Who is our second best player ?

[Dan26]

When asking this question, I am making the logical assumption that Hird is our best. I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

So, who then is our next most valuable/best player.

Is it Lloyd, Mercuri, Misiti, Caracella, Heffernan, Fletcher etc etc.

My vote woukd have to be Lloydy, followed closely by Fletcher, then Misiti

[James2]

Lloyd, followed by Mercuri and Fletcher.

[S.Robbo]

Lloydy would have to be second. Just too valuable a player not to be. Line ball between Mercuri and Fletcher thereafter.

Good topic Dan.

[Pessimistic]

You said second best but your replies indicate second 'most valuable'

But for performance over the years I would nominate Long. In fact I have been to essendon games in previous seasons and he was the only one who looked interested.

[walshy1993]

lloyd and mercuri are easily our equal second best players as far as skill and ability goes, closely followed by pretty much the rest of the team that played in the grand final and a couple who didnt, i definatly think we have a pretty even group of players

as for our second most valuable it has to be fletcher and hardwick. we can cover lloyd, if lloydy has a bad one then lucas, alessio, hird, moorcroft etc can all chip in with goals. mercuri can be covered by johnson, heffernan, caracella etc
but fletch and dimma really hold the backline together, although robran filled in well, these two really do generate a lot of our play and are vital to the teams game plan

[James2]

Walshy,

You say that Fletcher and Dimma are more valuable then Lloyd, because Lloyd's contribution can be covered by others when he performs poorly.

I think that the best measure of how valuable a player is, is how the team performs, when that player is not playing. I agree that both Fletch and Dimma would be crucial losses to the team, however, so to would Lloyd.

There is a difference between covering a player who is playing below there best, and covering a player who is not playing at all.

[Dan26]

Yeah, perhaps I should have separated "best" and "valuable"

On reflection, Lloyd would probably be our second most talented (best), however, Fletcher, it could be "argued" is more valuable to the team.

Then again, Lloyd played every game for the year, so we really have no idea how we would have fared, if Lloydy had been missing.

If we are talking in terms of value, don't forget about big Johnny Barnes. While he would probably only be our 12th or 13th in terms of pure talent (which is still pretty good), he would be in the top 5 in terms of "value", simply becasue no one else on the list performs the "role" he does.

[Arch]

If we could definitevely say that our defense was better than our attack (or vice versa) then it would make a strong case for either Lloyd or Fletch as theyre the focal points in both. But IMHO I dont think either D or Attack is better- they both led the league in PF & PA respectively.

Regardless of that waffle, my vote is for Fletcher, as not only is the best backman in football, but we can also throw him up forward with Lloydy, and he can do pretty much as good a job (on occasion), while Lloyd CANNOT play down back. Fletch can rove, mark, spoil read the play, has the ball skills, the height, the speed- he has it all.

vote "2" Fletch.

!!!

A.

[James2]

I suppose when you made that post Arch, you forget to mention James Hird's celebrated performance on Whitnall in round 5.

[Arch]

james do you mean Lloyds "celebrated" performance on Whitnall ?????

[S.Robbo]

It was Lloyd on lance in that last quarter in rd 5. That quarter was an absolute farce and left me very agitated.

[James2]

Hird also played on him.

[Arch]

exactly robbo- hence the word celebrated in quotes.

but james im still not sure what your getting at there.

[Dan26]

Well, Hird is basically irrelevant for this topic, because we know he is our best player by so much it ain't funny.

But anyway, here are my top 7 lists for "most valuable" and "best"

BEST (i.e most talented - football ability and skill)

1 Hird
2 Lloyd
3 Mercuri
4 Fletcher
5 Caracella
6 Heffernan
7 Misiti

MOST VALUABLE

1 Hird
2 Fletcher
3 Lloyd
4 Misiti
5 Barnes
6 Hardwick
7 Solomon

Beleive it or not, I'd put Moorcroft right up there in terms of value. It's hard to exlain, since he doesn't get many possesions, but when he is out there, everyone seems to walk a bit taller. He seems to lift those around him with his guts and determination. It's a very intangible quality, but a quality nonetheless.

[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 06 November 2000).]

[walshy1993]

dan i know exactly what you mean about moorcroft, similar to longs effect now, doesnt get a great deal of the footy but when he does you know something amazing is going to happen

[BomberGal]

Well, assuming Hird is our best and most valuable, then our 2nd best player would be Lloyd, and our 2nd most valuable player is definitely, no question about it, Fletcher. He is a crucial part of the line up.

[Dan26]

Yep, in terms of pure talent, Lloyd MUST be second. When people talk about Essendon's great list, Hird and Lloyd ae the two names that crop up first.

[CJH]

May I contribute?

My view is that Hird and Lloyd are your best two players, with daylight coming in third.

Players like Lloyd are one in a generation and when he retires, he will be mentioned in the same breath as Hart, Brereton, Kernahan and Carey.

This is intended as no disrespect to the many other talented players you have.

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.

[Dan26]

Yep,

Lloydy is a superstar in the making; if not already. He's already kicked 109 goals in a season as a 22 year old. And he is only going to get better. I agree with you, that he is a "once-in-a-generation" player. The next Essendon captain too.

[Grendel]

Im amazed and a little suprised that none of you Dons have mentioned Barnesy. For importance to your side, from this outsiders viewpoint id nearly class him in the same category as Hird *Note, that nearly is like a country mile type nearly*

No way would you classify him as your second best player, but in terms of importance to your side what happens if he goes down? The whole side is affected, Allessio is called to ruck (God help you) so the forwards are left a tall short (dont that sound weird?). Or Fletcher comes up the ground or rucks, then your left without your best defender.

Hille ISNT ready, not on what i saw of him. Not much i admit, but he would be killed if played now.

No, Barnes is a very vital cog in that side, and im really really suprised he didnt get some recgontion for his form. Though he did fade late in the year, i think that was more through lack of support than anything, which only highlights how much work he did.

But im only a Hawks supporter, what do i know? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/tongue.gif

Cheers http://cgi.tripod.com/smilecwm/cgi-bin/s/net7/beerchug.gif

[Dan26]

Grendel,

I agree, and I said exactly that, if you look back through this thread. I listed the most "valuable" and the "best" separately, and Barnesy made the "valuable" list.

[Grendel]

Sorry Dan, missed it. At least we can agree on something though lol http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Mumbo Jumbo]

Lloyd.

[LuDiCrOuS]

WHAT THE HELL!!!! Nice bump you've got there!
Do any of these people still even post on this site?

How about we apply this to our current team, most people would have Watson as our best player, so who is the second best player currently?
Zaka, Hurley, Fletcher, Hep D, Crameri?

For me it was Zaka last year and it will be Hurley this year.

[table tennis]

Hurls or hocking behind Watson

[mark1881]

12 years on and Fletcher is still in contention for a top 3 spot, what a freak!!!!

[Bombers36]

No Stanton love?

[jade_00]

That is one epic freakin bump.

[BrownPearHookers]

Hurley in my opinion is equal with Watson as the most valuable player right now, When Hurley is on we look a million dollars.

I would have Crameri and Hocking equal 3rd.
5. Fletcher
6. Zaka

[Howard Moon]

thought i was in bizzaro world there for a second......

all these posters with no allegiance.... commenting on our board..

for the record i would have gone fletcher back then, when he missed we lost... (still do)

[nickcat0]

I hadn't noticed the date ...... and was assuming this was an all-time list, hence the talk of past players.

I was just about to point out that Hird was only the 3rd best player we've ever had.

Oops.

[Donakebab]

As said earlier, best doesn't equate to most valuable. That said, after Watson, Hurley fits both best and most valuable.



Great bizzaro bump!

[bipolarbeaR]

Stanton is our second best player.

[fishardansin]

I'll go back to the original OP. In 2000 Hird was the spiritual leader and many considered the "best" player. I, however, disagree. Fletcher was the most valuable player to Essendon and remained so until Watson just kept getting better and better.

Here are my reasons.

1. The coaching staff obviously thought so. Considering Essendon finished with around 160% that year it is RIDICULOUS that a full back could win the B&F. That says to me that he was the the most important player in the side according to the coaches, week in week out.

2. The stats back it up. Around 2002 and 2003 when the slide had begun but we weren't total crap, prior to the last quarter, we were a team with 4 super stars, a few good players and whole lot of battlers. Of course the media didn't recognise how good Lucas was, so the media saw us as a three super star side. They ran stats on the our win/loss percentages with either of those players in or out. Turns out that there was a much bigger change in the percentage when Fletcher missed. That to me says he was a more important player.

3. 1999. Essendon was the best team all that year, beating north when Carey kicked 10 is evidence of this. Lets face it we were only one super arrogant effort in the prelim full of bad kicking for goal finished with a final quarter choke away from a flag that year. Kouta playing one of the all time great individual games didn't help much either. Hird missed practically the whole year. There is just no way that would have been the case without Fletch.

4. Could either of them play each other's role? I have no doubt that Fletch could have dominated AFL football if he was allowed to just roam off the half forward line and push into the center square when he felt like it. In fact if he was allowed to build up the tank to run through the midfield he could have come close to the impact that Kouta had at different points. Hird could not have filled Fletcher's role.

This in no way diminishes my love for Hird's football ability and commitment to the club I love. I just rate Fletch that highly.

[Shane Hird]

Hocking is more valuable to the side than Stanton.


Not taking anything away from the current No5.