Anthony Rocca or Scott Lucas [Archive]

Longy413

10 Mar 2006, 08:45

Darealrath

10 Mar 2006, 08:47

Lucas is the better player at every position except for in the ruck. Unlucky not to have been AA at both CHB and CHF.

Rocca's best can be very damaging, and he's Collingwood look lost without him but Lucas' best is still probably better. Not by a lot though. Overall Lucas comfortably the better player though. He's delivered when we were great (about 60 goals in 2000) and when we were rubbish (50+ goals in 2005). Most underrated player in the league.

Darealrath

10 Mar 2006, 08:48

Didn't Lucas kick 7 vs Carlton this year Longy ?

dave_27

10 Mar 2006, 13:43

Essendon supporters will say Lucas, Collingwood supporters will say Rocca.

Bit unfortunate in a way for Lucas coming to the club at the same time as lloyd because if he were at any other club he would be a superstar Full Forward imo.

I rate him talent wise on par with lloyd.

Longy413

10 Mar 2006, 13:45

Didn't Lucas kick 7 vs Carlton this year Longy ?

6.1

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=2033

hollis_tom

10 Mar 2006, 14:04

Both would be the best long accurate kicking (as well as Sav) players in the league, but Anthony seems to get the yips a little when closer to goal.

Scotty is the best kick for goal in the comp by a mile I would say, if I had to pick anyone to have a shot from and angle, straight in front, 50 out I would pick Lucas.

Ricketts

12 Mar 2006, 19:27

Interesting poll this one.

One of the league's most underrated players versus one of the league's most overrated players.

VANDA

12 Mar 2006, 21:04

Lucas

Daylight

Anfonee

Lynch drops a mark

12 Mar 2006, 22:08

I would go with Lucas

Bulldog1954

12 Mar 2006, 22:21

Interesting poll this one.

One of the league's most underrated players versus one of the league's most overrated players.

Exactly

On their day they are comparable, overall as footballers they aren't. Lucas' career has been far and away better then Roccas, he is far more consistent, more reliable and is a star at CHB. As someone else said if he wasn't on the same side as Lloyd he would get a hell of a lot more credit and publicity then he gets now.

DynamoUltra

12 Mar 2006, 23:03

Exactly

On their day they are comparable, overall as footballers they aren't. Lucas' career has been far and away better then Roccas, he is far more consistent, more reliable and is a star at CHB. As someone else said if he wasn't on the same side as Lloyd he would get a hell of a lot more credit and publicity then he gets now.

Yep, Lucas every day of the week.

dipper86

13 Mar 2006, 11:43

As a CHF you would have to pick Rocca, He has the ability to take a very good contested mark something that Lucas clearly lacks.

bomber_legend

13 Mar 2006, 12:08

Definitely Lucas

Moss Rocket

13 Mar 2006, 12:11

Lucas by a mile!

Rocca has not done enough to be compared with Scotty Lucas. Supposedly Rocca is fit and firing preseason, so perhaps this year he will show the consistency and talent that he has promised since his Sydney days.

Coughlan

13 Mar 2006, 12:56

Lucas by a very long margin, Rocca is very over rated

mark73

13 Mar 2006, 17:28

Lucas is more versatile and reliable.Also his kicking would be as long as Rocca's and far more consistent.Rocca would have it over him as a change ruckman.Also Lucas is equally adapt at either end.

mark73

13 Mar 2006, 17:30

Lucas by a very long margin, Rocca is very over rated
I don't agree with that.He is not overrated,just think Lucas would add more stability,as Rocca can be great one week and pedestrian the next.

Cyclops

14 Mar 2006, 15:42

I really can't split them

Lucas has more good games and fewer poor games than Rocca. Rocca probably plays more explosive games more often.

Consistency probably says Lucas if you were going to ask which would you rather have on your list. His best season/s have probably been better than Rocca's.

Must not agree with Longy...must resist reasonable-ness of his argument...

I voted Tony because we already have him but I think Lucas is far more consistant and versatile. Tony can play forward and tiny bursts in the ruck, and will occasionally annihilate sides. Lucas is an under-rated potential matchwinner who does a lot of good work all year long. He can play more possies as well, and I love that left foot. Now if he only knew how to deck blokes...

Another way of putting it is that Lucas will get you higher up the ladder, but Tony will win you more finals.

This is like a down-market version of the Buckley vs Hird threads. Usually I go for the more consitent player in these arguments (because its Bucks :D ) but in a KP forward that x-factor is a bonus.

I'd have voted dead heat if there was a button for that.

Darealrath

14 Mar 2006, 19:02

Must not agree with Longy...must resist reasonable-ness of his argument...

I voted Tony because we already have him but I think Lucas is far more consistant and versatile. Tony can play forward and tiny bursts in the ruck, and will occasionally annihilate sides. Lucas is an under-rated potential matchwinner who does a lot of good work all year long. He can play more possies as well, and I love that left foot. Now if he only knew how to deck blokes...

Another way of putting it is that Lucas will get you higher up the ladder, but Tony will win you more finals.

This is like a down-market version of the Buckley vs Hird threads. Usually I go for the more consitent player in these arguments (because its Bucks :D ) but in a KP forward that x-factor is a bonus.

I'd have voted dead heat if there was a button for that.

Good post Cyclops but one thing i will say is that Lucas is probably our best performed finals player. He doesn't just maintain his quality he lifts to another level more often than not. Got us over the line in a final vs WC in '02.

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 07:17

Good post Cyclops but one thing i will say is that Lucas is probably our best performed finals player. He doesn't just maintain his quality he lifts to another level more often than not. Got us over the line in a final vs WC in '02.

And kept us in the game in the 2001 GF. He also kicked the winning goal in the 2001 Prelim.

He's averaged 22.16 disposals in his last 6 finals (2002-2004). 4 Goals (from memory played 3 games back).

Rocca 11.0 disposals per game in his last 5 finals (2002-2003). 9 Goals.

Cyclops

15 Mar 2006, 07:46

Good post Cyclops but one thing i will say is that Lucas is probably our best performed finals player. He doesn't just maintain his quality he lifts to another level more often than not. Got us over the line in a final vs WC in '02.

You're preaching to the choir man. Until the last year or so Lucas was a most under-rated player and I'd have loved for us to have snagged him in some deal with Essendon.

Unfortunately we didn't have trade bait of the calibre of Henneman or Camporeale to offer ;) . What is it with Sheeds drafting superannuated hacks?

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 07:54

What is it with Sheeds drafting superannuated hacks?

I'd look in your own backyard first mate.
How's Chad's pre-season been? ;)

vinnie_vegas69

15 Mar 2006, 09:33

I'd look in your own backyard first mate.
How's Chad's pre-season been? ;)
Significantly better than any football played by Heffernan since you guys first traded him.

As for the debate, why do people continually insist on making polls about players, one who just had a great season, and one who spent their whole season injured?

I mean, people always vote for the player they have most recently seen playing their best footy, and invariably vote AGAINST the Collingwood player.

Earlier this year, before Nathan Buckley came back, Scott West actually beat him in a poll asking who the better player was. I mean seriously, it's a joke.

DaSawx

15 Mar 2006, 09:49

So Buckley is streets ahead of Scotty West? That, my friend, is a joke.

doppleganger

15 Mar 2006, 10:03

Hopefully Ant will be played closer to goal in 2006 so cant compare him to Lucas going forward

Lucas easily has the runs on the board

Yep O'Keefe, West, G.O'Donnell, Stanton, Lovett, McLeod are all better than Buckley!! id struggle to name a player Buckley is actually a better footballer than!

DaSawx

15 Mar 2006, 10:11

Buckley and West are both great footballers, if everybody voted objectively I wouldn't be surprised if it was pretty much split 50-50.

Some people wouldn't vote for Bucks because be plays for Collingwood, and some people underate West because he's never on a winning team. If he's team consistently played finals, no doubt he would have won a brownlow by now.

knackers27

15 Mar 2006, 10:53

Its rocca for mine, he means more to his side, when he is there Collingwood play well, when he isn't there is no structure in the forward line and Tarrant gets all the attention.

Lucas is more consistent but he doesn't mean as much to the Essendon team, I like him at CHB though

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 10:59

Lucas is more consistent but he doesn't mean as much to the Essendon team

That's because we have Lloyd.

knackers27

15 Mar 2006, 11:30

That's because we have Lloyd.

They have Tarrant, I am just saying if rocca doesn't play for Collingwood they generally lose, its not the same for Lucas, so IMO Rocca means more to his side, and I think he is a better player

Cyclops

15 Mar 2006, 11:30

I'd look in your own backyard first mate.
How's Chad's pre-season been? ;)

He's an ex-Eagle, they automatically get a game for us!

We just want to position ourselves as the club of choice for ex-West Coast players who do a runner or get homesick for Melbourne.;)

Sheeds was way to smart to trade Lucas. I haven't heard any whispers but I'm sure plenty of clubs would've sounded the Bombers out about a trade over the years.

Lucas is pretty integral to your structure now, he's the sort of fella you'd only trade away well over the odds. I guess Rocca's the same for us: he has a value of x, but we'd want 2x for him because of our team dynamic.

It'd be interesting to ask the coaches if they'd be happy with a straight swap. Of course they'd say "no, we're happy with our bloke" but there's a spot for Lucas at Pieland for sure, and I reckon Sheeds could put Pebbles to work (maybe as a wingman?;))

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 11:49

Rocca means more to his side

I agree. But that's because Tarrant goes to water without him.

Lloyd and Lucas work independently of each other. They work well as a unit but one's form isn't dependant on the other.

If Matthew Lloyd was at a different club, Lucas (along with Fletcher) would be Essendon's most important player. As it stands we have the ability to cover one or the other because they are both such great players. Lose both, we're in trouble.

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 11:51

Sheeds was way to smart to trade Lucas. I haven't heard any whispers but I'm sure plenty of clubs would've sounded the Bombers out about a trade over the years.

Everytime Scotty comes out of contract he is linked to Geelong (Falcons boy) but as far as I can tell there has never been any substance to it.

Cassius_Clay

15 Mar 2006, 12:36

I agree. But that's because Tarrant goes to water without him.

Lloyd and Lucas work independently of each other. They work well as a unit but one's form isn't dependant on the other.

If Matthew Lloyd was at a different club, Lucas (along with Fletcher) would be Essendon's most important player. As it stands we have the ability to cover one or the other because they are both such great players. Lose both, we're in trouble.
Tarrant really isn't a proper Full Forward, more of a HFF. Lloyd is a Full Foward. Tarrant will always struggle without Rocca. Just like an O'Loughlin would struggle without Hall.

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 12:40

Tarrant really isn't a proper Full Forward, more of a HFF. Lloyd is a Full Foward. Tarrant will always struggle without Rocca. Just like an O'Loughlin would struggle without Hall.

I agree.

Look at it from the other angle. If Lloyd played for Collingwood, Rocca wouldn't be nearly as important as he is now.

Cassius_Clay

15 Mar 2006, 12:49

Rocca would be a more important player to the Dons than Lucas. (Assuming Lucas got traded for Rocca)

Agree?

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 12:51

Rocca would be a more important player to the Dons than Lucas. (Assuming Lucas got traded for Rocca)

Agree?

No. I don't. He's be of the same importance.

Cassius_Clay

15 Mar 2006, 12:54

No. I don't. He's be of the same importance.
Who's more of a match winner then?

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 12:56

Who's more of a match winner then?

Define match winner?

The player who contributes the most to his side throughout the day?
Or the player who's the more explosive and turns a game in a burst?

If it's the former, then it's Lucas. If it's the latter then it's Rocca.

Cassius_Clay

15 Mar 2006, 13:07

The bloke who has won more games for his club off his own boot.

dave_27

15 Mar 2006, 13:09

Define match winner?

The player who contributes the most to his side throughout the day?
Or the player who's the more explosive and turns a game in a burst?

If it's the former, then it's Lucas. If it's the latter then it's Rocca.

I wouldnt say its totally clear cut in rocca's favour with the latter because how many times have we seen over the years lucas cut loose for a quater or 2.

Cassius_Clay

15 Mar 2006, 13:11

I wouldnt say its totally clear cut in rocca's favour with the latter because how many times have we seen over the years lucas cut loose for a quater or 2.
Not half as many times as Rocca has.

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 13:14

The bloke who has won more games for his club off his own boot.

But that can again be defined two ways.

Player A has 28 disposals and kicks 2 goals, his team wins by 5 points.
Player B kicks 3 goals in the last quarter but only has 8 touchs for the game, his team wins by 5 points.

Who is the match winner?

Is the match winner the consistent four quarter performer, or the one who bobs up when it's needed.

Longy413

15 Mar 2006, 13:16

Not half as many times as Rocca has.

Seen all of Lucas' games then I take it?
Kept a running tally of matches won?

Given Lucas has more than likely played in twice as many winning sides as Rocca has, I'd say the ledger would be in his favour.

Cyclops

15 Mar 2006, 16:06

...Is the match winner the consistent four quarter performer, or the one who bobs up when it's needed.

Hey thats the Buckley vs Hird argument again.

Very interesting your earlier post Longy, about their stats in finals. I recall Rocca going missing when we beat Brisbane in the 2003 finals (although he took one screamer and bagged Leppa afterwards), but the next final vs Port he fired up, and of course in the 2002 GF he nearly pinched the game in a shining display. He's our only player that Brisbane can't really handle.

Lucas does get under-rated, you can't say it enough. However I think Rocca is rightly feared as a game-breaker, because (as you note) a couple of times a year he takes over the pitch and rips sides apart.

Now that I think about it Essendon probably could use Rocca more than we could use Lucas. We have a couple of skilled tall versatile fellas in Fraser and Clement: Fraser's as versatile as Lucas and Clement almost so. Lucas would be a great bonus, but he's not the fella our list is screaming for (see midfielder, fast, and ruckman, any).

Rocca is more like what your side lacks: a nasty brute forward to make other sides wince. Like Lucas Lloyd's more of a skills player and gets hit more than he hits. He could back up Hille in the ruck for short bursts: I think he'd do a lot for you (although like us a quick midfielder is proabably top of the shopping list).

Not saying that makes Tony better, just an observatiion on their usefulness to each other's lists.