Griffin Logue 2017

Remove this Banner Ad

Frigate said:
Ouch, all we need is another undersized mid forward. I thought you had a fair comment before though!
Click to expand...

I prefer to take forwards early in the draft as it is a harder position to play. Simpkin was rated a top 5 prospect before breaking his leg. Both Crozier and Sheridan have question marks, but I still think Crozier can make it as a rebounding defender. Sheridan personifies average.

To be perfectly honest, I really wanted Florent, but it wouldn't have been right to take him so far away from his family after his father passed away.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Logue physically looks ready for AFL. We all know goal kicking and field kicking are pretty different. A few of his kicks over 30m like some of the switches looked a little flour baggy. hell get better though. I vaguely remember Mora being a bit like that as well.
 
Dirty_banchez said:
I prefer to take forwards early in the draft as it is a harder position to play. Simpkin was rated a top 5 prospect before breaking his leg. Both Crozier and Sheridan have question marks, but I still think Crozier can make it as a rebounding defender. Sheridan personifies average.

To be perfectly honest, I really wanted Florent, but it wouldn't have been right to take him so far away from his family after his father passed away.
Click to expand...

Fair, and he looks silky good. But not what we need IMO. I heard on the radio how we should have taken English - I don't think so. I was stoked we did not, and the sliding confirmed that to me. Logue was a slight surprise selection, and I am not one to pick the "athlete" over natural footballer, but my favorite of all time was Sir Clive Waterhouse so I will be patient. Time will tell, the best selection to me looks like GWS Taranto. What would I know?
 
Gussman said:
To be fair on D.Pearce, most of his shots on goal have been outside 50, getting a handball from Sandi or someone else, making the 45% more acceptable. How many times in his career has he been able to run into a open goal square or been able to even have a kick within 30 meters of the goal?

He isn't an accurate kick, but his role doesn't need him to be. His role is to get the ball inside 50 and probably does it better then anyone else on the team. Also I think that his ability to bomb it long contrasts nicely with B.Hill's ability to have a short accurate kick, making sure defenders stay on their toes, when both of then are on either wing. He's not a superstar but he isn't a bad player, and he'll probably hold a top 22 spot all year.
Click to expand...
Fiddlesticks. This is a complete myth. Most of Pearce's shots on goal from outside 50 end up as high floaters which drop well short of goal.

You do realise he kicked 4.8 last season in 22 games? Where would we have been without his 1.45 points per game on average?

To further emphasise my earlier post that Pearce has the lowest conversion rate of any Freo player ever with a minimum of 30 goals, let's look at his Port Adelaide career.

Pearce played 154 games for Port between 2005-2012. Using the same guideline as his time at Freo, there were 21 Port players who kicked 30+ goals during this time.

Best conversion rate went to Jay Schulz with 69.7% (106.46).
Twenty players converted at 50+%.
D. Pearce was the only player below 50% (76.79; 49.0%). Close to 50%, but still last place.

Coincidence? Hardly.

Finally, Pearce has now played 248 games and kicked 123 goals. His games tally is moving up into the rarified air category. Has does his conversion rate rank with his exalted alumni?

Using 248+ games and 120+ goals as a reference point, there have been 164 players qualify for comparison. Unfortunately 14 of those players' careers were in an era where complete stats are unavailable, so this leaves 150 players for consideration.

139 of these players converted at a rate of 50+%. Danyle's conversion rate of 47.5% places him 143rd out of 150 all-time. The only players below him were Browning, W. Richardson, Wallace, G.Wells, Alves, Raines and Hawthorn's Al Martello was last with an appalling 40.0%.

Yes this list incorporates most of the game's elite forwards, but a qualifiying point of a maximum of 0.5 goals per game also takes in all of those bog average half forwards and midfielders who were lucky enough to enjoy long careers in ordinary teams.

143rd out of 150 all-time, worst ever at Fremantle and worst at Port during his time there.

Here endth the lesson. I won't post on this again. Please resume the debate on that very promising, but very raw talent Griffin Logue. Play on.
 
Wonder how Danyle would go as a small forward.

Here endth the lesson. I won't post on this again. Please resume the debate on that very promising, but very raw talent Griffin Logue. Play on.
Click to expand...
You're quite right about the thread being about Logue and not Pearce, but you don't get to have the last word and say things like "here endeth the lesson" without taking all factors into account. Like Pearce not being played as a small forward with Fremantle, for example. I've very rarely seen Pearce take a shot from inside say, 30-40m. Most of his shots come from the boundary a fair way out, that being a result of his role in the team.

Sounds like it's fine to discuss Barlow being played out of position, but the debate can't be expanded to include Danyle. Not that I'm saying Danyle is a small forward, but... well, the option is there.

Sounds like a teenager typing in "/thread" when there is clearly more to be discussed. It's like you've just spent half an hour researching why Pavlich didn't kick more goals in his career than Reiwoldt without taking into account he was played as a backman for a few years.

I hate that juvenile s**t. /Thread my ******* grannies arse, you don't decide that.

Also, you missed an e in endeth. There's a lesson for ya.
Now go clean the blackboard.
 
Last edited:
rgauci said:
Didn't we get McCarthy, and the pick that secured Hamling and something else too. Was a ripper.
Click to expand...
Someone else - Darcy. Who will play 150 games for us.

Downgrade of 4 picks for CMac and young Sean - Pretty good deal I think.
 
Who can guarantee after 50 games logue can't be better than other draftee some here prefer. Just JLT game people already jumping at shadow. If people jump at Dawson, spurr,ibbo type of > 100 games players I can understand but an 18 years old in his first pre season. At first I thought people making joke so just join along , then realised is not.
 
Tayl0r said:
#3 > McCarthy, #7, #34 (became #35 after Mayne Compensation Pick) & #72
#35, #43, #61 > Joel Hamling, #40 & #63
#63 > Shane Kersten
#73 & 2017 2nd > #35, #71 & 2017 4th

I think we bought Sean Darcy with next year's second.
Click to expand...
Yup accuracy spot on .cox (should be hamling) and cam Mac plus pick 9 = pick 3 . still a good business.
 
Last edited:
meima said:
Who can guarantee after 50 games logue can't be better than other draftee some here prefer. Just JLT game people already jumping at shadow. If people jump at Dawson, spurr,ibbo type of > 100 games players I can understand but an 18 years old in his first pre season. At first I thought people making joke so just join along , then realised is not.
Click to expand...

I am Russian and I do not joke.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

youmewe said:
Fiddlesticks. This is a complete myth. Most of Pearce's shots on goal from outside 50 end up as high floaters which drop well short of goal.

You do realise he kicked 4.8 last season in 22 games? Where would we have been without his 1.45 points per game on average?

To further emphasise my earlier post that Pearce has the lowest conversion rate of any Freo player ever with a minimum of 30 goals, let's look at his Port Adelaide career.

Pearce played 154 games for Port between 2005-2012. Using the same guideline as his time at Freo, there were 21 Port players who kicked 30+ goals during this time.

Best conversion rate went to Jay Schulz with 69.7% (106.46).
Twenty players converted at 50+%.
D. Pearce was the only player below 50% (76.79; 49.0%). Close to 50%, but still last place.

Coincidence? Hardly.

Finally, Pearce has now played 248 games and kicked 123 goals. His games tally is moving up into the rarified air category. Has does his conversion rate rank with his exalted alumni?

Using 248+ games and 120+ goals as a reference point, there have been 164 players qualify for comparison. Unfortunately 14 of those players' careers were in an era where complete stats are unavailable, so this leaves 150 players for consideration.

139 of these players converted at a rate of 50+%. Danyle's conversion rate of 47.5% places him 143rd out of 150 all-time. The only players below him were Browning, W. Richardson, Wallace, G.Wells, Alves, Raines and Hawthorn's Al Martello was last with an appalling 40.0%.

Yes this list incorporates most of the game's elite forwards, but a qualifiying point of a maximum of 0.5 goals per game also takes in all of those bog average half forwards and midfielders who were lucky enough to enjoy long careers in ordinary teams.

143rd out of 150 all-time, worst ever at Fremantle and worst at Port during his time there.

Here endth the lesson. I won't post on this again. Please resume the debate on that very promising, but very raw talent Griffin Logue. Play on.
Click to expand...

I suppose goal conversion is a guide, not necessarily a good guide. It seems to be shots on goals that are goals divided by shots on goals that miss. It won't tell you how many points are from shots at goal where the degree of difficulty is high, shots on target that were touched on the line or just fall short.

In an individual game, if a player doesn't score any goals he doesn't have any goal percentage eg. Connor Blakely vs Carlton in the JLT kicked two points but doesn't have a goal percentage average because he didn't put one through the middle.

Anyway, all those players listed as worse than Danyle Pearce were either club champions and/or state footballers and/or premiership players.
 
Last edited:
Dirty_banchez said:
I prefer to take forwards early in the draft as it is a harder position to play. Simpkin was rated a top 5 prospect before breaking his leg. Both Crozier and Sheridan have question marks, but I still think Crozier can make it as a rebounding defender. Sheridan personifies average.

To be perfectly honest, I really wanted Florent, but it wouldn't have been right to take him so far away from his family after his father passed away.
Click to expand...

Sheridan does have one thing in spades and that is running ability, I'd happily have him at the club over the next couple of years as rotations drop Sheridan is going to get a boost. Plus he's in that age range where he might just get thye poo together.

The time for Logue is when MJ, Ibbo and Spurr ....rather have him in the ranks than Simpkin at this point.
 
Time's changed.

Ibbotson, Johnson, Spurr have a s**t game? Give this kid two or three games to stake his claims.

He isn't that small for a key back... he is just taller than Pav and about the same size as Luke McPharlin. He'll be fine to battle down there and the guy was drafted as a defender. Not everyone has to be a midfielder – sometimes you can be a good player without that, despite what the media and umpires reckon.
 
Tayl0r said:
#3 > McCarthy, #7, #34 (became #35 after Mayne Compensation Pick) & #72
#35, #43, #61 > Joel Hamling, #40 & #63
#63 > Shane Kersten
#73 & 2017 2nd > #35, #71 & 2017 4th

I think we bought Sean Darcy with next year's second.
Click to expand...

No he was pick 38 in the draft. Which was the 35 at the time of the last trade you mentioned.


theGav56 said:
I read the post as 3 for McCarthy, Hamling and 9.

Did I get it wrong?
Click to expand...
meima said:
No you are right. I get it mix up cox and hamling .
Click to expand...
Well and technically 8 not 9 at time of draft.

When all is said and done I think our trades can be summarized as

3 (McCluggage), 44 (Myles Poholke), 56 (Ed Phillips), 2017 2nd (?)
for
MaCarthy, 8 (Logue), Hamling, 38(Darcy), 41(Cox), Kersten, 66 (Ryan)
We killed it. 3 best 22 + change vs 1 injury and 2 who knows

O and Mayne for B Hill
About which I am sure that our recruitment staff are doing handstands and breaking out the party pies.
 
manpurple said:
No he was pick 38 in the draft. Which was the 35 at the time of the last trade you mentioned.




Well and technically 8 not 9 at time of draft.

When all is said and done I think our trades can be summarized as

3 (McCluggage), 44 (Myles Poholke), 56 (Ed Phillips), 2017 2nd (?)
for
MaCarthy, 8 (Logue), Hamling, 38(Darcy), 41(Cox), Kersten, 66 (Ryan)
We killed it. 3 best 22 + change vs 1 injury and 2 who knows

O and Mayne for B Hill
About which I am sure that our recruitment staff are doing handstands and breaking out the party pies.
Click to expand...

That pick #35 we got by trading next year's second? Thats where I was going with that
 
manpurple said:
No he was pick 38 in the draft. Which was the 35 at the time of the last trade you mentioned.




Well and technically 8 not 9 at time of draft.

When all is said and done I think our trades can be summarized as

3 (McCluggage), 44 (Myles Poholke), 56 (Ed Phillips), 2017 2nd (?)
for
MaCarthy, 8 (Logue), Hamling, 38(Darcy), 41(Cox), Kersten, 66 (Ryan)
We killed it. 3 best 22 + change vs 1 injury and 2 who knows

O and Mayne for B Hill
About which I am sure that our recruitment staff are doing handstands and breaking out the party pies.
Click to expand...
Easy to say we killed it until McLuggage is a bone fide superstar.
 
manpurple said:
No he was pick 38 in the draft. Which was the 35 at the time of the last trade you mentioned.




Well and technically 8 not 9 at time of draft.

When all is said and done I think our trades can be summarized as

3 (McCluggage), 44 (Myles Poholke), 56 (Ed Phillips), 2017 2nd (?)
for
MaCarthy, 8 (Logue), Hamling, 38(Darcy), 41(Cox), Kersten, 66 (Ryan)
We killed it. 3 best 22 + change vs 1 injury and 2 who knows

O and Mayne for B Hill
About which I am sure that our recruitment staff are doing handstands and breaking out the party pies.
Click to expand...

I am now confused where this has gone, but I like handstands and party pies, so I liked this post.

The way I see it, some make it some don't - tall, big or small. So many examples of players outside the top 10 becoming awesome, and top 10 players not making it. It is a hard science as it comes down to the player - the effort they commit, and the running, (and ball skill practice) and a lot of that is the competitiveness.

One thing is for certain, and that natural ability does not beat heart and determination. If the fast runner can not catch the football, or pick up the pill and then the disposal, been not effective, it is a pie in the sky. You need players that create time and space, and kick and handpass. I think Walters is the best in our team at this. In the mid, probably the Hill boys can lock in battle now - I cannot wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Arkhitect
Opinion Griffin Logue, Moving Forward
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
468
Views
26K
DQ 4EVER
DQ 4EVER

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top