Delisted 36.Stewart Crameri (2018 - 2018)

Remove this Banner Ad

Biggy_Boy said:
We could have traded Varcoe for a draft pick. There were some pretty decent players around the middle of the second round of the 2014 draft, which is about what Varcoe was worth. Such a player would likely still be on the list and ready to contribute in a meaningful way in 2018.
Click to expand...


..Or....

The player may have been a spud and been delisted by now, putting him in the same place as Mitch Clark, but with reason to justify drafting, since at least we know Clark has talent.

....Or Mitch Clark might have had a good run of it, been able to be injury-free and be over his depression, be a handy support to Hawkins, and helped us win a flag by now.

Young draftees aren't the answer to everything.
 
Ratcat said:
Parish was B+F at the Falcons you know, not real bad.
Wasn't Miers in that side?
You just watch and wait on Worpel.
Click to expand...
Blood won it last year and didn’t get drafted. BnFs aren’t always won on talent and impact on games.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Biggy_Boy said:
The opinions of posters on Bigfooty do not determine a player's worth. I don't like Blicavs in the side; that doesn't mean I would have been happy for the club to trade him out for pick 80 this trade period.
Click to expand...


So you don't want a past B & F player in the side?

Shows that you have NFI, Biggy Boy.
 
If Ablett and Crameri were 18-22 years old, you'd want them in a heartbeat.

Because they are 28-32 years old, you are not interested, even though someone like Ablett hasn't slowed down.

Stop looking at a player's age above all else. Some 28+ can run rings around some 18-22 year olds.
 
Catters 070911 said:
..Or....

The player may have been a spud and been delisted by now, putting him in the same place as Mitch Clark, but with reason to justify drafting, since at least we know Clark has talent.

....Or Mitch Clark might have had a good run of it, been able to be injury-free and be over his depression, be a handy support to Hawkins, and helped us win a flag by now.

Young draftees aren't the answer to everything.
Click to expand...
..or....

If my Aunty had the old proverbials she'd be my Uncle
 
Catters 070911 said:
If Ablett and Crameri were 18-22 years old, you'd want them in a heartbeat.

Because they are 28-32 years old, you are not interested, even though someone like Ablett hasn't slowed down.

Stop looking at a player's age above all else. Some 28+ can run rings around some 18-22 year olds.
Click to expand...
Yep Gaz is still good. Actually better than good, bloody awesome.
Crameri' snot really an age thing though more the fact he's barely played at all in a couple of years
 
Catters 070911 said:
So you don't want a past B & F player in the side?

Shows that you have NFI, Biggy Boy.
Click to expand...

Like you I think Blicavs should be selected. He is versatile and can fill multiple roles if called upon.

However, his B&F was 2 years ago ...2 weeks is a long time in football and things change. Telling Biggy he has NFI because he believes Blicavs is excess to needs is way too harsh. I don't agree with him...but with the influx of new talent, Blitz will need to lift to maintain his spot. That goes for a few others as well.

Winning a B&F doesn't preclude scrutiny of performance.
 
Catters 070911 said:
So you don't want a past B & F player in the side?

Shows that you have NFI, Biggy Boy.
Click to expand...
Blicavs won a B&F when the rules regarding 3rd man up and the fact we had no decent ruckman created a perfect niche for him to perform. He had an excellent year in 2015. That is a fact. His output and effectiveness has dropped severely since then. Also fact. Now the rules have changed and we have Zac Smith; Blicavs is just a tall, slow midfielder who can't jump third man up anymore, doesn't get a lot of the ball, is not a particularly effective tagger, can't defend and rarely gets dangerous up forward.

To me he is a bit of a blind alley that for some reason we are stuck going down when we could be trying numerous other players in the midfield. I'm not saying never play him, but like C Guthrie he is not an essential cog for our team and should be dropped when he's not performing. He's a fifth year midfielder who averaged 16 possessions a game, you could get that off a first or second year player but still have hope for some improvement...
 
year of the cat said:
Give me Crameri with a rookie pick rather than paying for Jack Watts with a pick in the 20's.
Click to expand...

Watts was traded for pick 31, is three years younger than Crameri, and hasn’t spent the past two years on the sidelines. I reckon you might eat your words on this one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BORIS332 said:
Watts was traded for pick 31, is three years younger than Crameri, and hasn’t spent the past two years on the sidelines. I reckon you might eat your words on this one.
Click to expand...
But then we would have had to trade pick 24 (Kelly) or 36 (Constable) for Watts, on top of his larger salary. As strange as it sounds, picking up Crameri in the rookie draft - virtually for free in both trade currency and contract - is better for the long-term future of the list than trading for Watts, who despite being younger, means one of Kelly or Constable wouldn't be on the list.
 
Catters 070911 said:
So you don't want a past B & F player in the side?

Shows that you have NFI, Biggy Boy.
Click to expand...
A B&F in a pretty poor year by recent standards, which I maintain that he was very fortunate to win, isn't a sole determining factor for me as to whether someone belongs in the side in 2018. In fact, I don't think it holds much relevance at all.

More pertinent to me are: what his role in the side is, how he affects the structure and balance of the side, how good he has been recently, and how good he has been when it matters.

He won his B&F playing primarily as a ruck out of necessity because the club had no one else. He then went on to play the third man up role to good effect. With Smith in the side and Stanley as backup, both of whom are far better at performing actual ruck duties, which I consider to be pretty important to premiership aspirations, and the third man up role gone, Blicavs can't be much help in the ruck. Other than that, his roles have been playing through the midfield, sometimes on the wing, sometimes in a defensive role, and he's never really done much there. He isn't a big accumulator, he is rarely able to effectively shut down an influential player, and he doesn't use his size around the ground or drifting up forward to justify how much he gets done for pace. He's tall and slow in a side that is overly tall and slow and yet he does not have a role that someone else couldn't and doesn't do better and nor does his size present as any real asset when he's playing. He impedes ball movement more than any other player in the side, hesitating, missing the first option and taking as long as possible to decide on a target, often stifling the flow of ball movement transitioning from defence to attack and allowing the opposition to set up.

His form for most of 2017 was putrid. He would play through the midfield and do nothing, and then the finals came around and he wilted, just like he did in the 2016, 2014, and 2013 finals, proving himself to be nothing more than a liability. This isn't just me; plenty of objective observers would tell you the same. You don't continue giving players games based on what they did in a previous season (when you weren't a shot for a flag) when they're not performing now. That's how mediocrity sets in.
 
BORIS332 said:
Those arent fantastic numbers and he’s effectively had two years out of the game...
Click to expand...

Crameri suffered a shocking and most unusual injury that kept him out for a very long time. It isn't the sort of injury likely to re-occur...he might be a surprise to some of us here...... before the injury he was a very dangerous lead up forward. Not something we have plenty of.

I think we should give the guy an even break. It may be an inspired and inexpensive choice.
 
To me it’s a bit like the HMAC move - in that we have an area of need and he has the skill set to fill it.
Whether it works out remains to be seen.
However, if it crashes and burns, and it might, I’ll be far less critical of the move as it didn’t cost us a 2rd pick, it didn’t cost us hardly any SC and there is potential to get 16-20 games and maybe 25 goals out if him.

Risk reward on this IMO is pretty favorable.

Go Catters
 
Biggy_Boy said:
A B&F in a pretty poor year by recent standards, which I maintain that he was very fortunate to win, isn't a sole determining factor for me as to whether someone belongs in the side in 2018. In fact, I don't think it holds much relevance at all.

More pertinent to me are: what his role in the side is, how he affects the structure and balance of the side, how good he has been recently, and how good he has been when it matters.

He won his B&F playing primarily as a ruck out of necessity because the club had no one else. He then went on to play the third man up role to good effect. With Smith in the side and Stanley as backup, both of whom are far better at performing actual ruck duties, which I consider to be pretty important to premiership aspirations, and the third man up role gone, Blicavs can't be much help in the ruck. Other than that, his roles have been playing through the midfield, sometimes on the wing, sometimes in a defensive role, and he's never really done much there. He isn't a big accumulator, he is rarely able to effectively shut down an influential player, and he doesn't use his size around the ground or drifting up forward to justify how much he gets done for pace. He's tall and slow in a side that is overly tall and slow and yet he does not have a role that someone else couldn't and doesn't do better and nor does his size present as any real asset when he's playing. He impedes ball movement more than any other player in the side, hesitating, missing the first option and taking as long as possible to decide on a target, often stifling the flow of ball movement transitioning from defence to attack and allowing the opposition to set up.

His form for most of 2017 was putrid. He would play through the midfield and do nothing, and then the finals came around and he wilted, just like he did in the 2016, 2014, and 2013 finals, proving himself to be nothing more than a liability. This isn't just me; plenty of objective observers would tell you the same. You don't continue giving players games based on what they did in a previous season (when you weren't a shot for a flag) when they're not performing now. That's how mediocrity sets in.
Click to expand...
As much as i think you post absolute garbage most of the time, i fully agree with your opinion on blitz. I think he needs to be left out of the side from now on. Mostly due to the way he continually holds the ball up during a switch of play, when a player is out in the open and he doesn’t see it or hesitates way too often. Often costs us goals.
 
Last edited:
BORIS332 said:
Watts was traded for pick 31, is three years younger than Crameri, and hasn’t spent the past two years on the sidelines. I reckon you might eat your words on this one.
Click to expand...
The only reason I wanted us to pick up Watts was because I was expecting him to become our new whipping boy, and for once I wouldn't have minded it.
 
Catters 070911 said:
If Ablett and Crameri were 18-22 years old, you'd want them in a heartbeat.

Because they are 28-32 years old, you are not interested, even though someone like Ablett hasn't slowed down.

Stop looking at a player's age above all else. Some 28+ can run rings around some 18-22 year olds.
Click to expand...
ablett turns 34 in the first month of the 2018 season. he aint 28-32.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dazbroncos
Senior 36. Oliver Henry (2022 -)
Replies
0
Views
639
dazbroncos
dazbroncos

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top