Peter Wright vs Reece McKenzie

[Turboman1994]

Wright will be a better play no two ways about it

 

[Pykie]

McKenzies underrated if anything.


Everyone can scream manchild, but the fact of the matter is, Hawkins and Cloke were man child's at the same age, with similar physiques, they don't get any smaller when they hit an AFL weight room.

McKenzie is huge in his legs and core, the most important spot if you are gauging his strength going forward, and he's not exactly undersized in height either.

People hav some misconception about AFL defenders, sure there's a few big ones in Lake, Taylor, Hooker, Thompson etc but there's plenty of undersized ones. If he goes to a club with an established forward line, he will have time to learn and grow and more importantly, play on those second string defenders to start with.

He could be a beast of the competition with his size and speed, I don't think I can say the same about Wright, he reminds me a bit of David Hale.

 

[dylan123]

Hawkins is probably the one that gets away with just being a massive bloke, but it probably helps when you have the ball coming in 70 times again every year since you got going with the likes of Chappy, Corey, Ablett, Bartel ect delivering it in week in week out.

Works very well for Tippett.

Would love to have another Tippett type on Adelaide's list, well just someone that can crash a pack when we can't choose to hit a forward on the lead and need an escape option (Tex is better on the lead then in a contested marking/pack situation).

 

[Smoocher]

McKenzie is a better chance of being a superstar. He has the ability to be the next Tom Hawkins. Strong hands and big bodied.

 

[TheJaegerBomb]

I really, really want Gold Coast to pull the trigger on him at pick 15. McKenzie that is.

 

[Grandaddy J]

Ive seen it all before with these big massive kids. I basically see it as early bloomers who have little upside and when faced against the Scarlett/Glass types who can out muscle and then beat them on the ground, they end up struggling big time.

Hows Mitch Harvey going?

He's been on our list for a year...what the * are you smoking

 

[TwentyNine]

Wright by a mile.

 

[Axcellence]

We have a poor endurance forward on the list called White. Only debuted 3 years after draft and got contracted 1 more year (to 2015) due to question marks.

We also have another forward with both speed and endurance. He got criticised for not getting pack marks initially as well. His name is Nick Riewoldt

 

[Richo83]

McKenzies underrated if anything.


Everyone can scream manchild, but the fact of the matter is, Hawkins and Cloke were man child's at the same age, with similar physiques, they don't get any smaller when they hit an AFL weight room.

McKenzie is huge in his legs and core, the most important spot if you are gauging his strength going forward, and he's not exactly undersized in height either.

People hav some misconception about AFL defenders, sure there's a few big ones in Lake, Taylor, Hooker, Thompson etc but there's plenty of undersized ones. If he goes to a club with an established forward line, he will have time to learn and grow and more importantly, play on those second string defenders to start with.

He could be a beast of the competition with his size and speed, I don't think I can say the same about Wright, he reminds me a bit of David Hale.

At times, Wright reminds me of Frasier, good around the ground, good endurance, can get a decent amount of footy, decent foot skills for a ruckman, nice height, but doesn't seem to really seem to be an elite talent at any position. He reminds me of Kreuzer up forward and I think he'll be just as effective offensively. And I'd like to see him play more in the ruck before I declare him an elite ruck prospect. Athletic ruckmen, guys who are known for being decent rucks but amazing athletes worry me, their athleticism, which looks impressive in a 200cm prospect's body ends up being not that impressive at AFL level.

 

[King Corey]

We also have another forward with both speed and endurance. He got criticised for not getting pack marks initially as well. His name is Nick Riewoldt

Not sure about that. Sounds like poetic license to make it a nice story.

Riewoldt was rated a strong pack mark and his junior footage shown during the draft itself indicated this.

 

[chaelsonnen]

We have a poor endurance forward on the list called White. Only debuted 3 years after draft and got contracted 1 more year (to 2015) due to question marks.

We also have another forward with both speed and endurance. He got criticised for not getting pack marks initially as well. His name is Nick Riewoldt

White will be a good player. Has all the tools.

 

[borderbarry]

I have a lot of respect for Emma Quayle's opinion. She has rated Wright as No.1 in front of Patracca etc., as she sees him as being the better player in the long run. McKenzie she had going in the 20's. Does not seem to be much comparison between the two,, does there?

 

[ManOfClay]

I have a lot of respect for Emma Quayle's opinion. She has rated Wright as No.1 in front of Patracca etc., as she sees him as being the better player in the long run

Interesting. Some have said Petracca is a once in a generation player and a clear number one (I disagree with that, it came from a saints supporter with a limited mental capacity).

 

[Knightmare]

Who projects as the better prospect?

Why isn't McKenzie viewed as a top 15 pick?

Would there be any chance of McKenzie going before Wright?

I guess the big bonus with Wright is he can play relief ruck as well?

Wright is the more sure thing. McKenzie if things go really right and he lands in a good situation I feel has the scope to be the better player, who knows, maybe even the best in the draft, which I'm not seeing with Wright who is more likely to be among very good but not top 3-4 good out of this draft.

McKenzie isn't viewed as a top 15 pick because we haven't seen him against the best in the country, only playing the one u18 champs game and not playing any state league footy. He also isn't viewed as a top 15 pick due to the incorrect perception that he is only effective because he physically dominates guys. He can do that, sure, but that's not all he can do.

Wright will go before McKenzie on draft day.

Wright can play both ruck and forward. McKenzie can also given his strength and leap, but given his relative lack of endurance and lack of mobility and lack of ability at ground level it's definitely not where I'd play him, I also find playing through the ruck ruins McKenzie's rhythm and you can see it with his production as evidenced by his clearly better numbers through the second half of the season where he played as the go to forward and didn't play those same relief ruck minutes.

 

[aussierulesrules]

We have a poor endurance forward on the list called White. Only debuted 3 years after draft and got contracted 1 more year (to 2015) due to question marks.

He was in just his 2nd season when he made his debut and a lot of the delay in him making his debut could very easily be put down to the fact both his preseasons at AFL level were very heavily interrupted by major wrist surgery, which would have also impacted his ability to build very much-needed muscle. I think the one year contract thing also has a lot to do with the fact that there have been numerous question marks about his work-ethic, so they wanted to just give him the one year to keep him on his toes (which seems to have worked, as he's gone off for an altitude camp on his own, off his own bat, prior to this current preseason starting).

I do agree that it wouldn't be ideal to have two or three with low endurance in the key forward posts though. Lee also has poor endurance.

 

[george2]

McKenzies underrated if anything.


Everyone can scream manchild, but the fact of the matter is, Hawkins and Cloke were man child's at the same age, with similar physiques, they don't get any smaller when they hit an AFL weight room.

McKenzie is huge in his legs and core, the most important spot if you are gauging his strength going forward, and he's not exactly undersized in height either.

People hav some misconception about AFL defenders, sure there's a few big ones in Lake, Taylor, Hooker, Thompson etc but there's plenty of undersized ones. If he goes to a club with an established forward line, he will have time to learn and grow and more importantly, play on those second string defenders to start with.

He could be a beast of the competition with his size and speed, I don't think I can say the same about Wright, he reminds me a bit of David Hale.

So was Robbie Tarrant

 

[Pykie]

So was Robbie Tarrant

5 shoulder reconstructions don't exactly help

 

[yaco55]

Wright plays like a small man rather than a big man, which will limit his impact on games. Mckenzie has more big man attributes but could possibly be a one trick pony. Wright is likely to play more games, but McKenzie has the bigger upside.

I would pass on Wright at 17 and give consideration to McKenzie.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

McKenzie is a better chance of being a superstar. He has the ability to be the next Tom Hawkins. Strong hands and big bodied.

Tom Hawkins is not a superstar. Solid player no doubt, but a superstar he is not.

 

[Barrels]

Tom Hawkins is not a superstar. Solid player no doubt, but a superstar he is not.

147 games, 286 goals, 2012 All-Australian, 2012 Carji Greeves medalist, 3-time Geelong leading goalkicker (2012-2014), 2-time premiership forward (2009, 2011), absolutely robbed of the 2011 North Smith medal against your mob...

Still only 26.

Give your head a wobble.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

147 games, 286 goals, 2012 All-Australian, 2012 Carji Greeves medalist, 3-time Geelong leading goalkicker (2012-2014), 2-time premiership forward (2009, 2011), absolutely robbed of the 2011 North Smith medal against your mob...

Still only 26.

Give your head a wobble.

He is not a superstar. The only key forwards who could be called superstars right now are Franklin, Roughead and N Riewoldt. Cloke has been and could be a again. Pav has been. Cameron and Tippet are not far off it. To call someone a superstar implies they are among the very best players in the comp full stop, not "top 5 to 8 in their position". For instance, as midfielders I would call Ablett, Pendlebury, Fyfe, Selwood and probably Watson superstars right now. Guys like Kennedy and Dangerfield are not far off it/nearly there and they are both better players than Hawkins. Swan, Judd, Bartel and a few others have been. Sandilands is a superstar ruckman. The word gets thrown around far to often.

 

[Barrels]

He is not a superstar. The only key forwards who could be called superstars right now are Franklin, Roughead and N Riewoldt. Cloke has been and could be a again. Pav has been. Cameron and Tippet are not far off it. To call someone a superstar implies they are among the very best players in the comp full stop, not "top 5 to 8 in their position". For instance, as midfielders I would call Ablett, Pendlebury, Fyfe, Selwood and probably Watson superstars right now. Guys like Kennedy and Dangerfield are not far off it/nearly there and they are both better players than Hawkins. Swan, Judd, Bartel and a few others have been. Sandilands is a superstar ruckman. The word gets thrown around far to often.

I completely and utterly disagree with you, but hey, that's football.

Carry on.

 

[Smoocher]

Tom Hawkins is not a superstar. Solid player no doubt, but a superstar he is not.

Really.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Really.

Yes, in my opinion. I would love him at the Pies no doubt but there are 100 players I would love to recruit who I wouldn't call superstars.

 

[dazbroncos]

Yes, in my opinion. I would love him at the Pies no doubt but there are 100 players I would love to recruit who I wouldn't call superstars.

Ok then….

If, by your scale, Hawkins is not a superstar but Cloke was but is not now, then whom on the Pies list qualifies as a superstar.

GO Catters