- Jan 5, 2013
- 13,405
- 23,871
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Wines easily has a more higher ceiling then Macrae.
Wines v Macrae
- Thread starter timtamWB
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #27
I don't need to elaborate. If you think Wines is clearly the better player because Macrae started as the sub in one game + some coach comments, then there's absolutely no possible way to have an intelligent argument with you.
[edit]
Now who's failing to back their ridiculous statements up?
Nice Grammar too, truly a world beater..
- Sep 22, 2008
- 25,524
- 34,634
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #28
How is this exactly? Not saying Wines doesn't have a high ceiling because he does (he's much better than just a slow inside mid that he was sort of labelled as in his juniors) but I wouldn't say he has a higher ceiling.
Macrae was always a longer term project, is still growing/getting used to his added height and still has a lot of filling out to do. His rate of improvement from the start of his draft year (wasn't in AIS, iirc wasn't even rated a first round pick) to now (2nd best performed player in a very strong draft) has been incredible.
- Jan 5, 2013
- 13,405
- 23,871
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
When the coach has come out and basically said he gets a lot of possessions but he isn't doing the team thing and what we ask of him AND finds himsf lucky to still be in the team then yes you can clearly say that wines (a player that racks up possessions AND does the team thing) is the better player ATM. You are just too blinded by your own bias thoughts to see that.
Isn't it obvious? Look at the above article in this thread, he is having one of the best second years in the history of AFL/VFL, and he is only 19. Imagine what he is going to be like when he is 25, Selwood like. Much better than Macrea in term of higher ceiling
Last edited:
- Sep 22, 2008
- 25,524
- 34,634
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #31
Yeah, same for the doggies and Macrae. Perfect result for both clubs!
- Banned
- #32
Jeez you're stupid. Coaches say stuff like that all the time; it's to teach players a lesson and make them better. If the coach's word to the media is the be all and end all for you, then no surprise your views are so distorted; I guess you believe all the mind games.
and come on now, properly justify why Wines has a higher ceiling than Macrae. Don't just say "isn't it obvious?" or "imagine what he'll be like when he's 25" like a stupid idiot with no real idea. Back yourself up like you were telling me to! Use actual logic! Prove you have what it takes to have an intelligent discussion.
Last edited:
No I don't, damn, you caught me. Macrae has been racking up the possies and has been showing some good signs, but even Macartney said he was sub as he wasn't doing the team defensive stuff. Wines has been doing that from day dot.
It's like Cotchin v Kennedy. Cotch may have 'a higher ceiling' but Kennedy is the one at the coalface winning games week in week out.
- Jan 5, 2013
- 13,405
- 23,871
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Lol look at the way you talk, know you're wrong so you go on to completely fill you argument with insults, I am honestly getting the feeling that you are a 10 year old so due to that this will be my last comment to you. You say that (bad) coaches say that all the but yet I haven't seen Hinkley come out and say wines is not doing what we ask of him and I haven't heard him say that he is lucky that he actually in the team... I wonder why (well one reason is because he is actually a good coach and knows what he is doing but)... Well it's obvious because he doesn't need it, he already does every thing ken ask and the team thing. If you honestly can't see that wines isn't the better player ATM (something that I would say 90% of the football public would agree with) then this whole conversation is pointless because you are that bias that I doubt you will listen to anything other than a Macrea pump up.
Bye
- Banned
- #36
So on top of being a stupid idiot and a wimp who avoids basic questions, like being asked to justify Wines' higher ceiling, you're also a Z-Grade Troll who's ironically calling other people 10 year olds after they call you out for exactly what you are; a stupid idiot.Lol look at the way you talk, know you're wrong so you go on to completely fill you argument with insults, I am honestly getting the feeling that you are a 10 year old so due to that this will be my last comment to you. You say that (bad) coaches say that all the but yet I haven't seen Hinkley come out and say wines is not doing what we ask of him and I haven't heard him say that he is lucky that he actually in the team... I wonder why (well one reason is because he is actually a good coach and knows what he is doing but)... Well it's obvious because he doesn't need it, he already does every thing ken ask and the team thing. If you honestly can't see that wines isn't the better player ATM (something that I would say 90% of the football public would agree with) then this whole conversation is pointless because you are that bias that I doubt you will listen to anything other than a Macrea pump up.
Bye
Also, where have I been pumping Macrae up? I'm probably his biggest critic on the Bulldogs board so that's more baseless assumption on your part. I'm entirely open to anyone thinking Wines is better & has a higher ceiling than Macrae; I'm just highlighting the sheer level of stupidity within your posts.
Bye indeed, feel free to come back when you're smarter.
Last edited:
Schmidty Chut
Debutant
Fair point, game winning was the wrong phrase, more so 'polish and class'. But as it has been pointed out on this forum, both Wines and Macrae are perfect fits for their respective clubs with Port having a surplus of outside runners and Footscray likewise with contested ball winners.
Wow just found out Macrae is 3rd out of all midfielders in the AFL for the lowest contested possessions to possessions ratio. Take Libba out of that side and i wonder how he would go, a lot easier to be the outlet handball with no tag and getting cheap uncontested possessions than it is to be the bull a.la. libba/wines.
- Sep 22, 2008
- 25,524
- 34,634
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #40
This just isn't relevant. He's hard at it, quite good on the inside when he has to do that stuff and tackles like a mad man inside the contest. But his biggest strength to the team is his outside work. The dogs have been absolutely crying out for outside runners with the majority of our team full of inside ball winners.
Lots of dogs supporters are big fans of his inside work and even think he projects as an inside mid when he puts size on, it's not that he can't do it just currently it's his job to stay outside the contest
- Banned
- #41
That's so ****ing stupid. By that logic, I'd imagine you'd also say Matt Priddis is better than Nick Dal Santo.
Um no, nick dal santo isn't anywhere near even top 30 for midfielders for uncontested to possession ratio. its like comparing josh p kennedy to kane cornes which im sure youd agree JPK is a better player.
- Banned
- #43
Who gives the slightest s**t about your pointless statistic. You argued:
If being a clearance winning bull rather than an outside midfielder makes Wines better than Macrae, which is what you're trying to argue, then you might as well apply that logic to every single inside mid vs outside mid debate. Just dumb; dumb dumb dumb.
Again Wines is exactly what Port need and wouldnt trade him for Macrea and Macrea is exactly what WB need and wouldnt trade for wines.
Both excellent young players. Both should really kick on with their games over the next few years. Both should play 150 + games no problems
/thread
Both excellent young players. Both should really kick on with their games over the next few years. Both should play 150 + games no problems
/thread
No it isnt, i used to argument of the poor uncontested ratio because guys like Dal Santo etc still find ways to earn their own ball UNLIKE macrae. The other part was just a simply fact, it is easy to be the CHEAP uncontested ball winner (which a lot of outside mid's are not).
The rest of the outside mids in the afl that are really good have significant characteristics such as line breaking ability, metres gained etc where as Macrae only has a thing called "class" which is completely subjective and only seems to be presented by Dogs viewers. I've watches every bulldogs game this year and this class is one simply sidestep he took in one game that was replayed heaps on footy shows, he rarely does anything other than get cheap touches. Bontempelli on the other hand has shown more in his last two matches that excemplify "class" than Macrae has done all season. Stupid little gimmicky thing. I'd rather a contested ball winner, match winner who shows more determination, two way running etc than a front running, cheap uncontested ball winning that provides "class" which is so subjective it isn't funny.
- Jan 5, 2013
- 13,405
- 23,871
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
That's is all good and nice but this is a thread to debate which one is the better player. You could say the exact same thing in nearly every poll thread. For example Lobbe vs Jacobs thread, Lobbe is exactly what port need (that tackling contested type of ruckman and Jacobs is what the crows need that extra midfielder + more possession... But you don't say that's because the whole point of a poll thread is to discuss who is better
- Banned
- #47
Do you seriously think ratio is relevant? Like, seriously? Do you think if two players average the exact same amount of contested possessions, the player who averages less uncontested possessions is better because they have a more even ratio? That's so ****ing stupid it hurts.
Well, now you've proven you've watched jack all and you're only presenting a one-eyed view. You're saying only Bulldogs Fans go on about his class? Total horseshit, anyone who's properly watched him emphasizes it and pretty much every 2012 phantom draft on bigfooty backs it up. His evasive ability in congestion is as good as it gets, and that's very much the reason he was drafted so high. Cheap uncontested ball winner? Again rubbish, you base that on stats alone.
Last edited:
seriously im not even going to reply after this you ignore every relevenat point and twist statements to suit your argument, one of 'those' posters. Absolutely 0 reason in your arguments. (say what you want but i know what i've seen from every single bulldogs game this year). Wines is currently a much better player and id rather be awesone than have some blue eyed perceived upside (how many players have 'upside' and then don't fulfill what is expected of them). We'll see in the future who is better because at the moment wines is a better player.
- Banned
- #49
and the desperate deflect has arrived. Called out for using something as irrelevant as contested/uncontested possession ratio as an argument and come out a loser. No surprises here.
I don't even need to argue any of your other preposterous points, nobody other than maybe a certain other Port Adelaide Supporter in this thread would seriously think Macrae's entire game is based around cheap, uncontested touches. Also, to say his class is based around 1 measely sidestep he took some time this year is outright stupidity.
the fact is i can backup every single thing i said and i could counter your entire post but what is the point when you ignore reason, its like arguing with a brick wall. i'll take my opinion somewhere else and ill leave you to your self rightious complete blue eyed bullshit. It's nice to know i can walk away from a conversation knowing i could make several points against the opposing view but at the end of the day i'd rather be the person who walks away knowing to themselves they are right than someone who refuses to listen to any of the opposing argument and is the majority of human beings that when an opposing person stops arguing as they see that person is too stupid to take a good hard look at themselves, they walk away. So continue thinking you are right but just know, its quite sad in the fact you are in 'that' group of people that cannot see that if people don't want to talk to them anymore its not because they are right (keep self-gratifying yourself) it's because they are so biased that they refuse to even listen to a reasonable opposing view.
