Preview No Changes vs Saints

[DangerSloane]

ALso hoping M Crouch gets a full game.
While he looked a little slow out there on the weekend he didnt have any trouble finding the ball.

 

[The Karma Bus]

Just on Lyons:

2012- sub in 2 out of 3 games
2013- sub in 3 out of 9 games
2014- sub in 1 out of 1 game

He's had 7 career games that he's been able to actually play the full game.. And to adjust and learn AFL..

 

[Vader]

Lyons is 21 years old and has played 13 games, he has rarely been poor in those games, he has been the sub in a high percentage of those games, he played a better game against Collingwood at the MCG last year than Petrenko has ever played in his 72 games..

Yet he's simply not AFL standard?
He's not an upgrade on Pets, while also looking to the future and if he fits into it?
And he is just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

We've been over this ground before. Lacks the speed & endurance to make it at AFL level - and his foot skills aren't great either.

That's my opinion - presumably one also shared by the selectors, given his continuing non-selection at senior level. He's good at extracting the pill, but that's not a lot of use if his lack of speed & endurance limits his ability to get to (and influence) a significant number of stoppages. Many here on BF are still blinded by shiny new toy syndrome. Personally, I'm fairly confident that he will have a good career at SANFL level, which is more suited to his strengths & weaknesses. I don't see him having a significant career at AFL level.

 

[Vader]

What like B. Crouch round 1 last year?
He was clearly ready, and should've played.

Or like Grigg who took 3/4 of a season to earn his spot and has been top 5 crows this season so far?

Or Kerridge who looks like a gem but couldnt get a spot last year ahead of some aging, underperforming players.

The decision to omit Crouch in R1 was a mistake. He played R2-4 (before getting injured). It's not as if he was held back for a prolonged period after he was ready to go.

Grigg had aspects of his game that needed working on. The fact that he played so well when finally selected is testament to the fact that they timed his selection perfectly.

Kerridge played every game for which his form (both AFL & SANFL) justified selection.

 

[TheMetricSystem]

Is he really, or is he just limited in his options by all the injuries we've suffered?

I'm no fan of Petrenko - anyone whose been here for a while knows that. But if you're going to replace him then you have to have an alternative. What are the alternatives? We're talking about replacing him with either an unproven player (CEY/Cameron) or one who isn't up to AFL standard (Lyons/Martin).

Excellent reasoning. Let's not replace a player who has proven they are not up to it with a player who is unproven. Do you re-read your posts and wonder WTF you were on about?

Lyons influences a game more in a quarter than Petrenko does over 4 and Martin if played forward will actually get the ball between the big sticks which when last time I checked was the primary objective of the game.

 

[Vader]

Excellent reasoning. Let's not replace a player who has proven they are not up to it with a player who is unproven. Do you re-read your posts and wonder WTF you were on about?

Lyons influences a game more in a quarter than Petrenko does over 4 and Martin if played forward will actually get the ball between the big sticks which when last time I checked was the primary objective of the game.

Who says that Lyons is unproven? The coach & selectors see him at close quarters every week - both at training & on game day. They know his strengths & weaknesses and they have a very good idea of what he is capable (or not capable of) at senior level.

Lyons is currently the most over-rated player on Adelaide's list - over-rated by the BF fans that is, not by the team selectors (who have a much more balanced & valid view of his strengths & limitations).

 

[Vader]

Just on Lyons:

2012- sub in 2 out of 3 games
2013- sub in 3 out of 9 games
2014- sub in 1 out of 1 game

He's had 7 career games that he's been able to actually play the full game.. And to adjust and learn AFL..

The implications of which are quite clear. He was the last man selected in 6 of his 13 games. That's a pretty fair indication of how the selectors see his value to the team.

Massively over-rated on BF.

 

[jackster83]

I'm more than happy for them to replace him with CEY, Cameron (or some other youngster) if/when the selectors decide that the kid is ready to play at senior level. I'm not in favour of throwing kids in at the deep end before they're ready for it. I trust the selectors to know the difference.

The problem is we don't deem them to be ready until late in their second or third year on the list. We then dabble with them being the sub, last in first out, etc. The end result is it takes us 6 years to determine whether they are AFL standard.

 

[TheMetricSystem]

Who says that Lyons is unproven? The coach & selectors see him at close quarters every week - both at training & on game day. They know his strengths & weaknesses and they have a very good idea of what he is capable (or not capable of) at senior level.

Lyons is currently the most over-rated player on Adelaide's list - over-rated by the BF fans that is, not by the team selectors (who have a much more balanced & valid view of his strengths & limitations).

Of course the selectors are balanced and valid when agreeing with you.

Are they balanced and valid when selecting Petrenko?

 

[TheMetricSystem]

The implications of which are quite clear. He was the last man selected in 6 of his 13 games. That's a pretty fair indication of how the selectors see his value to the team.

Massively over-rated on BF.

Have you played football? Not on a computer, for real?

 

[1970crow]

Youd hope so. They are playing for premiership point too aren't they?

are they, is that their mission? i thought they were created to ensure that our afl listed players have the best development possible and provide the best chance for the afl team to flourish. winning games of sanfl is a bonus, but it surely can't be the end game. i presume then, that you are saying that if at the half way mark of the seasons, the afl team cannot make the finals and the sanfl team can, then we'll play our best players in the sanfl to push for a flag in that comp. after all, we're in the sanfl for premiership points. or will your argument now change that sanfl premiership points aren't the be all and end all, but they still remain that in this instance at this time.

just to isolate this to a some of easy to understand points;

1. players named only in the afl team, if fit, will only play in the afl competition
2. players named in both the sanfl and afl teams, if fit, will play in either competition
3. players named in only the sanfl team, if fit and barring more late injuries, will only play in the sanfl

now, mitch grigg is named in both teams and has a fitness test. if he passes that fitness test and can play on the weekend, depending on other injuries he is subject to playing in the sanfl. that is where the selection panel see him at the moment, on the edge. but you somehow know that this isn't the case.

again, the discussion isn't about the naming of extended interchange benches. it is about the very simple fact that, if fit, mitch grigg may be playing in the sanfl this weekend. the conversation started because there are a few posters who are unhappy about the fact that mitch has potentially been dropped while other players haven't. standard selection discussions. some of the responses to this is that it is merely some form of playing ducks and drakes or that mitch will only miss through injury and will definately not be playing sanfl.

 

[Vader]

The problem is we don't deem them to be ready until late in their second or third year on the list. We then dabble with them being the sub, last in first out, etc. The end result is it takes us 6 years to determine whether they are AFL standard.

There are plenty of players who have been given a good run in their 1st year - Brad Crouch played 14 games last year and would have played more if he wasn't injured, Matt Crouch played last week and has been selected again this week. Not all players are ready to go from R1 of their first season. Some are, some aren't - and most of those who are were taken early in the draft. Most of our draft picks have historically been later in the draft, selecting players with longer term potential but requiring significant development periods.

That said, there should be no excuse for players like Martin spending 6 years on our list. A decision on him could & should have been made several years ago.

 

[The Karma Bus]

We've been over this ground before. Lacks the speed & endurance to make it at AFL level - and his foot skills aren't great either.

That's my opinion - presumably one also shared by the selectors, given his continuing non-selection at senior level. He's good at extracting the pill, but that's not a lot of use if his lack of speed & endurance limits his ability to get to (and influence) a significant number of stoppages. Many here on BF are still blinded by shiny new toy syndrome. Personally, I'm fairly confident that he will have a good career at SANFL level, which is more suited to his strengths & weaknesses. I don't see him having a significant career at AFL level.

Why didn't they trade him to Melbourne then?
They wanted him..

Lyons is not a shiny new toy anymore.. I'm not saying he will definitely make it as a gun but 13 games (6 as sub) is not the way to find out if he will..
His clearance work is already better than some of our other players, he also tackles a lot more than some.. 12 tackles from 6 games as a sub and 20 tackles from 7 full games..
I think there are quite a few players who don't have speed or other attributes, yet make it in the AFL..
I know our very own Scott Thompson as one example was no road runner..

 

[Vader]

Have you played football? Not on a computer, for real?

How is that relevant?

It's not hard to understand the AFC team selections most of the time. They tend to keep to the same formula most of the time - and the sub vest always goes to the last (mid-small sized) player selected.

 

[DangerSloane]

Pets has good speed, doesnt mean hes any good.
Im sick of people saying "he doesnt have this skill or that skill" if the guy can play footy he can play footy!

Lyons is a much better player than Petrenko whether he isnt as fast or fit as him.
He might know where to run, whereas Pets has NFI!

 

[Wood_Duck]

Why didn't they trade him to Melbourne then?
They wanted him..

For Free.

 

[The Karma Bus]

The implications of which are quite clear. He was the last man selected in 6 of his 13 games. That's a pretty fair indication of how the selectors see his value to the team.

Massively over-rated on BF.

And if that's how we use the sub (last player picked - you be the sub), it shows another brain explosion we have down there..
One of the many..
Yet you have this faith they know exactly what they are doing..

 

[DangerSloane]

How is that relevant?

It's not hard to understand the AFC team selections most of the time. They tend to keep to the same formula most of the time - and the sub vest always goes to the last (mid-small sized) player selected.

Hugely relevant.

If you'd played then you'd know that if people can play football, it doesnt matter if theyre slow or unfit.
Too much is made of these bs statistics.

I know id rather a player that runs to the right places instead of running around like a mad man not getting the footy.

Look at the fastest and fittest players in the comp. None of them are the best are they?
Swan is slow and not that fit, do you see collingwood not playing him because of that?

 

[1970crow]

In: Martin, Ellis-Yolmen, Shaw
Out: -

Drugs are bad.

at this point that is just an extended interchange bench with a couple of players having fitness tests. until there are actual out's there's no positive assessment to be made. the fact that there isn't 1 form/future related out yet, and the only potentially downscaled player is grigg, there's a whiff of the negative.

so, i guess, drugs are good.

 

[betterthanu]

Just on Lyons:

2012- sub in 2 out of 3 games
2013- sub in 3 out of 9 games
2014- sub in 1 out of 1 game

He's had 7 career games that he's been able to actually play the full game.. And to adjust and learn AFL..

Is Sando the only coach who doesn't use the sub as a quick, impact player? Lyons is the sorta player we should sub out, not into a game. Play Pets as the sub and tell him to go berserk.

 

[Vader]

Why didn't they trade him to Melbourne then?
They wanted him..

Lyons is not a shiny new toy anymore.. I'm not saying he will definitely make it as a gun but 13 games (6 as sub) is not the way to find out if he will..
His clearance work is already better than some of our other players, he also tackles a lot more than some.. 12 tackles from 6 games as a sub and 20 tackles from 7 full games..
I think there are quite a few players who don't have speed or other attributes, yet make it in the AFL..
I know our very own Scott Thompson as one example was no road runner..

Lyons will remain a shiny new toy until he's played enough games at senior level for the BF fans as a whole to accept that he's not "the next big thing", but a player with major flaws in his game. How long that takes varies widely from player to player. With Pets it took around 50 games before the majority woke up (I took around 30). With some others it can take as few as 10 games. The fact that we're having this discussion at all is a strong indication that Lyons career has not yet reached this point.

I accept that his clearance work is good. Very good even. However, his leg speed and endurance are below AFL standard, limiting the number of contest which he is able to influence. He's too slow to provide anything meaningful outside of those contests he does manage to get to.

Thompson is (and always was) a much more complete player than Lyons - and any comparison between the two is, quite frankly, insulting to Thompson. Comparisons with Sam Mitchell are even more embarrassing. Thompson may not be genuinely quick, but Lyons is genuinely slow - and that's by the standards of the AFC, which is far from being the fastest team going around.

Some "slow" players do make it. Sam Mitchell is the classic example. However, for every Sam Mitchell there are 50 other similar draftees who don't make it. Mitchell made it because he is extremely good at what he does and his strengths far outweigh his deficiencies. Lyons' deficiencies far outweigh his strengths.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Is Sando the only coach who doesn't use the sub as a quick, impact player? Lyons is the sorta player we should sub out, not into a game. Play Pets as the sub and tell him to go berserk.

The dogs have used Gia perfectly. Hes the perfect sub.

 

[TheMetricSystem]

Thompson is (and always was) a much more complete player than Lyons - and any comparison between the two is, quite frankly, insulting to Thompson. Comparisons with Sam Mitchell are even more embarrassing. Thompson may not be genuinely quick, but Lyons is genuinely slow - and that's by the standards of the AFC, which is far from being the fastest team going around.

Lyons is quicker than Thompson has ever been. Fact.

 

[TheMetricSystem]

I accept that his clearance work is good. Very good even. However, his leg speed and endurance are below AFL standard, limiting the number of contest which he is able to influence. He's too slow to provide anything meaningful outside of those contests he does manage to get to.

Nothing builds a tank better than playing.

Pendlebury, Swan, Bartel, Boyd, Mitchell, Hodge, Cross, Vince, Watson, Murphy, Cotchin, Barlow, Rich, Kennedy, Priddis, Thompson, Boak, Hayes

Some half decent players there that are not noted as being terribly fast. Good brains and tanks built up through plenty of pre-seasons and a whole lot of game time.

Give me a footballer any day.

 

[The Karma Bus]

Lyons will remain a shiny new toy until he's played enough games at senior level for the BF fans as a whole to accept that he's not "the next big thing", but a player with major flaws in his game. How long that takes varies widely from player to player. With Pets it took around 50 games before the majority woke up (I took around 30). With some others it can take as few as 10 games. The fact that we're having this discussion at all is a strong indication that Lyons career has not yet reached this point.

I accept that his clearance work is good. Very good even. However, his leg speed and endurance are below AFL standard, limiting the number of contest which he is able to influence. He's too slow to provide anything meaningful outside of those contests he does manage to get to.

Thompson is (and always was) a much more complete player than Lyons - and any comparison between the two is, quite frankly, insulting to Thompson. Comparisons with Sam Mitchell are even more embarrassing. Thompson may not be genuinely quick, but Lyons is genuinely slow - and that's by the standards of the AFC, which is far from being the fastest team going around.

Some "slow" players do make it. Sam Mitchell is the classic example. However, for every Sam Mitchell there are 50 other similar draftees who don't make it. Mitchell made it because he is extremely good at what he does and his strengths far outweigh his deficiencies. Lyons' deficiencies far outweigh his strengths.

Dramatising much?
All I said was that Thommo was not a fast player, it's proof you can make it without speed..
Not that Lyons is on a level with him

Thommo as we know him now was not always that way though..
Many never rated him that highly or pictured him having the career he has..

If you're a footballer, you'll make it..