View Full Version : McLean / Jones VS Stanton / J. Watson
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 12:54
Of these two teams which are tipped to be cellar dwellars for next year, who has the better midfield young duo?
thebigboy
9 Dec 2007, 13:04
Well i'll say Stanton and Watson. Stats don't lie and Watsons and Stantons are up there with the best.
dutchy12
9 Dec 2007, 13:15
stanton is not a bad player gets a lot of it but isn't very effective. mclean is just dynamic through the midfield, before this year he was rated as just about the best young midifelder in the game. due to injury this year he wasn't at his best. simply enough if you break your foot in rd 1 your not going to set the world on fire. jones is a battler but he's great to watch. reminds me a lot of a young daniel kerr but doesn;t have as good skills yet they will develop with time.
im not oging to even mention watson in this discussion
McLean and Jones easily. I'm not convinced Watson is an AFL-standard player. 2008 could be his last. Stanton is a middle-of-the-road outside midfielder. His strength is his endurance. Doesn't have the skills or talent to worry an opposition. The Essendon midfield is in real trouble, owing to years of list mismanagement of that area. McLean has been a great little player for the Dees. Not fast, but is the ultimate inside midfielder, with heaps of courage and ability to find the footy. Finishing skills needs some improvement, but will get better. Jones has shown glimpses. None of these players are top-shelf quality though, but the Dees pair are a lot better. :)
DynamoUltra
9 Dec 2007, 14:37
Well i'll say Stanton and Watson. Stats don't lie and Watsons and Stantons are up there with the best.
Ablett and Bartel
Hodge and Mitchell
Burgoyne and Cornes
Kerr and Priddis
Murphy and Judd
In that class, are they?
thebigboy
9 Dec 2007, 14:40
Ablett and Bartel
Hodge and Mitchell
Burgoyne and Cornes
Kerr and Priddis
Murphy and Judd
In that class, are they?
Absolutly:D
BABYBOMBERS2007
9 Dec 2007, 17:25
Stanton and Watson are better. Stanton>>>>>>>>>Mclean, Watson>>>>>>Jones
makethat2
9 Dec 2007, 18:51
Stanton is an average footballer at best. He can run all day but he does no damage. McLean has won a final of his own boot where as Stanton runs around getting cheap kicks.
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:11
Stanton>>>>>>>>>Mclean, Watson>>>>>>Jones
That has to be one of the most ****ed upped sentences i have ever seen in my life.
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:12
Lol every voter who has voted for the bummers combo have been bummers supporters. Sad really
Lol every voter who has voted for the bummers combo have been bummers supporters. Sad really
No it isn't really and i will clarify why i voted that way.
Watson is clearly a better footballer at this stage than Jones, as he should be as he is far more experienced.
I'm not sure if it finished this way but for most of last year he was fourth in clearances.
That leaves Stanton vs Mclean and i believe they are quite even albeit very different players.
I gave the edge to McLean , just, but since Jobe wins clearly over Jones, that leaves us ahead.
GreaT SourcE
9 Dec 2007, 19:26
Stanton and Watson are better. Stanton>>>>>>>>>Mclean, Watson>>>>>>Jones
Agree 100%..........
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:32
The fact is, any neutral supporter would take Mclean over Stanton, Stanton over Jones, Jones over Watson
Deenamite
9 Dec 2007, 19:33
Stanton and Watson are better. Stanton>>>>>>>>>Mclean, Watson>>>>>>Jones
That is up there with the biggest load of shit I've ever heard on BF.
GreaT SourcE
9 Dec 2007, 19:39
The fact is, any neutral supporter would take Mclean over Stanton, Stanton over Jones, Jones over Watson
Not to sure on that one (McLean over Stanton), Stanton is more experienced and is less injury prone.... And any neutral supporter would go for Watson over Jones because he is more experienced and is advanced at clearances / stoppages.......
GreaT SourcE
9 Dec 2007, 19:40
That is up there with the biggest load of shit I've ever heard on BF.
:o:o:o:o:o
..Watson is clearly a better footballer at this tage than Jones, as she should be as he is far more experienced...
lol. Do you really think any other team would want Watson on their list? The only reason he's playing AFL footy still, is that Essendon's midfield is the weakest in the AFL. He should have been delisted at the end of last season. The Dons badly need some midfield talent, and playing ordinaries like Watson in the middle, is just going to starve others of opportunity. The Dons list is a bit of a mess. not only is their midfield shocking, but they rely on 2 oldies in the forward half, and 2 oldies in defense. The Dons rejected other coaching candidates, because they recognized the list problems and said they were going to do something about it. Their reserves coach was the only one who said what they wanted to hear ie make no changes, and avoid reality. So they gave him the job. What a disaster. :)
The fact is, any neutral supporter would take Mclean over Stanton, Stanton over Jones, Jones over Watson
No that is not a FACT at all.
Most of the polls on BF are all about who hates which team/ player more than the other.
They generally have nothing to do with an accurate assessment.
If you can't agree that Watson is a superior player to Jones at this tage of their development, then you are merely presenting a biased view that you accuse others of.
lol. Do you really think any other team would want Watson on their list? The only reason he's playing AFL footy still, is that Essendon's midfield is the weakest in the AFl. He should have been delisted at the end of last season. The Dons badly need some midfield talent, and playing ordinaries like Watson in the middle, is just going to starve others of opportunity. The Dons list is a bit of a mess. not only is their midfield shocking, but they rely on 2 oldies in the forward half, and 2 oldies in defense. The Dons rejected other coaching candidates, because they recognized the list problems and said they were going to do something about it. Their reserves coach was the only one who said what they wanted to hear ie make no changes, and avoid reality. So they gave him the job. What a disaster. :)
You just ramble on with shit parrot and have no clue, so your opinion is irrelevant to me.
Your posts are not worth a reply and the only reason i don't have you on ignore is as a mod i can't.
You speak nothing but shit and i am suprised at the amount of people that still reply to you.
Goodbye
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:48
Watson is clearly a better footballer at this tage than Jones, as he should be as he is far more experienced.
Probably the only accurate thing ive seen you write Merv:D
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:49
And any neutral supporter would go for Watson over Jones
Then tell me why not one neutral supporter has voted for essendons combo?
...
Your posts are not worth a reply and the only reason i don't have you on ignore is as a mod i can't....
Calm down. I just think your logic is fundamentally flawed, and not based on the performances of the players in question. Saying a player like Watson is superior to Jones because "..he has played more games.." is a limited insight. I'm not a huge fan of Jones, but anyone who watches the game would tell you he is clearly a better footballer in terms of talent, skill execution, awareness, creativity, upside and hurt factor. Watson just does not worry any opposition at all. Everything he does is serviceable, but nothing more. If the Dons are serious about rebuilding, they need to recognize that these sort of players are not the future. :)
Then tell me why not one neutral supporter has voted for essendons combo?
Most of the polls on BF are all about who hates which team/ player more than the other.
They generally have nothing to do with an accurate assessment.
answered already
whelan=legend
9 Dec 2007, 19:56
answered already
Dont kid yourself. Im sure many neutral supporters would have voted for Pendlebury / some other pies midfielder, and everyone hates Collingwood more.
GreaT SourcE
9 Dec 2007, 19:58
answered already
Yep.......
Then tell me why not one neutral supporter has voted for essendons combo?
You just can't vote for the Don's combo. Essendon's midfield is a complete disaster. Everyone knows it, and even Dons supporters know it, hence the reaction. However the real issue is what are they going to do to fix the problem i.e. confront the realities and make big decisions, or continue to avoid the problem for another year or 2. :)
lol. Do you really think any other team would want Watson on their list? The only reason he's playing AFL footy still, is that Essendon's midfield is the weakest in the AFL. He should have been delisted at the end of last season. The Dons badly need some midfield talent, and playing ordinaries like Watson in the middle, is just going to starve others of opportunity. The Dons list is a bit of a mess. not only is their midfield shocking, but they rely on 2 oldies in the forward half, and 2 oldies in defense. The Dons rejected other coaching candidates, because they recognized the list problems and said they were going to do something about it. Their reserves coach was the only one who said what they wanted to hear ie make no changes, and avoid reality. So they gave him the job. What a disaster. :)
This bloke is seriously the biggest tool on this board. :)
I know Watson is not very highly regarded around these parts. But too much attention has been put on his speed issues and supposed but overblown kicking issues. What gets lost is that he is a top 10 clearance player and also sets up a lot of play by hand.
He had an up and down year but for about a month midyear he was very good. The second time we played Adelaide we were without Hird and Jason Johnson yet we smashed the mature Adelaide midfield in the clearances 47-27 mostly because of the work of Watson, Stanton and Hille. Watson received 3 brownlow votes for the match.
I am not going to comment on Jones and McLean as I don't watch them closely enough to form a solid judgement.
Calm down. I just think your logic is fundamentally flawed, and not based on the performances of the players in question. Saying a player like Watson is superior to Jones because "..he has played more games.." is a limited insight. I'm not a huge fan of Jones, but anyone who watches the game would tell you he is clearly a better footballer in terms of talent, skill execution, awareness, creativity, upside and hurt factor. Watson just does not worry any opposition at all. Everything he does is serviceable, but nothing more. If the Dons are serious about rebuilding, they need to recognize that these sort of players are not the future. :)
So we are supposed to agree with you because you use a lot of persuasive language and a lot of buzz words without corresponding evidence?
Bachar_Houli
9 Dec 2007, 22:20
Stanton averaged 23 disposals
Watson averaged 23 disposals
Mclean averaged 18 disposals
Jones averaged 17 disposals
Parrot, u r such an idiot and u are known to be a stupid poster on Bigfooty by many. Stats say everything. Essendon's combo is way better!!!
Deenamite
10 Dec 2007, 06:35
Parrot is actually making quite good sense here. I suggest we listen and the vote accordingly. Open your eyes bomber fans.
SEEING EYE DOG
10 Dec 2007, 07:31
I'm a neutral observer and here's my opinion, I would give you a late
2nd round or early 3rd round pick for Stanton. Much as I hate to agree
with Parrot, I don't think any other team would have Watson on their
list. If I had a choice between Watson and Bentick, I'd take Bentick.
At least he can tackle.
As for Mclean and Jones, both worth early to mid 1st round picks. Jones
is and will be far surperior to Stanton and Watson.
I'm a neutral observer and here's my opinion, I would give you a late
2nd round or early 3rd round pick for Stanton. Much as I hate to agree
with Parrot, I don't think any other team would have Watson on their
list. If I had a choice between Watson and Bentick, I'd take Bentick.
At least he can tackle.
As for Mclean and Jones, both worth early to mid 1st round picks. Jones
is and will be far surperior to Stanton and Watson.
If you put "NEED A" in front of your username, it would make perfect sense after that post.
makethat2
10 Dec 2007, 15:35
If you put "NEED A" in front of your username, it would make perfect sense after that post.
Ha, that was funny! Gee Essendon Supporters are getting touchy over there 2 lowly rated players. Stanton's a reciever and Jobe is A clearance player only. McLean S**ts all over both of them and Jones just tops it off.
smiddaz123
10 Dec 2007, 15:49
God there's some shit being posted here.
Stanton is a top player, and Watson is above average.
I could understand wanting jones more on the list but if it was a grand final he wouldn't get a game ahead of either stanton or Watson. Mclean is the best out of them in my opinion but is more injury prone and slightly less consistant than the other 3... In terms of potential you would go Jones/Mclean but if it were for one match i think it is not so clear cut. in terms of performance i rate them Mclean, Watson, Stanton, Jones they all have room for improvement though
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 21:23
Still not one neutral vote for the essendon combo
Still not one neutral vote for the essendon combo
God there's some shit being posted here.
Stanton is a top player, and Watson is above average.
Can't make them vote.
Enjoy your poll win as all it is is a reflection of our success, hence why most will vote against us.
Whereas your team haven't tasted success for so long most pity you and won't vote against you.
It's a close call but the poll won't reflect that, hence the bias.
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 21:41
Can't make them vote.
Enjoy your poll win as all it is is a reflection of our success, hence why most will vote against us.
Whereas your team haven't tasted success for so long most pity you and won't vote against you.
It's a close call but the poll won't reflect that, hence the bias.
Seriously you guys havent made finals since 2004 and its not looking likely until 2014. No one is jealous of essendons position atm so why would people vote against you?
You are deluded. Im sure again if it was geelong who won the granny this year, there would be neutral votes for geelongs combo.
Once again, deluded.
But i did find the little mod edit funny up there:D
Seriously you guys havent made finals since 2004 and its not looking likely until 2014. No one is jealous of essendons position atm so why would people vote against you?
You are deluded. Im sure again if it was geelong who won the granny this year, there would be neutral votes for geelongs combo.
Once again, deluded.
But i did find the little mod edit funny up there:D
See, this is the difference between our two clubs, at least one of them.
Success for us isn't making finals but winning Grand Finals.
Like we did against you in 2000, hence why we have 16 premierships and are widely hated, that's success.
You are deluded. Im sure again if it was geelong who won the granny this year, there would be neutral votes for geelongs combo.
Geelong did win it, no idea what you are on about there.
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 21:53
See, this is the difference between our two clubs, at least one of them.
Success for us isn't making finals but winning Grand Finals.
Like we did against you in 2000, hence why we have 16 premierships and are widely hated, that's success.
Cant argue with that.
Geelong did win it, no idea what you are on about there.
I meant if it was a Geelong duo
Cant argue with that.
I meant if it was a Geelong duo
But Geelong are not hated, except for by Hawthorn supporters.
Not only that their midfield comparisons would blow away most other comparisons.
The one you have offered is a very even comparison, yet the poll will not reflect that, hence the bias.
How about this cheif...
Gumbleton / Ryder VS Umm... :D
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 22:03
The one you have offered is a very even comparison, yet the poll will not reflect that, hence the bias.
Its alright, keep letting yourself think that
Its alright, keep letting yourself think that
Brilliant retort, i will slink away now.
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 22:10
Brilliant retort, i will slink away now.
Seriously if they were as even as you say the are, you would have got at least ONE neutral vote. From and interstater who doesnt hate essendon or something!
The Great Gabsby
10 Dec 2007, 22:32
How about this cheif...
Gumbleton / Ryder VS Umm... :D
Newton/Rivers?? I think the Dees pair have the runs on the board to win that one too.
Not saying that they necessarily will be better players though. Huge fan of Gumby. He's my tip for Rising star 08 :thumbsu:
GreaT SourcE
10 Dec 2007, 22:36
Newton/Rivers?? I think the Dees pair have the runs on the board to win that one too.
Oh jeese mate, you're a bias supporter if ever I've seen one.....
GreaT SourcE
10 Dec 2007, 22:39
God there's some shit being posted here.
Stanton is a top player, and Watson is above average.
Hail to you Smiddaz, now there is some sense that has been put back into the argument, good to see you open your eyes not like some other people....:rolleyes:
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 22:41
Oh jeese mate, you're a bias supporter if ever I've seen one.....
You realise you said stanton>>>>> mclean and watson>>>> jones? Look in the mirror if you want to see a bias supporter
GreaT SourcE
10 Dec 2007, 22:44
You realise you said stanton>>>>> mclean and watson>>>> jones? Look in the mirror if you want to see a bias supporter
I do realise I said that, and I would not change that statement at anytime of the day.... That is 100% true if you open your eyes as well......
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 22:45
I do realise I said that, and I would not change that statement at anytime of the day.... That is 100% true if you open your eyes as well......
Oh god are you actually serious?
GreaT SourcE
10 Dec 2007, 22:53
Oh god are you actually serious?
Are you serious for disagreeing with me ?......... Here are some stats, but you'll probably come up with something else :-
Stanton's average disposals = 23.4
McLean's average disposals = 18.1
Watson's average disposals = 23.3
Jones's average disposals = 17.4
But I'm the real biased one aren't I ????????? :thumbsd:
GreaT SourcE
10 Dec 2007, 22:56
I'm a neutral observer and here's my opinion, I would give you a late
2nd round or early 3rd round pick for Stanton. Much as I hate to agree
with Parrot, I don't think any other team would have Watson on their
list. If I had a choice between Watson and Bentick, I'd take Bentick.
At least he can tackle.
As for Mclean and Jones, both worth early to mid 1st round picks. Jones
is and will be far surperior to Stanton and Watson.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA :D !!!!!!! You're joking right ??
whelan=legend
10 Dec 2007, 23:04
Are you serious for disagreeing with me ?......... Here are some stats, but you'll probably come up with something else :-
Stanton's average disposals = 23.4
McLean's average disposals = 18.1
Watson's average disposals = 23.3
Jones's average disposals = 17.4
But I'm the real biased one aren't I ????????? :thumbsd:
With Mcleans avg i cant comment too much, he broke his foot round one (in the first quarter which would have made his average go down even more) and had niggles all year while stanton was injury free.
With Watsons, the fact is, most of those wouldnt have been within a 5m radius of the target.
And, we all know that AVG disposal stats are defining stat:rolleyes: Players impacts per minute would be the number one stat, and last year when brock and judd were at there fittest, Judd ranked number one in the comp and Brock number 2.
Not to mention Brocks leadership abilities
melbournemartin
10 Dec 2007, 23:41
I wouldn't trade either Jones OR McLean on their own for Stanton AND Watson. They are decent midfielders but McLean has the potential to be a superstar and most likely our next long term captain. Jones is only a bit behind him.
Huddo91
11 Dec 2007, 00:19
With Mcleans avg i cant comment too much, he broke his foot round one (in the first quarter which would have made his average go down even more) and had niggles all year while stanton was injury free.
Try again buddy.
The Great Gabsby
11 Dec 2007, 08:41
Oh jeese mate, you're a bias supporter if ever I've seen one.....
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
whelan=legend
11 Dec 2007, 10:31
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
Cant say im expecting an answer from him any time soon.
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
Gumbleton took more marks per game than Newton but trailed in the other key stats but given that it was his first year on a list compared to Newton (3rd year) it is fair to say that Gumbleton is well ahead. Rivers is ahead of Ryder but given there is over 3 years separating them it is hard to compare.
whelan=legend
11 Dec 2007, 15:50
Gumbleton took more marks per game than Newton but trailed in the other key stats but given that it was his first year on a list compared to Newton (3rd year) it is fair to say that Gumbleton is well ahead. Rivers is ahead of Ryder but given there is over 3 years separating them it is hard to compare.
Well you did get Gumbleton pick 2 in a super draft, we got Newton pick 60 ish in the 2004 draft. A great smokey that has payed off beautifully
Well you did get Gumbleton pick 2 in a super draft, we got Newton pick 60 ish in the 2004 draft. A great smokey that has payed off beautifully
43 in 2004. Has paid off nicely. How are things looking for CHF though?
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
Gumbleton hasn't achieved more than Newton yet and neither of them have done anything yet.
If you go off potential and how they were rated by recruiters and those that know more than those on BF, Gumbleton is one of the highest rated KPP players in recent times. This of course doesn't mean that he will end up the best.
Rivers would have to be rated slightly ahead of Ryder, as he won the RS and had a fantastic first year and has more experience. He has struggled with injury since and hasn't been able to perform at his top.
Ryder played about 5 games in his first year and all of them this year also holding down the CHB position.
Both very talented footballers but i think Ryder has Rivers measure from an athletic POV and a versatility and disposal POV.
I wouldn't swap Gumby Or Ryder for any of Rivers or Newton but i wouldn't be surprised if these guys will go on to all be very good KPP's and quite possibly might match up on each other quite a lot.
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 16:34
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
I didn't say to date, I was putting their abilites / potential together and if you didn't go for Gumbleton & Ryder over Rivers & Newton, then, I don't know what to say really......
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 16:36
I wouldn't swap Gumby Or Ryder for any of Rivers or Newton....
I wouldn't either......
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 16:39
.....A great smokey that has payed off beautifully
I wouldn't say it has payed off beautifully just yet, he has only played 10 games.........
whelan=legend
11 Dec 2007, 19:22
Rivers would have to be rated slightly ahead of Ryder
:eek::eek:
Oh god rivers is so underrated.
The Great Gabsby
11 Dec 2007, 20:24
I didn't say to date
No, but I did in my original post.
I didn't think you had read it, and this just confirmed it. You were too busy blowing your load over players who have lots of potential but are yet to fully realise that potential.
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 20:35
....You were too busy blowing your load over players who have lots of potential but are yet to fully realise that potential....
You Melbourne supporters are / were blowing your bags over Newton, he has played only 10 games for God's sake........So I thought if they're blowing their bags about potential, why can't I with Gumbleton 'n' Ryder !!!
whelan=legend
11 Dec 2007, 21:12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsAlOpPcfBg
Sorry but how can you not blow your load over that.
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 21:19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsAlOpPcfBg
Sorry but how can you not blow your load over that.
I wouldn't judge if he's a good player or not by that mark, but anyway, this is Ryder's no hands on anyone shoulders mark....Pure spring... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MW1VCwJJEII
whelan=legend
11 Dec 2007, 21:46
no hands on anyone shoulders
Yeah look at newtons there were no hands on the shoulders, massive leap. Mark of the year 07:)
http://eteamz.active.com/wrfnc/images/Newton.Mick.Mark'07.jpg
GreaT SourcE
11 Dec 2007, 21:49
Yeah look at newtons there were no hands on the shoulders, massive leap. Mark of the year 07:)
http://eteamz.active.com/wrfnc/images/Newton.Mick.Mark'07.jpg
Yeah wasn't a bad mark at all, but as I said before, I wouldn't call him a good player just because of that mark... I wrecken Newton had a bigger run up than Ryder though, but it was a great mark from Newton no doubt about that.....:thumbsu:.......
brettman135
11 Dec 2007, 23:04
Yeah wasn't a bad mark at all, but as I said before, I wouldn't call him a good player just because of that mark... I wrecken Newton had a bigger run up than Ryder though, but it was a great mark from Newton no doubt about that.....:thumbsu:.......
was a great mark but i am sure neitz didnt enjoy it
while stanton was injury free.
:eek:
Ok then mate, please tell me how Gumbleton has achieved more than Newton, and Ryder has achieved more than Rivers to date. If you actually read what I wrote, you should be able to give me a straightforward answer.
Rivers is 3 and a bit years older FFS. Tell me honestly who you would rather have, Gumbleton and Ryder or Rivers and Newton...;)
Big John
11 Dec 2007, 23:46
I would take Mclean first out of the players listed and haven't seen enough of Jones to compare him, but jeez theres some crap being written about Stanton and Watson in here. Fact is both of them are good players who would easily make any team in the country. They aren't superstars, but they're both good players.
And a little note on Stanton. I think he still caries a stigma on him from his 1st few years. His disposal was questionable early on, but he has fixed that and he has also improved his hurt factor IMO. He only won me over this year, when he started to kick a few goals and took a big mark.
Fairley
11 Dec 2007, 23:58
Mclean and Jones with ease...
I would take Mclean first out of the players listed and haven't seen enough of Jones to compare him, but jeez theres some crap being written about Stanton and Watson in here. Fact is both of them are good players who would easily make any team in the country. They aren't superstars, but they're both good players.
And a little note on Stanton. I think he still caries a stigma on him from his 1st few years. His disposal was questionable early on, but he has fixed that and he has also improved his hurt factor IMO. He only won me over this year, when he started to kick a few goals and took a big mark.
http://www.gspimages.com.au/images/thumbs/main/7238.jpg
Raskolnikov
12 Dec 2007, 15:57
Lol every voter who has voted for the bummers combo have been bummers supporters. Sad really
What's really sad is that you posted this thread just because you knew that most people would vote McLean/Jones. I bet you are jerking off reading this thread.
The Great Gabsby
12 Dec 2007, 16:01
Rivers is 3 and a bit years older FFS.
Ok then. Why don't you go ahead and compare Rivers' second year to Ryder's second year (which is this year i believe)?
See how they stack up.
whelan=legend
12 Dec 2007, 16:11
What's really sad is that you posted this thread just because you knew that most people would vote McLean/Jones. I bet you are jerking off reading this thread.
Whats really sad is you say stuff like that to make you feel better for having shit midfielders.:thumbsd:
I was having a debate with thebigboy in another thread about our midfields and so i started this poll to prove him wrong. And prove him wrong i did:D
Raskolnikov
12 Dec 2007, 16:15
I was having a debate with thebigboy in another thread about our midfields and so i started this poll to prove him wrong. And prove him wrong i did:D
Congratulations!! You must feel like a real hero!!:thumbsu:
Ok then. Why don't you go ahead and compare Rivers' second year to Ryder's second year (which is this year i believe)?
See how they stack up.
Rivers was slightly ahead with averages of 11 disposals, 5 marks and 2 tackles whilst Paddy had 10 disposals, 4 marks, 2 tackles and also 2 hitouts per game. Not that different at all.
And this year Rivers only had 13 disposals and 5 marks per game... Was he injured? As he is now in his prime.
Geelong63
12 Dec 2007, 17:38
Wow......Stanton & Watson are getting Pantsed in the poll :rolleyes:
Bachar_Houli
12 Dec 2007, 17:51
who cares about what this poll says.
stanton averages 23 disposals
watson averages 23 disposals
mclean averages 18 disposals
jones averages 17 disposals
Smyth94
12 Dec 2007, 18:12
McLean is an upgraded version of Stanton however, Stanton has a bigger engine and at this point in time I would still take McLean but I believe Stanton is really going to go to the next level this coming season.
The Jones v Watson debate is silly - Watson is clearly better than Jones at this stage as he should be. Jones may well end up being a better player than Watson but at this point in time it isn't even a contest.
smiddaz123
12 Dec 2007, 18:14
who cares about what this poll says.
stanton averages 23 disposals
watson averages 23 disposals
mclean averages 18 disposals
jones averages 117 disposals
Wow.....go Jones ;)
Stats aren't the only factor btw. I mean, no offence, Watson is a great player imo....but his kicking is very poor.
GreaT SourcE
12 Dec 2007, 18:37
.....Stanton has a bigger engine and at this point in time I would still take McLean but I believe Stanton is really going to go to the next level this coming season.
I wouldn't take McLean over Stanton, McLean is more injury prone and doesn't get the ball as often as Stanton gets it.....Stanton easily leads the average disposals department against McLean, and Stanton averages a few more marks than McLean as well (4 marks more Stanton averages). They're the same age, and at this point, you'd have to say Stanton is better, and I believe Stanton will turn into an elite midfielder next season.....Having said all that, McLean looks like he'll become a great player for the Demons, with his grunt and leadership qualities..... I'm sure even Melbourne supporters with their eyes open would have to say, 'Stanton is better than McLean at this stage for sure..'.
And like you said Smyth, Watson is way better than Jones at this stage, it is silly even comparing them........Jones I feel will be a great player for the Dees, has the same qualities as McLean, but at this stage, I'm sure every Melbourne would have to say, ' Watson is better than Jones at this stage for sure..".
The Great Gabsby
12 Dec 2007, 18:41
Rivers was slightly ahead with averages of 11 disposals, 5 marks and 2 tackles whilst Paddy had 10 disposals, 4 marks, 2 tackles and also 2 hitouts per game. Not that different at all.
Yeah except for the fact that Rivers won the rising star award that year.
And this year Rivers only had 13 disposals and 5 marks per game... Was he injured? As he is now in his prime.
Rivers was chronically injured all year. Played only 3 games.
Yeah except for the fact that Rivers won the rising star award that year.
Must have been a weaker year then champ ;)
The Great Gabsby
12 Dec 2007, 22:34
Must have been a weaker year then champ ;)
I dunno, didn't one Brent Stanton get nominated that year?;)
whelan=legend
12 Dec 2007, 23:58
I dunno, didn't one Brent Stanton get nominated that year?;)
Oooooooh BURNT:thumbsu:
One of the larger burnings ive seen all year Gabsby, good on ya:D
GreaT SourcE
13 Dec 2007, 07:10
I dunno, didn't one Brent Stanton get nominated that year?;)
Brent Stanton only played 13 games that year when Rivers won the Rising Star, and Jared Rivers played 21 games. How can you win it over someone if you are in the team almost every second week (Stanton), against somebody that has only missed one match for the season (Rivers) ???
whelan=legend
13 Dec 2007, 11:22
Yeah thats true if people like Stanton got nominated it must have been a very weak year.
thebigboy
13 Dec 2007, 14:04
Brent Stanton only played 13 games that year when Rivers won the Rising Star, and Jared Rivers played 21 games. How can you win it over someone if you are in the team almost every second week (Stanton), against somebody that has only missed one match for the season (Rivers) ???
Also that was Stantons first year in the comp and Rivers' 3rd. A 3rd year player should be able to wipe the floor of a first year player.
whelan=legend
13 Dec 2007, 14:45
Also that was Stantons first year in the comp and Rivers' 3rd. A 3rd year player should be able to wipe the floor of a first year player.
Hes second year actually. And as a backmen it is alot harder to make an impact then a midfielder.
whelan=legend
13 Dec 2007, 14:47
Oh and thebigboy remember this :D
"If im wrong and the poll goes in your favour ill apologise to every melbourne supporter for being wrong."
Well go on:thumbsu::p
Bachar_Houli
13 Dec 2007, 14:53
this is the third time i post this:
stanton averages 23 disposals
watson averages 23 disposals
mclean averages 18 disposals
jones averages 17 disposals