View Full Version : Promote Jones for Hansen + Ultimatum Lynch
sdb4884
10 Jun 2007, 12:52
All in the title. Hansen will still miss the next 6 weeks and probably come back through Swans to get into our side again so its worth promoting Chad Jones who kicked another 6 yesterday. Also if Q doesn't start kicking straight he should be dropped to the WAFL after all he is here to kick goals, winning the ball is only a quarter of it.
Also: Armstrong deserves another shot, McKinley should be given a chance in our forward line and Seaby form should be monitored because he's been shocking lately that goes for Wirrapunda, R Jones (good one week, shocking next) Also whos going to make way Embley and Nicoski and Cousins?
I know nothing of Jones. What sort of body does he have?
Is he a FF prospect or is he too small?
How old is he?
Btw totally agree, Drop lynch give him some time to get a clue and work out to kick a goal. No doubt the legions of other eagles supporters will stick up for the guy who barely knows where the goals are. Hardest worker my arse...
Embley Nicoski Cousins for R Jones, Le Cras, Rosa.
Then from there swap people out based on form and rest.
We need sampi's magic back in the forward line, cuzz won't be back till mid to end of july.
Fletchers Girl
10 Jun 2007, 14:06
We need sampi's magic back in the forward line, cuzz won't be back till mid to end of july.
Sampi's "magic" is way to inconsistent for my liking...
How much longer till Hansen is back? I agree we should drop Lynch, he does do some hard work around the ground but i think even that has died off a bit.
I think to upgrade a rookie in terms of injury, the player needs to be ou for 8 weeks. Also the WAFL is alot differant to AFL. I believe we should give McKinley a shot.
Scotland
10 Jun 2007, 15:39
I know nothing of Jones. What sort of body does he have?
Human; two arms, two legs etc.
Lynch kicked 65 goals last year. Good to see how quickly that is forgotten.:thumbsd:
Lynch struggles in a pack situation. He is good at one on one wrestles, when on the lead and whe he has a run at the ball. In situations where he has a high ball coming in with guys like Fletcher, Michael and Ryder all around him he clearly struggles.
As I've been saying all year we need to be smarter and more patient going forward, and force more accountability from the opposition defenders. If Ryder and and Fletcher's opponents had stood 40m from goal and Lynch in the square, they would either be open for a short pass from 60-70m out, or would have dragged their opponents up from the goal square to man them up, and thus Lynch would have just Michael to contend with.
Lynch is averaging 2 goals a game.....thats ok for somone of his ability. shuld be averaging 3......but he will be important come second half of the season.....
isyoucallmeGranny
10 Jun 2007, 16:49
I know nothing of Jones. What sort of body does he have?
Is he a FF prospect or is he too small?
How old is he?
Btw totally agree, Drop lynch give him some time to get a clue and work out to kick a goal. No doubt the legions of other eagles supporters will stick up for the guy who barely knows where the goals are. Hardest worker my arse...
Embley Nicoski Cousins for R Jones, Le Cras, Rosa.
Then from there swap people out based on form and rest.
How can you say swap players on form when Rosa has been in outstanding form?
West Coast 06
10 Jun 2007, 17:11
Lynch is averaging 2 goals a game.....thats ok for somone of his ability. shuld be averaging 3......but he will be important come second half of the season.....True.
Same as Hall (only Hall has alot fewer possesions to add depth to his game), would you drop Hall sdb4884?
Lynch has very similar numbers to Jonathan Brown, would you want him dropped?
Only the elite FF of the comp are averaging 3 goals a game, the likes of Pavlich, Lucas, Lloyd, Fevola. Not that it isn't something for Lynch to aim for, I think he can average 3 goals a game (he could already seems he averages 2.6 behinds a game as well!)
I would be all for promoting Jones, lets see what hes got, lets leave no stone unturned. However suggesting that we drop Lynch is rediculous, he adds a great deal to our team.
How can you say swap players on form when Rosa has been in outstanding form?
Not only that but something people are struggling to understand is that Cousins is UNAVAILABLE FOR SELECTION.
Don't get pissed off at the staff for continuing to leave him out. Get pissed off at Cuz for stretching the team like this.
Ricky Bobby
10 Jun 2007, 18:16
I think Lynch should be kept in the side. He isnt gonna take big pack marks ala J. Brown or reiwoldt but he will beat most fb one on one. Lets be smarter with our setup and entry to the f50. I would play Lynch at CHF, hansen when he is fit to ff. Hansen is a much better set shot, lynch more deadly from 50+ and from 80 out could find someone on the lead that is 20-30 out. Really keen to see him as a CHF to work up the ground then push hard inside 50. Think he could be dominant if used in the right role as a i beleive he has a really good tank and it will take a little while for hansen to get that back after a little while out of the game. Get Lynch to CHF!
sdb4884
11 Jun 2007, 00:15
True.
Same as Hall (only Hall has alot fewer possesions to add depth to his game), would you drop Hall sdb4884?
Lynch has very similar numbers to Jonathan Brown, would you want him dropped?
Only the elite FF of the comp are averaging 3 goals a game, the likes of Pavlich, Lucas, Lloyd, Fevola. Not that it isn't something for Lynch to aim for, I think he can average 3 goals a game (he could already seems he averages 2.6 behinds a game as well!)
I would be all for promoting Jones, lets see what hes got, lets leave no stone unturned. However suggesting that we drop Lynch is rediculous, he adds a great deal to our team.
No but Lynch needs to kick goals, given he missed only oneagainst Essendon because he had 2 easy shots and goaled. Needs to kick straight every week. Im just saying that if it continues maybe he might need to go WAFLing.
I think they are worried about demoting him.. because he might kill someone in the WAFL when he falls on them :o
Would love to see cones have a go. Personally i'm a fan of the traditional full forward. The big name who can get the ball and kick a couple to blow a team away. Is it safe to say that we have not had one since Cummings? Maybe troy wilson?
No but Lynch needs to kick goals, given he missed only oneagainst Essendon because he had 2 easy shots and goaled. Needs to kick straight every week. Im just saying that if it continues maybe he might need to go WAFLing.
You're joking right? You want to drop our only decent forward back to the WAFL?
I can guarantee you, Lynch will not be dropped back to the WAFL on his current form.
Keyser Soze
11 Jun 2007, 12:51
Lynch has been able to enough of the footy but as is well documented his kicking for goal has been astray.
I don't see how dropping him back to WAFL will improve his goal kicking and I doubt any one else on the senior list who is available for selection would do better.
With the benefit of hindsight delisting Smith may have been premature as with Hansen out, a forwardline with Smith at FF and Lynch at CHF would have been interesting.
eagles06
11 Jun 2007, 13:08
Could Lynch play in the back line? I think he could play on Gehrig against the saints and just get him away from the forward line. He's played in the back line before and I think its worth a try.
I would make Staker FF and if Hunter isn't needed in the back line then play him at CHF or either Brown or Graham could play at CHF. Staker is a better option at FF because he can take many more contested marks than Lynch.
West Coast 06
11 Jun 2007, 13:16
Could Lynch play in the back line? I think he could play on Gehrig against the saints and just get him away from the forward line. He's played in the back line before and I think its worth a try.
I would make Staker FF and if Hunter isn't needed in the back line then play him at CHF or either Brown or Graham could play at CHF. Staker is a better option at FF because he can take many more contested marks than Lynch.Gehrig wont play against us, he broke his hand and has had it operated on. Out for 3-4 weeks.
Could Lynch play in the back line? I think he could play on Gehrig against the saints and just get him away from the forward line. He's played in the back line before and I think its worth a try.
I would make Staker FF and if Hunter isn't needed in the back line then play him at CHF or either Brown or Graham could play at CHF. Staker is a better option at FF because he can take many more contested marks than Lynch.
Bloody hell. Lynch is our best option at FF, he will not be moved to the backline, he has still been our best forward this year.
Seriously, not having a go at you eagles06, but there a few people on this forum who go way over the top when we have a loss. How about we move Glass to FF, Fletcher to FB and Wirra to the ruck while we're at it?
eagles06
11 Jun 2007, 13:29
Bloody hell. Lynch is our best option at FF, he will not be moved to the backline, he has still been our best forward this year.
Seriously, not having a go at you eagles06, but there a few people on this forum who go way over the top when we have a loss. How about we move Glass to FF, Fletcher to FB and Wirra to the ruck while we're at it?
This isn't just after the loss to the bombers. HE has been kicking horribly all year, hes got something like 21 goals and 28 behinds. If we had someone like Fevola he would have 50 goals by now, I know Lynch has been good even though he hasn't been kicking goals and thats why I would like to see him in another position. I wouldn't mind seeing him at CHF also, I think he could play in the back line as well. If he stays at FF and doesn't begin kicking goals then he will be dropped because he is at FF to kick goals not get points. I would try Lynch at CHF and Staker at FF. Its also worth a shot to put Lynch back just for an experiment.
I wish the afl had let us put smithy on the rookie list.. sucks. :(. He looked like someone who could really fired if he was given a chance in the AFL.
Ahh well, i guess jones is the new hope!
This isn't just after the loss to the bombers. HE has been kicking horribly all year, hes got something like 21 goals and 28 behinds. If we had someone like Fevola he would have 50 goals by now, I know Lynch has been good even though he hasn't been kicking goals and thats why I would like to see him in another position. I wouldn't mind seeing him at CHF also, I think he could play in the back line as well. If he stays at FF and doesn't begin kicking goals then he will be dropped because he is at FF to kick goals not get points. I would try Lynch at CHF and Staker at FF. Its also worth a shot to put Lynch back just for an experiment.
He has only kicked 1 goal less than Hall and a couple less than J. Brown. Would you drop them too?
Staker has been great this year and had 1 good game up forward. That doesn't automatically make him a good forward who should take over Lynch at FF. Lets be realistic here. :rolleyes:
Our backline is full, no room for Lynch down back. No chance in hell Worsfold would send him down back anyway.
Would be hilarious to see a few people on this forum become coach. After a loss, half the team would be dropped and the rest would be switched to another position. :D
eagles06
11 Jun 2007, 13:45
He has only kicked 1 goal less than Hall and a couple less than J. Brown. Would you drop them too?
Staker has been great this year and had 1 good game up forward. That doesn't automatically make him a good forward who should take over Lynch at FF. Lets be realistic here. :rolleyes:
Our backline is full, no room for Lynch down back. No chance in hell Worsfold would send him down back anyway.
Would be hilarious to see a few people on this forum become coach. After a loss, half the team would be dropped and the rest would be switched to another position. :D
I didn't say that I would drop him. I said play him in another position than FF. I also said that the reason I would make Staker FF was because he is a better contested mark than Lynch.
I didn't say that I would drop him. I said play him in another position than FF. I also said that the reason I would make Staker FF was because he is a better contested mark than Lynch.
Still think Staker would be killed at FF against the oppositions best defender. Would do much worse than Lynch.
Alphanumeric
11 Jun 2007, 13:54
I spoke with Ash Hansen after the game on Friday night and he said the finger is coming along well. Hopes to only miss another 4 weeks..
Keyser Soze
11 Jun 2007, 13:57
Would be hilarious to see a few people on this forum become coach. After a loss, half the team would be dropped and the rest would be switched to another position. :D
Outside of the 22 who played against Essendon, Armstrong was the only other player with AFL experience on our list who was realistically available for selection last week. All the others were either injured or lacked match fitness.
As players return from injury competition for spots will naturally tighten up, but it's no good saying player X should be dropped if there is nobody better to take his place.
Exactly what I said, all this discussion about who will be dropped. Yet there is no-one to replace them. Just settle down, until we get some boys back to push their way back into the side. If it isnt broken, don't fix it. Unless you can improve on it. And that will only happen when.. niko, sampi, cousins, hansen, embley.. come back.
Let's just put Lynch's season into perspective: More goals, more shots on goal, more possessions and more marks than at the same point last year.
Why would anyone think he should be dropped?
Let's just put Lynch's season into perspective: More goals, more shots on goal, more possessions and more marks than at the same point last year.
Why would anyone think he should be dropped?
Exactly, and he hasn't been playing solely as a FF either.
If he could kick the bloody ball through the big sticks he'd be right near the top of the goalkicking list.
Underdog
12 Jun 2007, 19:38
Also if Q doesn't start kicking straight he should be dropped to the WAFL after all he is here to kick goals, winning the ball is only a quarter of it.
Btw totally agree, Drop lynch give him some time to get a clue and work out to kick a goal.
I agree we should drop Lynch, he does do some hard work around the ground but i think even that has died off a bit.
Could Lynch play in the back line? I think he could play on Gehrig against the saints and just get him away from the forward line. He's played in the back line before and I think its worth a try.
jesus - where has intelligence gone?
Lynch playing mediocre is still better then any option we have. Having said that, he has had a solid season so far with just accuracy being the issue.
He brings others into the game, he can pinch hit at a variety of positions, is one of our best contested markers - if not the best and is super strong.
His accuracy is poor but he has also struggled somewhat by patches of crapness by our midfield and appalling delivery. This is a midfield missing Cousins, Embley and Nicoski who can all be lethal, not to mention the Kerr suspension.
There is no way in hell he deserves or will be dropped
All those thinking Staker would be a better FF are deluded. He can take some good grabs and is a good albeit inconsistent third tall but against the oppositions best defender he would be mauled.
sdb4884
12 Jun 2007, 20:28
I guess he is the only option we have.
You guys have to understand, the whole reason lynch's selection always comes into question is because he makes such simple mistakes that cost the team. I mean, the guy could blow any team out of the park on a perfect day. I think he got figures of 4.8 once this season?? Thats 10+ goals, if he was the least bit accurate.
Its those misses that cost us games where we dominate, yet make no headway on the scoreboard. If his 15 of his 28 behinds this season were turned into goals, I think we can safely say we would be looking at undefeated top spot on the ladder.
Its a sad fact, that all he has to do is kick straight and thats supposed to be the easy part of being a forward.
sdb4884
12 Jun 2007, 23:23
Well at least my calls for Chad Jones seem to be making news :)
Underdog
13 Jun 2007, 01:06
You guys have to understand, the whole reason lynch's selection always comes into question is because he makes such simple mistakes that cost the team.
It NEVER comes into question
I mean, the guy could blow any team out of the park on a perfect day. I think he got figures of 4.8 once this season?? Thats 10+ goals, if he was the least bit accurate.
5.7 from memory
Its those misses that cost us games where we dominate, yet make no headway on the scoreboard. If his 15 of his 28 behinds this season were turned into goals, I think we can safely say we would be looking at undefeated top spot on the ladder.
Who cares about being undefeated in top spot? Woosha doesn't, otherwise he wouldn't place such faith in unproven kids in pressure situations. He regularly gives kids opportunities to allow them to grow to the detriment to the team.
Your argument also fails to address the fact that NO other tall forward at our team would make or create as many opportunities as Lynch.
It will eventually click for him and as long as he maintains his work rate as he has been it will pay off.
larrikin
13 Jun 2007, 01:09
Judd's goal kicking has been average this year too.
I think we should drop him.
Underdog
13 Jun 2007, 01:23
As a matter of interest
2000 AFL Draft
First Pick - 5 - Andrew McDougall
no quality forwards follow
2001 AFL Draft
First Pick - 3 - Chris Judd
Jarrad Waite a smokey at 46 - slightly worse then Lynch and unproven at FF despite same age
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?tid1=19&pid1=575&tid2=4&pid2=318
2002 AFL Draft
First Pick - 24 - Paul Johnson
Tim Boyle a smokey at 51 - still unproven and benefits from less opposition focus
2003 AFL Draft
First Pick - 11 - Beau Waters
Ryan Murphy at 12 - still unproven and benefits from less opposition focus
2004 AFL Draft
First Pick - 29 - Matt Rosa
no quality forwards follow
Given we drafted Staker, Johnson, Hansen and McDougall in this time (not including rookie list) it is safe to assume we were looking to address the issue but the talent simply wasn't there beyond the first few picks - and we were in no position to receive them
larrikin
13 Jun 2007, 01:27
As a matter of interest
2000 AFL Draft
First Pick - 5 - Andrew McDougall
no quality forwards follow
2001 AFL Draft
First Pick - 3 - Chris Judd
Jarrad Waite a smokey at 46 - slightly worse then Lynch and unproven at FF despite same age
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?tid1=19&pid1=575&tid2=4&pid2=318
2002 AFL Draft
First Pick - 24 - Paul Johnson
Tim Boyle a smokey at 51 - still unproven and benefits from less opposition focus
2003 AFL Draft
First Pick - 11 - Beau Waters
Ryan Murphy at 12 - still unproven and benefits from less opposition focus
2004 AFL Draft
First Pick - 29 - Matt Rosa
no quality forwards follow
Given we drafted Staker, Johnson, Hansen and McDougall in this time (not including rookie list) it is safe to assume we were looking to address the issue but the talent simply wasn't there beyond the first few picks - and we were in no position to receive them
There was some quality ahead of those picks though - eg we could've traded to pick up Franklin in '04....
Underdog
13 Jun 2007, 01:33
There was some quality ahead of those picks though - eg we could've traded to pick up Franklin in '04....
we would have had to trade something bloody good
at the end of the day its all pretty irrelevant.
the coaching staff have a very limited input in drafting and you can only play what you've got.
larrikin
13 Jun 2007, 01:39
we would have had to trade something bloody good
at the end of the day its all pretty irrelevant.
the coaching staff have a very limited input in drafting and you can only play what you've got.
I certainly don't disagree with you (or my English teacher would probably have told me I agree with you). I'm just saying there was quality forwards in most of those drafts - if they had have been THE priority we probably coud've got them.
Underdog
13 Jun 2007, 01:46
if they had have been THE priority we probably coud've got them.
perhaps, yet as I said - we drafted plenty of talls as it was, who we obviously had faith in - particularly McDougall who was a very high pick
Unfortunately things didn't work out the way we hoped and it shows the inexact science of drafting
larrikin
13 Jun 2007, 01:52
perhaps, yet as I said - we drafted plenty of talls as it was, who we obviously had faith in - particularly McDougall who was a very high pick
Unfortunately things didn't work out the way we hoped and it shows the inexact science of drafting
Especially with talls. It's amazing how many ruckmen come from low/rookie draft picks. Not as common with tall forwards but they are quite hit and miss
It NEVER comes into question
I'm talking about from the supporters point of view, not the actual match committee, their decisions are made on better information and by better people for the job. Just referring to how many people bring up lynch and his inaccuracy almost every week.
5.7 from memory
Thats better than expected, but still almost 40% accuracy.. Could have been a huge game for him if he'd nailed them. No doubt that he still played well.
Who cares about being undefeated in top spot? Woosha doesn't, otherwise he wouldn't place such faith in unproven kids in pressure situations. He regularly gives kids opportunities to allow them to grow to the detriment to the team.
Being undefeated is not important, its just a possible outcome that would have occurred if lynch kicked straight. For example, if we unfortunately miss out on the top 4, would you not think our inaccuracy throughout the season cost us dearly (in many games)
Your argument also fails to address the fact that NO other tall forward at our team would make or create as many opportunities as Lynch.
That is true, lynch is an important aspect to our team, however his usefulness in my opinion falters in the goal kicking area. His ability to present and get the ball outside the fifty is unmatched by any other player (maybe hansen comes close), but if we want to succeed in the future, we really need a primary goal kicker. Lynch will always be useful in any position he plays, but given his accuracy this year, maybe another option might be able to take that load off him.
It will eventually click for him and as long as he maintains his work rate as he has been it will pay off.
Lets hope its not during the offseason :(