View Full Version : Who says Port weren't trying?????
RogerRabbit69
28 Feb 2006, 10:53
From today's Advertiser:
And don't think Port did not want to win the pre-season derby. Having launched its Target 5000 membership campaign last Wednesday, chief executive John James spoke to the players about just how important it was to put in a good showing against Adelaide. Its 72-point hiding was badly timed and will do nothing to attract new members.
"That's obviously very disappointing," Lade said.
"John had a talk to us during the week saying it was very important to play well against the hometown rival and unfortunately we didn't do that and hopefully it hasn't put too much of a dampener on memberships and season tickets."
topjars
28 Feb 2006, 11:38
"hopefully it hasn't put too much of a dampener on memberships and season tickets."
Nup....more Crowfans just signed up:p
From today's Advertiser:
And don't think Port did not want to win the pre-season derby. Having launched its Target 5000 membership campaign last Wednesday, chief executive John James spoke to the players about just how important it was to put in a good showing against Adelaide. Its 72-point hiding was badly timed and will do nothing to attract new members.
"That's obviously very disappointing," Lade said.
"John had a talk to us during the week saying it was very important to play well against the hometown rival and unfortunately we didn't do that and hopefully it hasn't put too much of a dampener on memberships and season tickets."
well a number of port people built this game up :rolleyes:
one wonders how much room there is between there backs and the wall :rolleyes:
Blue Red and Gold
28 Feb 2006, 15:41
I couldnt care less about Port Adelaide or their membership drive. We have more important sides to worry about in 06.
We have more important sides to worry about in 06.
With the amount of threads on Port Adelaide in the last two days on this board you wouldnt think it.
RogerRabbit69
28 Feb 2006, 15:51
Hook, line + sinker. Thankyou Rory.
In case you hadn't noticed, Port played the Crows on the weekend. Perhaps that's got something to do with the number of Power references on the Crows board recently. Just a hunch.
RogerRabbit69
28 Feb 2006, 15:52
With the amount of threads on Port Adelaide in the last two days on this board you wouldnt think it.
Also ......
If I posted that thread on the Port board, I'd be accused of trolling.
dA Crow
28 Feb 2006, 15:55
With the amount of threads on Port Adelaide in the last two days on this board you wouldnt think it.
No more obsessed than, oh, say... you avatar :)
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/image.php?u=20639&dateline=1140414978
No more obsessed than, oh, say... you avatar :)
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/image.php?u=20639&dateline=1140414978
Its a good one isnt it :D
I never said anything about obsession I just noticed alot of threads about Port Adelaide and its players and thought I would just comment that I thought it was nice that you Adelaide supporters didn't just think about yourselfs :)
dA Crow
28 Feb 2006, 16:10
Its a good one isnt it :D
I never said anything about obsession I just noticed alot of threads about Port Adelaide and its players and thought I would just comment that I thought it was nice that you Adelaide supporters didn't just think about yourselfs :)
We are a caring sharing bunch for sure, but we are making hay whilst the sun shines, I am sure if the shoe was on the other foot you would be doing the same. I think the underlying comment is that most people here would be stunned as to how Port just collapsed really, regardless of comments about trying or not, losing by 12 goals is gunna hurt regardless of the status of the game.
Blue Red and Gold
28 Feb 2006, 16:14
With the amount of threads on Port Adelaide in the last two days on this board you wouldnt think it.
And there are no Crows related threads on the Port board?
Works both ways.
One thread compred to five on the Adelaide board. But as I said its nice to see that Adelaide supporters think about Port Adelaide. As they say any attention is good attention :)
Blue Red and Gold
28 Feb 2006, 16:41
Yeah at the moment there may not be too many threads, but why would there be after we smashed you?
Wait for it, it will happen mark my words.
Crow-mo
28 Feb 2006, 19:44
One thread compred to five on the Adelaide board. But as I said its nice to see that Adelaide supporters think about Port Adelaide. As they say any attention is good attention :)
yes, it's true we are enjoying your predicament.
SpringChoke
1 Mar 2006, 07:47
According to Port and this mornings Advertiser, on the weekend it was the inexperience of Deluca, Ezard, Ebert and Salopak V Biglands, Goodwin, Reilly and Knights, hence the reason for the massacre. Apparently Maric, Brogan, Cassisii, Cornes, P Burgoyne, Lade and Porp didn't play. If the AFC were humiliated like that we would have been crucified by Rucci and co. I wonder if staff at the Advertiser are actually on the payroll of the Powers marketing dept.
Seems strange that they would go with that line up when, as reported eariler, they were desperate to win to boost their membership. Or maybe Chocco and John "I was an AFC member" James are no longer reading from the same page- now there's a story.
One thread compred to five on the Adelaide board. But as I said its nice to see that Adelaide supporters think about Port Adelaide. As they say any attention is good attention :)
That's not surprising considering the fact that hardly anybody visits the utterly boring Port Power board. In fact, most Port Power supporters actually prefer the Crows board.
I wonder if staff at the Advertiser are actually on the payroll of the Powers marketing dept.
Doesnt Rucci write their year books? I dont know as Ive never actually seen one, but Ive heard it said before. If so, then the answer is YES! there is at least 1.
... In fact, most Port Power supporters actually prefer the Crows board.
Aw rubbish.
The are definitely more threads about Port on this board (started by Crows posters) than there are about the Crows on our board, hence a lot more port posters will respond to these.
Overall there are as many crows posters on our board that are willing to add their two bits about Port as there are Port ones including myself on here.
That is sensible type posting irrelevant of positive or negative opinion and even what you might call "light trolling", but not outright abusive trolling that is not tolerated on any boards, and neither it should.
The are definitely more threads about Port on this board (started by Crows posters) than there are about the Crows on our board, hence a lot more port posters will respond to these.
Of course, there will be more threads on any subject on this board than that boring deserted PAP board. The Port Power board is nothing but a barren wasteland with ZERO activity.
Having said that, feel free to spend most of your time on this board (which you already do anyway). We all understand that the Port Power board is just much too boring for you to spend any time there.
Of course, there will be more threads on any subject on this board than that boring deserted PAP board. The Port Power board is nothing but a barren wasteland with ZERO activity.
Having said that, feel free to spend most of your time on this board (which you already do anyway). We all understand that the Port Power board is just much too boring for you to spend any time there.
Double rubbish.
Go to the Port board and count the number of non Port posters (mostly AFC posters) that have posted on there in PAFC related threads since Sunday and see if you can match that number with Port posters that have posted on here in AFC related threads. You cannot without making up numbers. ;)
Go to the Port board .......
I tried... anyone know how to get thumble weed of a shirt :)
NewCrowsFan
1 Mar 2006, 12:09
I tried... anyone know how to get thumble weed of a shirt :)
*brings out the industrial strength vacuum cleaner and sucks that tumbleweed right off the shirt*. :p
outback jack
1 Mar 2006, 12:53
Of course, there will be more threads on any subject on this board than that boring deserted PAP board. The Port Power board is nothing but a barren wasteland with ZERO activity.
agree entirely hence my imminent unbanning will be appreciated.
Having said that, feel free to spend most of your time on this board (which you already do anyway). We all understand that the Port Power board is just much too boring for you to spend any time there.
go easy on *PAF hes better than some of the crows posters here. No need to label all paps supporters as bitter and twisted, just because the club embraces this mentality. *PAF is just twisted, but not bitter though.
outback jack
1 Mar 2006, 13:03
According to Port and this mornings Advertiser, on the weekend it was the inexperience of Deluca, Ezard, Ebert and Salopak V Biglands, Goodwin, Reilly and Knights, hence the reason for the massacre. Apparently Maric, Brogan, Cassisii, Cornes, P Burgoyne, Lade and Porp didn't play. If the AFC were humiliated like that we would have been crucified by Rucci and co. I wonder if staff at the Advertiser are actually on the payroll of the Powers marketing dept.
Seems strange that they would go with that line up when, as reported eariler, they were desperate to win to boost their membership. Or maybe Chocco and John "I was an AFC member" James are no longer reading from the same page- now there's a story.
agree that its rubbish, but i wouldnt worry too much about it. They are designed to be a pain. Port have always used injuries as excuses in previous yrs. When you look at the outs, i'd pick our outs easily over theres personally.
Ports outs- Chad Cornes, Gavin Wanganeen, Darryl Wakelin, Josh Francou, Michael Wilson, Toby Thurstans, Peter Walsh and Aaron Shattock
Crows' absentees - Ricciuto, Welsh, Ben Hart, Nathan Bassett, Jason Torney, Michael Doughty, Ben Hudson and Matthew Clarke
Its from the advertiser though so it could be wrong. Mark williams is clutching at straws a bit there with wanganeen and wakelin.
dyertribe
1 Mar 2006, 15:04
Aaron Shattock
If he'd played we'd have won by 100.
Just on Shattock, it will be interesting to see if he's given the hitman role now that Pickett has departed.
Bottom of the barrel for skill and ability, but not afraid to attack the man as his suspension for wiping out Ball in Launceston showed.
Oh Port were trying all right, but I wish I had waited a bit longer before putting my hard earned on the game. Once we went short I knew my money was gone.
I have been wanting to ask this since Sunday but/and the only reason I haven't done so is because no doubt some posters on here will start screaming blue murder, but in light of some of the crap that has been posted, here goes.
How did you lot see your talls on Sunday?
The reason I ask is because IMO they did what was expected of them, but not too much more can be got from the game.
We played only 2 KPP down back and 2 up front.
They were Bishop and Chaplin down back, and Tredrea and White up front, plus cameos from resting ruckmen.
To put it in perspective, White 18 games, Chaplin 9 games.
Van Berlo 11 games, 7 less than White and 3 more than Chaplin.
He certainly wasn't expected to carry the team was he? Neither he should have been, but the same criteria is not being applied across the board.
As we all know, KPPs usually take quite a bit longer to come good than "shorter" players.
SpringChoke
1 Mar 2006, 17:54
Oh Port were trying all right, but I wish I had waited a bit longer before putting my hard earned on the game. Once we went short I knew my money was gone.
I have been wanting to ask this since Sunday but/and the only reason I haven't done so is because no doubt some posters on here will start screaming blue murder, but in light of some of the crap that has been posted, here goes.
How did you lot see your talls on Sunday?
The reason I ask is because IMO they did what was expected of them, but not too much more can be got from the game.
We played only 2 KPP down back and 2 up front.
They were Bishop and Chaplin down back, and Tredrea and White up front, plus cameos from resting ruckmen.
To put it in perspective, White 18 games, Chaplin 9 games.
Van Berlo 11 games, 7 less than White and 3 more than Chaplin.
He certainly wasn't expected to carry the team was he? Neither he should have been, but the same criteria is not being applied across the board.
As we all know, KPPs usually take quite a bit longer to come good than "shorter" players.
True, White and Chaplin have minimal experience and you were short KPP depth, so is it more a sign of things to come in 2007? Let's hope like hell you have a real good crack at it this year becuase next year you will be without Wakelin and Bishop, Cornes is supposedly a midfielder, Thurstans is overrated and Pettigrew hasn't proven himself as a regular AFL footballer. So that leaves your KPP stocks for 2007 as:
Chaplin - looks promising - but still finding his way,
Tredrea,
Thurstans - :eek:
White - Last year to prove himself,
Cornes - Midfileder according to Port supporters,
Willits - Miles off,
Pettigrew - Still to prove himself. Disposal and decision making under pressure is a concern.
I only see 5 kpps ( including Cornes )there and 2 ( White and Pettigrew ) are yet to prove themselves. Maybe more of the same for 2007 PAF.
True, White and Chaplin have minimal experience and you were short KPP depth, so is it more a sign of things to come in 2007? Let's hope like hell you have a real good crack at it this year becuase next year you will be without Wakelin and Bishop, Cornes is supposedly a midfielder, Thurstans is overrated and Pettigrew hasn't proven himself as a regular AFL footballer. So that leaves your KPP stocks for 2007 as:
Chaplin - looks promising - but still finding his way,
Tredrea,
Thurstans - :eek:
White - Last year to prove himself,
Cornes - Midfileder according to Port supporters,
Willits - Miles off,
Pettigrew - Still to prove himself. Disposal and decision making under pressure is a concern.
I only see 5 kpps ( including Cornes )there and 2 ( White and Pettigrew ) are yet to prove themselves. Maybe more of the same for 2007 PAF.
No question we are a few short atm, but we also have faith in a couple of them.
I agree wrt White. It may not be his last year at the club but for the good of the team he has to start playing like a KPP rather than a tall rover. Personally I am not sure if he will end up being a KPP forward or back at this stage.
SpringChoke
1 Mar 2006, 19:56
No question we are a few short atm, but we also have faith in a couple of them.
I agree wrt White. It may not be his last year at the club but for the good of the team he has to start playing like a KPP rather than a tall rover. Personally I am not sure if he will end up being a KPP forward or back at this stage.
I think our KPP stocks are the best they have ever looked.
I think our KPP stocks are the best they have ever looked.
They certainly look promising. Compared to your last few years they are lightyears ahead.
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 20:03
They certainly look promising. Compared to your last few years they are lightyears ahead.
And the players in question all have a lot of footy ahead of them and are yet to hit their peak. Perrie is the oldest of our KPP and he is in his prime now.
SpringChoke
1 Mar 2006, 20:32
And the players in question all have a lot of footy ahead of them and are yet to hit their peak. Perrie is the oldest of our KPP and he is in his prime now.
True kpps
Trent H: 23, 5-7 years left
Bock: 23 - see Trent
Rutten: 23 - See Trent
Perrie: 27 - 3-4 years left
Kenny: 25 - 4-5 years left
Can play tall:
Welsh: 27 - 3-4 years left
Bassett: 29 - 2-3 years left.
Things are looking good Stiff. Considering there isn't a powerhouse in the comp at the moment ( Essendon 2000, Bisb/Port 2001-2004 ) we have a real good chance of winning a flag in the next 2-3 years. Even after that we still have a realtively good/youngish spine to build a midfield around.
PAF, just of interest, I would be interested on how you rate the players above.
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 20:35
True kpps
Trent H: 23, 5-7 years left
Bock: 23 - see Trent
Rutten: 23 - See Trent
Perrie: 27 - 3-4 years left
Kenny: 25 - 4-5 years left
Can play tall:
Welsh: 27 - 3-4 years left
Bassett: 29 - 2-3 years left.
Things are looking good Stiff. Considering there isn't a powerhouse in the comp at the moment ( Essendon 2000, Bisb/Port 2001-2004 ) we have a real good chance of winning a flag in the next 2-3 years. Even after that we still have a realtively good/youngish spine to build a midfield around.
I still think Gibson needs to come on and we need to draft another young KPP that will develop into a good long term AFL footballer.
Also ......
If I posted that thread on the Port board, I'd be accused of trolling.
Ahem...
Hook, line + sinker. Thankyou Rory.
SpringChoke
1 Mar 2006, 21:06
I still think Gibson needs to come on and we need to draft another young KPP that will develop into a good long term AFL footballer.
True you can never have enough but we are in a better position KPP wise than alot of other clubs. BTW what's your mail on Gibson, how's he progressing?
RogerRabbit69
1 Mar 2006, 21:10
Ahem...
Trolling on your own board??? Interesting ....
Just expecting some Port fan to come up with same old cr.p - we don't pick on you as much as you pick on us ..... and Rory duly obliged.
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 21:25
Ahem...
Wow, look what the cat dragged in :rolleyes:
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 21:26
True you can never have enough but we are in a better position KPP wise than alot of other clubs. BTW what's your mail on Gibson, how's he progressing?
Got no idea. I know that he has been restricted by OP again. Thats 2 years in a row that he has carried OP during the pre-season :(
True kpps
Trent H: 23, 5-7 years left
Bock: 23 - see Trent
Rutten: 23 - See Trent
Perrie: 27 - 3-4 years left
Kenny: 25 - 4-5 years left
Can play tall:
Welsh: 27 - 3-4 years left
Bassett: 29 - 2-3 years left.
Things are looking good Stiff. Considering there isn't a powerhouse in the comp at the moment ( Essendon 2000, Bisb/Port 2001-2004 ) we have a real good chance of winning a flag in the next 2-3 years. Even after that we still have a realtively good/youngish spine to build a midfield around.
PAF, just of interest, I would be interested on how you rate the players above.
I find these type of things hard to do as I normally just like looking at a player from a team needs point of view, but I'll give it a go.
I'll use a rating of 6 to mean standard AFL type KPP player so to speak.
Trent H: 23, Rate him highly but as a third tall at this stage with the occasional cameo. Needs to start playing taller. At moment more of a "tall Hird" than a powerhouse KPP.
Not overly tall for a KPP so needs to improve strength. Has increased in size over the last couple of years so we'll have to wait and see just how much that helps him. Exceptional evasive type skills for a tall.
Last year he went another step, still has one or two steps to go, cannot see why he will not get there if his attitude is the right one for the job at hand.
Rating 6.5
Bock: 23 - Mr straight lines. Can take a grab, can play strong, starting to play a bit smaller than he was able to in past, that is a good thing for him.
I said the year before last that I wasn't sure if he would be best up front or down back (at the time he was up front all the times) well I am still not sure where he is best suited in the long run.
He too went another step last year, he too needs to go another step or two. Not sure he will/can go 2 more steps so to speak, but no reason why he cannot go another one and/or start being super consistent.
Rating 6
Rutten: 23 - I can only go on the games I saw him play last year, but suffice to say I love no nonsense full backs. He is that plus he is strong. I'd love to have him at Port. However so far that is only one season, but what a season.
Rating 9
Perrie: 27 - Very hard to rate one way or the other. A tall Poulton. Gotta love that, however he has limitations but is in career best form atm.
With 2 other talls around him and him being focal point as often as others (he is not suited for second fiddle type jobs) and he can cause match up problems plus bring others into the game.
Rating 6.5 to 7
Kenny: 25 - A better version of Thurstans. He can be laconic but can play front or back. I thought he would be top player when I first saw him, then eventually had to change my mind, but no sooner that I did that I had to eat my words. I hope Thurstans does the same thing to me.
Rating 7.5
Welsh and Basset have exposed form and not much needs to be said about them that hasn't been said in the past.
Wow, not a dud amongst them, but no massive stand out consistent game winner either. Overall they make a nice balanced group that can be changed around to suit plus scope for improvement with a couple.
I'd be happy if I was a Crows supporter at this stage. As others have pointed out depth department needs to be worked on now.
If your real question was meant to be "would I swap them with our young KPPs", then I cannot answer that as they are more advanced in development at this stage thus it's hard to tell if ours will go the next step or not. We are all hopeful of finding a champion when they are young and untried.
Chaplin so far is very very promising. Pettigrew is promising and White is promising but confused. However none of them rate a 5 or over yet. Neither does Thurstans.
For what It's worth I thought Maric was impressive. I have read what people on here have been saying, but just going on his performance on Sunday, IMO he is more advanced than people on here give him credit for. Lade tried but couldnt push him around that easily. Strong for a young bloke.
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 21:41
Kenny: 25 - A better version of Thurstans. He can be laconic but can play front or back. I thought he would be top player when I first saw him, then eventually had to change my mind, but no sooner that I did that I had to eat my words. I hope Thurstans does the same thing to me.
Rating 7.5
I rate your input highly but that my friend is a great insult to The Grug.
Mentioning McGregor and Thurstans in the same sentence is a death penalty with footy gods :D
Thurstans = DUD. Always has been, always will be.
McGregor = A VERY fine KPP who has bucketloads of courage. Something Toby can only have wet dreams about.
I rate your input highly but that my friend is a great insult to The Grug.
Mentioning McGregor and Thurstans in the same sentence is a death penalty with footy gods :D
Thurstans = DUD. Always has been, always will be.
McGregor = A VERY fine KPP who has bucketloads of courage. Something Toby can only have wet dreams about.
You need to highlight the laconic bit as well as his entry into "AFL life" to make sense out of what I am trying to say Stiffy.
I have given McGregor a rating of 7.5 and Thurstans less than 5. I do however believe that Thurstans is capable of more than he is doing atm. If he will produce or not I have no idea as atm it looks like not.
Thurstans is no dud, but his output or rather lack of at times makes it hard to argue against people that rate him as such.
dyertribe
1 Mar 2006, 22:05
If Kenny had Perrie's endurance he'd just about be the best CHF in the business.
Pound for pound the best contested mark in the game.
Didn't think I'd be saying this five years ago.
I rate your input highly but that my friend is a great insult to The Grug.
Mentioning McGregor and Thurstans in the same sentence is a death penalty with footy gods :D
Thurstans = DUD. Always has been, always will be.
McGregor = A VERY fine KPP who has bucketloads of courage. Something Toby can only have wet dreams about.
Amen Stiffy
Thurstans (Dud) slightly the older but both 25.
Kenny can play CHF, CHB or FF - has played many good games in his 117 AFLgames. A key player for the Crows
Dud plays ?? or bench - about 2 or 3 good games in his 49 AFL games. A fringe player for Port.
Let's never mention them in the same sentence again. ;)
Stiffy_18
1 Mar 2006, 22:12
While we are on the topic of Ken McGregor, is anyone else concerned with Kenny's landing technique. He keeps doing a Stevo and land knees first into the ground. Everytime he does that its heart in the mouth stuff for me. He did it on 3 occasions against Port on the weekend. He just goes in kees first. His knees take all the impact. There is no way that can be good for him or us in the long run. The last thing Kenny and the AFC need is another episode of Mark Stevens :(
While we are on the topic of Ken McGregor, is anyone else concerned with Kenny's landing technique. He keeps doing a Stevo and land knees first into the ground. Everytime he does that its heart in the mouth stuff for me. He did it on 3 occasions against Port on the weekend. He just goes in kees first. His knees take all the impact. There is no way that can be good for him or us in the long run. The last thing Kenny and the AFC need is another episode of Mark Stevens :(
I noticed that very point Stiffy and thought exactly what you have written.
Obviously that doesn't happen anywhere near as much at CHB because more often than not the task is to spoil or mark overhead
It's a worry.
dyertribe
1 Mar 2006, 22:16
While we are on the topic of Ken McGregor, is anyone else concerned with Kenny's landing technique. He keeps doing a Stevo and land knees first into the ground.
YES.
I said it two or three times while watching it with the gf.
"That was how Stevo used to land"
"Look at him plant the knee"
"If he keeps this up he'll be f#cked"
"I hope he puts back that divet. The groundsman will be ********ed" :p ok maybe not the last one.
In the end she was "ALRIGHT! I GET IT!"
NikkiNoo
1 Mar 2006, 22:18
While we are on the topic of Ken McGregor, is anyone else concerned with Kenny's landing technique. He keeps doing a Stevo and land knees first into the ground. Everytime he does that its heart in the mouth stuff for me. He did it on 3 occasions against Port on the weekend. He just goes in kees first. His knees take all the impact. There is no way that can be good for him or us in the long run. The last thing Kenny and the AFC need is another episode of Mark Stevens :(
I was saying last year that the club need to send him down to GymSA to be taught how to land or else at least put some knee pads on the boy. He often dives forward to mark to ensure that the defender can't get his hand on the ball, (plus the delivery being crap in some instances) in doing so he lands on his feet first, but the momentum means that he then has to use his knees next while he makes sure that he has marked the ball and then he can finish falling to the ground. The lush turf at footy park makes it look worse as he makes some nice marks in it.
Amen Stiffy
Thurstans (Dud) slightly the older but both 25.
Kenny can play CHF, CHB or FF - has played many good games in his 117 AFLgames. A key player for the Crows
Dud plays ?? or bench - about 2 or 3 good games in his 49 AFL games. A fringe player for Port.
Let's never mention them in the same sentence again. ;)
Age aside, Thurstans showed as much if not more than McGregor when he started.
Gee some people on here have selectively short memories. :D
dyertribe
1 Mar 2006, 22:40
Thurstans showed as much if not more than McGregor when he started.
Gee some people on here have selectively short memories. :D
I was the biggest KMac detractor on this board, but you can't in any way shape or form compare the two at any stage of the journey.
McGregor took awhile to come good but his form has continually improved over the journey - and going into his eighth season and still just 25 he looks the goods to become a go-to key forward.
Thurstans on the other hand has been playing catch-up the entire time.
Remember, he was taken in the same draft as McGregor and is half a year older, yet had to wait a good five seasons for his debut, since which he has started slowly - having what looked to be a promising 2004 before slipping backwards in 2005.
Bottom line?
McGregor > Thurstans.
Younger, more experienced, more versatile, superior.
...
Bottom line?
McGregor > Thurstans.
...
Have I said otherwise? ;)
cro_Magnum
1 Mar 2006, 23:12
If your real question was meant to be "would I swap them with our young KPPs", then I cannot answer that as they are more advanced in development at this stage thus it's hard to tell if ours will go the next step or not. We are all hopeful of finding a champion when they are young and untried.
Chaplin so far is very very promising. Pettigrew is promising and White is promising but confused. However none of them rate a 5 or over yet. Neither does Thurstans.
Generally respect your opinions, but it's hard to be objective about your own players as hope clouds our judgement sometimes (yes Crows supporters too).
Have seen a bit of Thurstans and Chaplin as I follow Sturt and I think Pettigrew is the pick of the three by far. Thought Thurstans was a dud before his grand final feats, and was hoping I was wrong but it looks like he'll go the way of Shane Ellen. As for Chaplin, again I hope I'm wrong but to me he looks better than he is. I've seen him drop his head more than once against SANFL players and that's never impressive. Just a 3rd backman ATM but hopefully he'll have some upside, otherwise he's welcome at the Double Blues.
Generally respect your opinions, but it's hard to be objective about your own players as hope clouds our judgement sometimes (yes Crows supporters too).
Have seen a bit of Thurstans and Chaplin as I follow Sturt and I think Pettigrew is the pick of the three by far. Thought Thurstans was a dud before his grand final feats, and was hoping I was wrong but it looks like he'll go the way of Shane Ellen. As for Chaplin, again I hope I'm wrong but to me he looks better than he is. I've seen him drop his head more than once against SANFL players and that's never impressive. Just a 3rd backman ATM but hopefully he'll have some upside, otherwise he's welcome at the Double Blues.
I can only go on the few AFL games they have played and on TV at that.
I've called it the way I see it at this stage.
And yes hope does cloud our judgement, but that (hope) is also part of the fun from a supporter's point of view. :)
SpringChoke
2 Mar 2006, 07:41
While we are on the topic of Ken McGregor, is anyone else concerned with Kenny's landing technique. He keeps doing a Stevo and land knees first into the ground. Everytime he does that its heart in the mouth stuff for me. He did it on 3 occasions against Port on the weekend. He just goes in kees first. His knees take all the impact. There is no way that can be good for him or us in the long run. The last thing Kenny and the AFC need is another episode of Mark Stevens :(
Bingo. I thought the same thing last weekend, M Stevens MK2. He will get away with it on footy park but do that on Telstra and he may be in trouble.
BTW Mac, Thurstans is 26 this year, Kenny is 25.
SpringChoke
2 Mar 2006, 08:13
I find these type of things hard to do as I normally just like looking at a player from a team needs point of view, but I'll give it a go.
I'll use a rating of 6 to mean standard AFL type KPP player so to speak.
Trent H: 23, Rate him highly but as a third tall at this stage with the occasional cameo. Needs to start playing taller. At moment more of a "tall Hird" than a powerhouse KPP.
Not overly tall for a KPP so needs to improve strength. Has increased in size over the last couple of years so we'll have to wait and see just how much that helps him. Exceptional evasive type skills for a tall.
Last year he went another step, still has one or two steps to go, cannot see why he will not get there if his attitude is the right one for the job at hand.
Rating 6.5
Bock: 23 - Mr straight lines. Can take a grab, can play strong, starting to play a bit smaller than he was able to in past, that is a good thing for him.
I said the year before last that I wasn't sure if he would be best up front or down back (at the time he was up front all the times) well I am still not sure where he is best suited in the long run.
He too went another step last year, he too needs to go another step or two. Not sure he will/can go 2 more steps so to speak, but no reason why he cannot go another one and/or start being super consistent.
Rating 6
Rutten: 23 - I can only go on the games I saw him play last year, but suffice to say I love no nonsense full backs. He is that plus he is strong. I'd love to have him at Port. However so far that is only one season, but what a season.
Rating 9
Perrie: 27 - Very hard to rate one way or the other. A tall Poulton. Gotta love that, however he has limitations but is in career best form atm.
With 2 other talls around him and him being focal point as often as others (he is not suited for second fiddle type jobs) and he can cause match up problems plus bring others into the game.
Rating 6.5 to 7
Kenny: 25 - A better version of Thurstans. He can be laconic but can play front or back. I thought he would be top player when I first saw him, then eventually had to change my mind, but no sooner that I did that I had to eat my words. I hope Thurstans does the same thing to me.
Rating 7.5
Welsh and Basset have exposed form and not much needs to be said about them that hasn't been said in the past.
Wow, not a dud amongst them, but no massive stand out consistent game winner either. Overall they make a nice balanced group that can be changed around to suit plus scope for improvement with a couple.
I'd be happy if I was a Crows supporter at this stage. As others have pointed out depth department needs to be worked on now.
If your real question was meant to be "would I swap them with our young KPPs", then I cannot answer that as they are more advanced in development at this stage thus it's hard to tell if ours will go the next step or not. We are all hopeful of finding a champion when they are young and untried.
Chaplin so far is very very promising. Pettigrew is promising and White is promising but confused. However none of them rate a 5 or over yet. Neither does Thurstans.
For what It's worth I thought Maric was impressive. I have read what people on here have been saying, but just going on his performance on Sunday, IMO he is more advanced than people on here give him credit for. Lade tried but couldnt push him around that easily. Strong for a young bloke.
Cheers PAF. I agree with most of your comments but a few things:
Trent H: I don't think he will ever be a powerhouse forward in the Carey, Brown pack marking mould. More of a skillful, leading, one on one KPP forward. BTW he is 193cm about average for a KPP.
Kenny: Abetter version of Thurstans - enuff said.
No masive stand out game winner: I disagree with this comment, Rutten was AA last year. If you have a FB who can negate a monster forward ( Brown, Tredrea, gehrig etc ) to a goal or less, as Rutten does, then he can be considered a match winner.
SpringChoke
2 Mar 2006, 08:16
I find these type of things hard to do as I normally just like looking at a player from a team needs point of view, but I'll give it a go.
I'll use a rating of 6 to mean standard AFL type KPP player so to speak.
Trent H: 23, Rate him highly but as a third tall at this stage with the occasional cameo. Needs to start playing taller. At moment more of a "tall Hird" than a powerhouse KPP.
Not overly tall for a KPP so needs to improve strength. Has increased in size over the last couple of years so we'll have to wait and see just how much that helps him. Exceptional evasive type skills for a tall.
Last year he went another step, still has one or two steps to go, cannot see why he will not get there if his attitude is the right one for the job at hand.
Rating 6.5
Bock: 23 - Mr straight lines. Can take a grab, can play strong, starting to play a bit smaller than he was able to in past, that is a good thing for him.
I said the year before last that I wasn't sure if he would be best up front or down back (at the time he was up front all the times) well I am still not sure where he is best suited in the long run.
He too went another step last year, he too needs to go another step or two. Not sure he will/can go 2 more steps so to speak, but no reason why he cannot go another one and/or start being super consistent.
Rating 6
Rutten: 23 - I can only go on the games I saw him play last year, but suffice to say I love no nonsense full backs. He is that plus he is strong. I'd love to have him at Port. However so far that is only one season, but what a season.
Rating 9
Perrie: 27 - Very hard to rate one way or the other. A tall Poulton. Gotta love that, however he has limitations but is in career best form atm.
With 2 other talls around him and him being focal point as often as others (he is not suited for second fiddle type jobs) and he can cause match up problems plus bring others into the game.
Rating 6.5 to 7
Kenny: 25 - A better version of Thurstans. He can be laconic but can play front or back. I thought he would be top player when I first saw him, then eventually had to change my mind, but no sooner that I did that I had to eat my words. I hope Thurstans does the same thing to me.
Rating 7.5
Welsh and Basset have exposed form and not much needs to be said about them that hasn't been said in the past.
Wow, not a dud amongst them, but no massive stand out consistent game winner either. Overall they make a nice balanced group that can be changed around to suit plus scope for improvement with a couple.
I'd be happy if I was a Crows supporter at this stage. As others have pointed out depth department needs to be worked on now.
If your real question was meant to be "would I swap them with our young KPPs", then I cannot answer that as they are more advanced in development at this stage thus it's hard to tell if ours will go the next step or not. We are all hopeful of finding a champion when they are young and untried.
Chaplin so far is very very promising. Pettigrew is promising and White is promising but confused. However none of them rate a 5 or over yet. Neither does Thurstans.
For what It's worth I thought Maric was impressive. I have read what people on here have been saying, but just going on his performance on Sunday, IMO he is more advanced than people on here give him credit for. Lade tried but couldnt push him around that easily. Strong for a young bloke.
Cheers PAF. I agree with most of your comments but a few things:
Trent H: I don't think he will ever be a powerhouse forward in the Carey, Brown pack marking mould. More of a skillful, leading, one on one KPP forward. BTW he is 193cm about average for a KPP.
Kenny: Abetter version of Thurstans - enuff said.
No masive stand out game winner: I disagree with this comment, Rutten was AA last year. If you have a FB who can restrict a match winnning forward ( Brown, Tredrea, gehrig etc ) to a goal or less, as Rutten does, then he should be considered a match winner himself.
SpringChoke
2 Mar 2006, 08:18
Generally respect your opinions, but it's hard to be objective about your own players as hope clouds our judgement sometimes (yes Crows supporters too).
Have seen a bit of Thurstans and Chaplin as I follow Sturt and I think Pettigrew is the pick of the three by far. Thought Thurstans was a dud before his grand final feats, and was hoping I was wrong but it looks like he'll go the way of Shane Ellen. As for Chaplin, again I hope I'm wrong but to me he looks better than he is. I've seen him drop his head more than once against SANFL players and that's never impressive. Just a 3rd backman ATM but hopefully he'll have some upside, otherwise he's welcome at the Double Blues.
Out of the three I think Chaplin looks the best. IMO he actually looks better at AFL level than he does at SANFL, if that makes sense. I reckon he has the most chance out of the three of being an A class Kpp. Pettigrew has questions marks over his decision making and disposal under pressure but could still be a player. Considering a KPP is at his peak between 22-28 I reckon time has just about run out for Thurstans. A club doesn't try to trade away KPP's unless they're rubbish
( Sydney and S Stevens ) or they have off field issues.
drakeyv2
2 Mar 2006, 11:51
I still think Gibson needs to come on and we need to draft another young KPP that will develop into a good long term AFL footballer.
Don't forgett Griffin.
I have a hunch he will be groomed more as a forward than as a ruckman.
Kane McGoodwin
2 Mar 2006, 12:24
Out of the three I think Chaplin looks the best. IMO he actually looks better at AFL level than he does at SANFL, if that makes sense. I reckon he has the most chance out of the three of being an A class Kpp. Pettigrew has questions marks over his decision making and disposal under pressure but could still be a player. Considering a KPP is at his peak between 22-28 I reckon time has just about run out for Thurstans. A club doesn't try to trade away KPP's unless they're rubbish
( Sydney and S Stevens ) or they have off field issues.
I agree Chaplin looks the best. Also, IMO Thurstans would be more suited to playing as a defender for Port, which would allow them to move C Cornes forward.
Kane McGoodwin
2 Mar 2006, 12:26
I find these type of things hard to do as I normally just like looking at a player from a team needs point of view, but I'll give it a go.
I'll use a rating of 6 to mean standard AFL type KPP player so to speak.
Trent H: 23, Rate him highly but as a third tall at this stage with the occasional cameo. Needs to start playing taller. At moment more of a "tall Hird" than a powerhouse KPP.
Not overly tall for a KPP so needs to improve strength. Has increased in size over the last couple of years so we'll have to wait and see just how much that helps him. Exceptional evasive type skills for a tall.
Last year he went another step, still has one or two steps to go, cannot see why he will not get there if his attitude is the right one for the job at hand.
Rating 6.5
Trent is about the same height as Tredders & most other KPP's - I think his mobility gives the impression that he is smaller than what he actually is. However, he has bulked up & I'm confident we will see him take the next step this year & become our #1 forward.
I would like to know from all those people claiming the 193cm Trent Hentschel isn't tall enough. How tall exactly do you expect a KPP to be?
Cheers PAF. I agree with most of your comments but a few things:
Trent H: I don't think he will ever be a powerhouse forward in the Carey, Brown pack marking mould. More of a skillful, leading, one on one KPP forward. BTW he is 193cm about average for a KPP.
I agree with your first part. He is more your skills based player than a power one. I do not think he will ever end up being one of the champions (never said that he would) but he can go from being a versatile third tall to a more than decent KPP. On that scale I think he could go up to about an 8 at his peak, if that makes sense. He has got improvement left in him.
His height might be average-ish, but the only skinny ones that make it are the taller ones. He is bulking up and thus it's a wait and see to find out if it will help or hinder him.
...
Kenny: Abetter version of Thurstans - enuff said.
...
If Thurstans produced what he appears capable of he would be a versatile player like Kenny Mc is. People on here can say what they want, but that bit is 100% correct IMO.
Thurstans does have a lot of strings to his bow. Can play up front, down back and pinch hit in the ruck. He is also quite skilful for a tall player. Of that there is no question mark.
He hasn't delivered and is not getting younger though. I rated McGregor almost twice as high as him, so I cannot see why people on here are getting their knickers in a knot.
...
No masive stand out game winner: I disagree with this comment, Rutten was AA last year. If you have a FB who can negate a monster forward ( Brown, Tredrea, gehrig etc ) to a goal or less, as Rutten does, then he can be considered a match winner.
Yeah I suppose you are right. I was thinking more of helping get goal sort of thing.
I have never had favorite players and such, but as I said in the original post I have a special "liking" of no nonsense fullbacks.
By the way, I can think of a number of current player I’d rate a 9, but cannot think of any I’d rate higher.