player here on this board), how about you watch a few games with an open mind?

Actually, now I look back, it seems there has been a reasonable amount of support, which you've so cleverly countered with, "too many drugs". :rolleyes:

You have your hero's...Most people here have their hero's, that's fine, but don't try to talk serious football while you (or anyone else) is wearing blinkers.

End of the day, you think Eagleton is a dud, Johnno is a "star"...I disagree with both.
Oh well....

EDIT: Yep. I'll agree with that, Boargsta, that Eagleton isn't as consistant as Johnson.
But the whole point of this thread was to see who here does(n't) rate Eagleton, and why...And we constatly hear the same things about being soft, and a receiver etc.
The point I was trying to make is that we have (as we all know) numerous 'soft receiving' types, but some don't get called out on a bad performance/effort, and some get crucified.

Ipaidmy200in89

12 Jul 2005, 16:29

Here's an idea....Instead of starting a pointless poll (pointless, because I have no great doubt that Johnson would be 'voted' the better player here on this board), how about you watch a few games with an open mind?

Actually, now I look back, it seems there has been a reasonable amount of support, which you've so cleverly countered with, "too many drugs". :rolleyes:

You have your hero's...Most people here have their hero's, that's fine, but don't try to talk serious football while you (or anyone else) is wearing blinkers.

End of the day, you think Eagleton is a dud, Johnno is a "star"...I disagree with both.
Oh well....

Sounds like I am not the only one who is wearing blinkers......

One or two others supporting your view is hardly a vindication.

I note the you are making the comment that JOHNSON is NOT a STAR.

Gooka

12 Jul 2005, 16:29

Here's an idea....Instead of starting a pointless poll (pointless, because I have no great doubt that Johnson would be 'voted' the better player here on this board), how about you watch a few games with an open mind?

Actually, now I look back, it seems there has been a reasonable amount of support, which you've so cleverly countered with, "too many drugs". :rolleyes:

You have your hero's...Most people here have their hero's, that's fine, but don't try to talk serious football while you (or anyone else) is wearing blinkers.

End of the day, you think Eagleton is a dud, Johnno is a "star"...I disagree with both.
Oh well....

Yeah, I agree with that one. Eagleton isn't a dud... and while I think Johnno is a great guy, has given his heart and soul for the club and thus deserves our loyalty in return, he doesn't hurt sides that much.

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 16:53

johno will always kick more goals than eagle becaues he is a way way better contested mark - does come in handy in the forward line, just ask bandy.

eagleton has been played in the forward line before and struggled. With the close attention - he needs more room to do his thing.

johno should be (has been by eade?) relegated to a half forward role, and told to put more emphasis on running defensively, not just 100% offensively. give him bursts in the midfield on rotation.

there is a future as a dangerous forward for johno over the next 4-5 years for the doggies. This has been a bit of a transition year for him.

scooter600x

12 Jul 2005, 17:46

Hindsight has (eventually) proven the trade to be worthwhile for us, but at the time, there was much angst with trading away 2 solid performing players and getting one streaky outside runner in return (and the Wiggo draft pick). The poor way in which the trade was handled for the out-going players was a factor in ruining the close team bond our team had in 97-99. It also started the over-supply of outside runners at the expense of inside midfielders, which I'm sure Scott West could attest to in 2003-4.

Eagle can run the lines and is an excellent running shot for goal: just wish he didn't flash in and out of the play on a weekly basis.
We all loved Powell because of the way he played the game (I personally fell in love when he took out Paul Williams) but the fact was his second half of '99 was ordinary. His kicking was dreadful (especially after half time when he was a bit tired) and he was slow as. I remember a game at Optus v Hawthorn (the draw?) he didn't make the distance on the run from 30 out right in front.

Monty was a permanent HFF who kicked 14 goals in 22 games in '99.

Sedat!

12 Jul 2005, 18:06

We all loved Powell because of the way he played the game (I personally fell in love when he took out Paul Williams) but the fact was his second half of '99 was ordinary. His kicking was dreadful (especially after half time when he was a bit tired) and he was slow as. I remember a game at Optus v Hawthorn (the draw?) he didn't make the distance on the run from 30 out right in front.

Monty was a permanent HFF who kicked 14 goals in 22 games in '99.
Not doubting the reasoning behind the trade, but the way it was executed was very poor. To not tell Powelly to his face that he was being traded was very poor player relationship management. Powell did have an outstanding season in 2000 for Melbourne and was far and away their BOG in the GF. His work at the clearances was a huge factor in Woewodin being made to look so good that season.

As it's turned out, Eagle will be a 200 gamer for us, so the trade has borne fruit for us as well. Monty has been very solid for Port and Powelly has had some goos seasons mixed in with some injury interrupted ones. No-one really lost, although we were looking very foolish half way through season 2003 when Eagle finally extracted the digit and became much more consistent.

Dog Town

12 Jul 2005, 18:10

scooter600x

12 Jul 2005, 18:21

Monty has played almost exclusively at half back since he went to Port and occasionally on a wing.Could quite possibly have had 2 All Australian births.Was very unlucky one year.It could end up close to even but at the moment we are still a little behind on that deal.Eagleton is currently of more value IMO.Monty has struggled this season.
As a HB Smith had Monty's spot, and he's had one AA and got ripped of another (they picked the wrong Smith by mistake, I'm sure) so how much extra would Monty have added to our side?

stefoid

12 Jul 2005, 18:56

Rookie

13 Jul 2005, 00:18

I think Eagleton should be traded.

I rate him highly and I think a lot of you are underrating his courage. He might be soft in-and-under, but he's really improved his strenght in the air over the last couple of years. Takes a courageous, brave mark a few times a season now. And Eagle's upside is huge.

But he simply is surplus to requirements. Ray, Griffen, Cooney, Gilbee, Giansiracusa, Cross, West, Johnson... where does he fit?

I can see Collingwood getting great value out of him, but he's just becoming a liability at the Bulldogs.

This is the time to move him on and get something of value for him before his worth dwindles.

Dry Rot

13 Jul 2005, 00:29

he's just becoming a liability at the Bulldogs.

Agree with most of what you said except this bit.

Rookie

13 Jul 2005, 00:51

Agree with most of what you said except this bit.

I'm trying to see this from a long term perspective. I can't see Eagleton featuring as much in a few years time. His trade value is only going to diminish as our young midfielders grow in responsibilty and get more gametime.

I still think the Eagle has a lot to offer at AFL level. His kicking, when happening, is superb, and his 50m+ kicking for goal is handy as well, but his goalkicking is the only asset of his game we're lacking.

Weigh up Eagleton's trade value NOW (or preferably at the end of last season) as compared to the value he's going to give us over the next three seasons as we make a push (hopefully) deep into September.

It's not that I don't rate Eagle, because I do, and he's been one of my favourite players since he found his form two years ago. I simply don't see him being as important to the team as what we could get for him on the trading table.

If we netted a pick for The Eagle which we ontraded (or used our own pick from the same round) to get us one of the many key forward names that have been thrown around this board in recent weeks, I can only see that as a win for us.

Dog Town

13 Jul 2005, 11:13

As a HB Smith had Monty's spot, and he's had one AA and got ripped of another (they picked the wrong Smith by mistake, I'm sure) so how much extra would Monty have added to our side?They both play loose but they played fairly different roles.Monty sagged off his man alot and picked up alot of marks by dropping in front of opposition leading players whereas Smith ran the lines a bit.I think our side would have been better with Monty but you are right that they would have infringed on each others ability to play permamnent defence.Monty was a quality player for Port though and is still playing reasonable footy.Wouldnt surprise to see him go forward again late in his career.

The_Flying_Egg

13 Jul 2005, 16:05

I'm trying to see this from a long term perspective. I can't see Eagleton featuring as much in a few years time. His trade value is only going to diminish as our young midfielders grow in responsibilty and get more gametime.

I still think the Eagle has a lot to offer at AFL level. His kicking, when happening, is superb, and his 50m+ kicking for goal is handy as well, but his goalkicking is the only asset of his game we're lacking.

Weigh up Eagleton's trade value NOW (or preferably at the end of last season) as compared to the value he's going to give us over the next three seasons as we make a push (hopefully) deep into September.

It's not that I don't rate Eagle, because I do, and he's been one of my favourite players since he found his form two years ago. I simply don't see him being as important to the team as what we could get for him on the trading table.

If we netted a pick for The Eagle which we ontraded (or used our own pick from the same round) to get us one of the many key forward names that have been thrown around this board in recent weeks, I can only see that as a win for us.

I don't see why we would trade the Eagle. He is not old, so he will be around when our guns like Bubba, Johnno etc. are gone, and most importantly he is a good player. He came a deserved 4th in our B and F last year, and while he started this season slowly he is flying again now. He is a certain starter every week and at his best is one of our most damaging players. And he ain't soft, he used to be, and the fact that he started putting his head over the ball and putting his body on the line is a major reason he turned his career around and it is a good example for some of our younger players

And if Johnno's soft then Lindsay Gilbee can't kick and Matthew Robbins is lazy defensively. He is also a deadset gun and it staggers me that Dogs fans would think anything else

As for Stephen Powell he has achieved a top 3 position in StKilda's B and F and was Melbournes best finals player in a team that made the Grannie. He might be slowing down now, but he's had a good career and is as tough as nails. And I will hunt down anyone who says otherwise and have their organs for breakfast :eek:

Rookie

13 Jul 2005, 16:51

I don't see why we would trade the Eagle. He is not old, so he will be around when our guns like Bubba, Johnno etc. are gone, and most importantly he is a good player. He came a deserved 4th in our B and F last year, and while he started this season slowly he is flying again now. He is a certain starter every week and at his best is one of our most damaging players. And he ain't soft, he used to be, and the fact that he started putting his head over the ball and putting his body on the line is a major reason he turned his career around and it is a good example for some of our younger players

And if Johnno's soft then Lindsay Gilbee can't kick and Matthew Robbins is lazy defensively. He is also a deadset gun and it staggers me that Dogs fans would think anything else

As for Stephen Powell he has achieved a top 3 position in StKilda's B and F and was Melbournes best finals player in a team that made the Grannie. He might be slowing down now, but he's had a good career and is as tough as nails. And I will hunt down anyone who says otherwise and have their organs for breakfast :eek:

If we managed to ship off Eagleton and more or less get McDougal or Whitnall for him (in a roundabout, on-trading sort of way) would you still be against trading him?

If we netted a pick in the teens for Eagleton, we could almost ontrade that pick for McDougal, Whitnall, or Watts, or use our higher first rounder for the task.

We've gotta give something to get something in return - for mine Eagleton is the most expendable.

No one, at least not me, said Eagleton, or Johnno or Powell was soft.

The_Bulldogs_Bite

13 Jul 2005, 19:11

Eagleton's a good player, nothing more and nothing less. You'd be foolish though not to trade him for A KPP.

Rookie

13 Jul 2005, 21:54

Eagleton's a good player, nothing more and nothing less. You'd be foolish though not to trade him for A KPP.
Amen Brother.

Gooka

14 Jul 2005, 09:54

Eagleton's a good player, nothing more and nothing less. You'd be foolish though not to trade him for A KPP.

Exactly... but I'd have to say that goes for quite a few people in the team that have been listed as 'untouchables' by some people... aka Jordie McMahon. He's good and has pace, but if a KPP comes up that can fill a REAL gap in our team, then trade is a possibility.

Of course, you have to look at how trading a young player will affect other young players when it comes to contract negotiations next time... if the club is seen as unloyal, then that would be the worst possible outcome if we eventually lost Coon and Griff etc.

Dog Town

14 Jul 2005, 11:21

Exactly... but I'd have to say that goes for quite a few people in the team that have been listed as 'untouchables' by some people... aka Jordie McMahon. He's good and has pace, but if a KPP comes up that can fill a REAL gap in our team, then trade is a possibility.

Of course, you have to look at how trading a young player will affect other young players when it comes to contract negotiations next time... if the club is seen as unloyal, then that would be the worst possible outcome if we eventually lost Coon and Griff etc.Mcmahon isn't untouchable but I think we would be silly to trade him unless it was a fantastic deal.I think people have underestimated his performance this season.In alot of ways he has been our most damaging player particularly since round 6 or so.

He straightens us up with his dual sided kicking because no matter where on the field he is he can bring the ball back into the corridor.Also I think he has strengthened his ability to hold his opponent whether it be in the midfield or down back.

I think he still has plenty of improvement in him as well given that he is still under 80kg.He will never be a big man but he will only get stronger with each pre season.This year was probably the first time he has had a full pre season aswell.

The other thing that I have liked about him this year is his ability to get his hands on the ball at clearances when he has been thrown in there at the start of games.

For him to be part of a trade we would want to get a fairly decent KPP that would improve us significantly otherwise all we are doing is weakening one of our major strengths.

stefoid

14 Jul 2005, 11:42

I don't see why we would trade the Eagle. He is not old, so he will be around when our guns like Bubba, Johnno etc. are gone, and most importantly he is a good player. He came a deserved 4th in our B and F last year, and while he started this season slowly he is flying again now. He is a certain starter every week and at his best is one of our most damaging players. And he ain't soft, he used to be, and the fact that he started putting his head over the ball and putting his body on the line is a major reason he turned his career around and it is a good example for some of our younger players

And if Johnno's soft then Lindsay Gilbee can't kick and Matthew Robbins is lazy defensively. He is also a deadset gun and it staggers me that Dogs fans would think anything else

As for Stephen Powell he has achieved a top 3 position in StKilda's B and F and was Melbournes best finals player in a team that made the Grannie. He might be slowing down now, but he's had a good career and is as tough as nails. And I will hunt down anyone who says otherwise and have their organs for breakfast :eek:

nobody said johno was soft, but he is a receiver with average kicking skills, especially on the run. Fortunately for him, thats not his whole game.

Ill agree eagleton is showing more intention to be physical at the contest, but he isnt more effective in that area because he has terrible physical contest skills.

Sedat!

14 Jul 2005, 11:53

For him to be part of a trade we would want to get a fairly decent KPP that would improve us significantly otherwise all we are doing is weakening one of our major strengths.
Having been a McMahon convert over the last 12 months, I would actually place him in the untouchable category for precisely the reasons outlined by Dog Town. Just because we need to find some KPP's with ability, it should not be at the expense of other areas on the ground which we have spent the best part of 5 years addressing and building. We have desperately needed rebound ability and skill off HB: McMahon and Gilbee. We needed clearance winners to help out West: Cross, Hahn, Faulkner (still developing in this area). We needed a strong key defender: Harris. We needed a lock-down defender: Morris. We needed ruck strength and back-up: Minson, Street. We needed defensive 3rd tall and flexibility: Hargrave. we needed midfield skill and players who can run the lines: Cooney, Ray, Griffen. we needed midfielders who give us forward flexibility: Gia, Bobby. None of this has happened by accident. But now that we have these areas sorted, the last thing we should be doing is contemplating wekening these key areas to fix up another deficient area.

We have youngsters on our list who are being groomed to address the key position posts. Williams = CHB. Wells/Walsh/Tiller = FF. Surely a couple of these guys will come through and be a success. That leaves CHF as the only area we don't seem to have anybody coming through. Whether it be through thre National Draft or via trades, we should be concentrating our efforts on a player that can fill this breach long term. Nothing more, nothing less. Furthermore, we should only comtemplate trading players we already have a surplus of. Remember, in a weaker draft, those clubs with the higher picks are in the box seat when it comes to negotiations.

Gooka

14 Jul 2005, 13:25

Having been a McMahon convert over the last 12 months, I would actually place him in the untouchable category for precisely the reasons outlined by Dog Town. Just because we need to find some KPP's with ability, it should not be at the expense of other areas on the ground which we have spent the best part of 5 years addressing and building. We have desperately needed rebound ability and skill off HB: McMahon and Gilbee. We needed clearance winners to help out West: Cross, Hahn, Faulkner (still developing in this area). We needed a strong key defender: Harris. We needed a lock-down defender: Morris. We needed ruck strength and back-up: Minson, Street. We needed defensive 3rd tall and flexibility: Hargrave. we needed midfield skill and players who can run the lines: Cooney, Ray, Griffen. we needed midfielders who give us forward flexibility: Gia, Bobby. None of this has happened by accident. But now that we have these areas sorted, the last thing we should be doing is contemplating wekening these key areas to fix up another deficient area.

We have youngsters on our list who are being groomed to address the key position posts. Williams = CHB. Wells/Walsh/Tiller = FF. Surely a couple of these guys will come through and be a success. That leaves CHF as the only area we don't seem to have anybody coming through. Whether it be through thre National Draft or via trades, we should be concentrating our efforts on a player that can fill this breach long term. Nothing more, nothing less. Furthermore, we should only comtemplate trading players we already have a surplus of. Remember, in a weaker draft, those clubs with the higher picks are in the box seat when it comes to negotiations.

See, I totally disagree. Can appreciate his value to the team, but just don’t think he’s so irreplaceable that he couldn’t be traded for good KPP’s.

There was a thread on here a few weeks back asking when we last had a good KPP set up, and I think the consensus was that it was quite a while back. It seems we’ve been good at finding and blooding quick and highly skilled half-back flankers, but KPP’s have eluded us for quite a while.

I’d feel much better about securing a good KPP and giving up a draft pick and a half back flanker than I would about holding onto a HBF and missing out on a good KPP…

Having said that, obviously the KPP has to be of decent value to be worth it… but in the end, we need KPPs.

The facts are, if we take the softly softly approach to trading then we’ll end up with more Aaron James’… I don’t think that’s what Rocket is about… by the sounds of it he’ll go out hard and trade hard meaning we’re going to pay for a good forward… and pay what they’re worth.

A trade shouldn’t just be based on the cost, but more so on the overall value to the team. A key forward no only improves our attack, it makes our midfield more dangerous and they can go more direct and also improves our defense as you could expect fewer turnovers in the midfield due to a more direct style of play. I think all that is greater value than a HBF.

Just my opinion obviously…

HK_Bulldog

14 Jul 2005, 13:51

nobody said johno was soft, but he is a receiver with average kicking skills, especially on the run. Fortunately for him, thats not his whole game.

Ill agree eagleton is showing more intention to be physical at the contest, but he isnt more effective in that area because he has terrible physical contest skills.

I don't think Johnno's kicking is suspect. Its not long like a Smith or magical like a Jarman but good enough. It's his decision-making that needs to dramatically improve. Having pot-shots from the boundary, ignoring the first option, back-tracking, taking on his man when he doesn't have to. To me, his decision making is ordinary with or without the ball.

The_Flying_Egg

14 Jul 2005, 14:06

If we managed to ship off Eagleton and more or less get McDougal or Whitnall for him (in a roundabout, on-trading sort of way) would you still be against trading him?

I'd trade him if it meant getting a good big guy, but I do think he's a required player and not as expendable as some people seem to think he is.

Minotaur

14 Jul 2005, 14:37

This BOard is reaaly good. Great discussion without to much infantile name calling.

The Monty -Eagleton Trade from a port perspective. Port got something else too -maybe Bishop (can't remember exactly)

Monty has played HBF as a third man up marker. He is an excellent readaer of the ball in flight and is a good mark. He does end up some games with over 10 marks. HE has done this extremely well over the years, but has dropped off considerably. Unfortunately for him, as of last year this role is now undetaken by Chad Cornes. Chad Crones is bigger and is a far better user of the ball once he has it. From a Port fan's view of the game, Monty has been one of the most frustrating performers this year. When he gets the ball and looks sideways, backwards and only then forwards. It is the view of many Port fans that he should not currently be in the team. It wouldn't surprise me if he retired/delisted at teh end of the year. Some players under Mark Williams have gone from reguar starting 18 to delisting.

So currently Port is miles ahead on the trade. (Port didn't lose much because Eaglton and Dew were basically vying for the same role) This could even out if Eagleton plays good footy for another 4 or 5 years -or secures you a good trade. Its funny how things like this can turn around.

stefoid

14 Jul 2005, 15:06

I don't think Johnno's kicking is suspect. Its not long like a Smith or magical like a Jarman but good enough. It's his decision-making that needs to dramatically improve. Having pot-shots from the boundary, ignoring the first option, back-tracking, taking on his man when he doesn't have to. To me, his decision making is ordinary with or without the ball.

his kicking style is very up and under - he doesnt have that knack of being able to kick at full pace. maybe thats one of the reasons he holds onto it - because he cant kick it accurately if someone is on his hammer.

Sedat!

14 Jul 2005, 15:45

A trade shouldn’t just be based on the cost, but more so on the overall value to the team. A key forward no only improves our attack, it makes our midfield more dangerous and they can go more direct and also improves our defense as you could expect fewer turnovers in the midfield due to a more direct style of play. I think all that is greater value than a HBF.

Just my opinion obviously…
So basically you don't rate any of our developing talls. Guys that have been hand-picked by Scott Clayton and, primarily through injury, have not developed as quickly as hoped. If you don't rate any of them, then I can see why you would think this way.

BTW, I agree with the paragraph above. One of my key arguments is that we need to spefically target KPP's that will enhance our list and fill a void. People shouldn't forget that we have been horribly deficient in many other areas over the last 3-4 years, not just in KPP's. These problem areas have taken a while to fix, and I would be very wary of weakening these areas to try and quick fix in others. As I stated previously, surely some of the KPP's on our list will come through and help fill some of the void.

Gooka

14 Jul 2005, 16:23

So basically you don't rate any of our developing talls. Guys that have been hand-picked by Scott Clayton and, primarily through injury, have not developed as quickly as hoped. If you don't rate any of them, then I can see why you would think this way.

I don't know much about the young boys, I'm just going off 2 things.
1. Rodney said we're going to trade aggressively for a proven key forward
2. Smorgo (I think) said there's now room in the salary cap to attract a high profile forward.

Going off those 2 statements from obviously, pretty infulential guys when it comes to who we trade and what our trade policy will be, I think that perhaps our young talls aren't rated that highly, or at least aren't rated to be the dominant tall we want/need... maybe they'll be good 2nd, 3rd talls.

So going off that, I think we'll lose some guys that we've developed over the past years to get the guy Rocket wants.