Player Watch Darcy Fogarty

[Shaz2012]

Thanks for the update.

The criticisms that the board are now placing aren't the sort that are going to get better, were they accurate. He's apparently slow, fat, can't run.

Thankfully that's all a load of crap, but it's been another fun experience in just how quickly people will throw the young players under the bus if they want to defend status quo. I should have learned from Taylor Walker and tackle gate all those years ago I suppose.

That wasn’t a criticism, saying he is only 19 is just a call for patience. The only criticism is that he doesn’t have a big enough tank. All of the rest I think most people see. Fog is our future. Get him in as soon as he is ready. Fitness wise he doesn’t look ready to run out 4 quarters yet.

 

[Bicks]

That wasn’t a criticism, saying he is only 19 is just a call for patience. The only criticism is that he doesn’t have a big enough tank. All of the rest I think most people see. Gov Fog is our future. Get him in as soon as he is ready. Fitness wise he doesn’t look ready to run out 4 quarters yet.

FIFY

 

[Bicks]

True, but Gov was in the 2's for a full year before he played, and he was substantially more advanced in his mobility, tackle pressure and speed when he came into the side, not to mention his aerial marking ability. So he essentially kept himself in it due to the threats he possessed and the defensive pressure he could apply, even without the ball in his hands (which is precisely the trait I want FOG to develop into his game to make him reach his potential).

I would say those traits covered up his phase outs in the eyes of many.

And Gov was a "mature" age Claremont draftee drafted out of the WAFL seniors. Apples and oranges

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Gov was 21 when he debuted for us. Fog is currently 19. Let’s start the Gov comparison in two years time.

 

[Shaz2012]

Gov was 21 when he debuted for us. Fog is currently 19. Let’s start the Gov comparison in two years time.

Dont see much to compare Gov and Fog at this stage. I am looking to see him follow in the footsteps of Tex. If I am reading it right, Tex played his first 14 games as a 19 year old averaging 7.9 disposals, 4.1 marks (whaaat), and 1.6 goals/1.4 behinds (bit inaccurate). Fog looks to me to be tracking well.

I'm looking at Davis and McAdam as the two guys that might be comparable to Gov. Quick, defensive pressure, mark tall and scoreboard impact. Gov is a big loss for mine. KFC jokes aside, I feel we are going to miss him so would like to see one of these two blokes do that role for us.

Edit: BTW Tex kicked bags of 5 and 4 as a 19 year old so its no mean task for Fog to keep on tracking Tex.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I described his running action as 'noticeably non fluid'. Never said slow and bulky.

And yes, I think with increased aerobic capacity he will be able to run harder for longer which will enhance his perceived speed by leaps and bounds. Its when he's gassed that you really notice that really upright, short gate style of running that he does.

Love FOG, but am I wrong or did he still look a touch slow and bulky still on the weekend?

I have no doubt he was still blowing out the cobwebs in a hot trial match, but I wont like i'm hoping he looks a bit more fluid in his movement in the JLT.

Um...

 

[Southerntakeover]

That wasn’t a criticism, saying he is only 19 is just a call for patience. The only criticism is that he doesn’t have a big enough tank. All of the rest I think most people see. Fog is our future. Get him in as soon as he is ready. Fitness wise he doesn’t look ready to run out 4 quarters yet.

He was our key player at the end of the game- there's no present evidence of an inability to complete a game.

The fitness narrative is largely baseless at this point. It appears to be predominantly centered on the assumption that his fitness has not improved as the result of his second pre-season.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Here's the thing though, people claiming that they want 'patience' are actually calling for the opposite. They're not calling for a patient selection process that prioritises Fog whilst understanding that it is necessary he develop.

What they're calling for is patience towards an impatient selection policy that refuses to allow him opportunity if he doesnt presently out perform maxed out seniors with no development left in them.

 

[BRL121]

He was our key player at the end of the game- there's no present evidence of an inability to complete a game.

The fitness narrative is largely baseless at this point. It appears to be predominantly centered on the assumption that his fitness has not improved as the result of his second pre-season.

I think this is probably fair. I only see him on TV, and my view is that I don't see him in the picture often enough. When he is on screen, he looks good, marking, kicking, running, harassing, and tackling. His physique looks a lot better this year and I've no idea whether the reason he's not in my picture more often is because he lacks tank, or is simply still learning to get into the right position: I suspect the latter. TOG probably not helping either. Give him time!

 

[Scorpus]

Here's the thing though, people claiming that they want 'patience' are actually calling for the opposite. They're not calling for a patient selection process that prioritises Fog whilst understanding that it is necessary he develop.

What they're calling for is patience towards an impatient selection policy that refuses to allow him opportunity if he doesnt presently out perform maxed out seniors with no development left in them.

Seniors having no development left should have nothing to do with Fog getting selected.

It's about balancing his development with choosing players that are most likely to see us win.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Seniors having no development left should have nothing to do with Fog getting selected.

It's about balancing his development with choosing players that are most likely to see us win.

It has plenty to do with it. Selection is a comparative process.

The present quality of a player, and their capacity to improve on that quality, are plainly relevant criterion.

 

[Scorpus]

It has plenty to do with it. Selection is a comparative process.

The present quality of a player, and their capacity to improve on that quality, are plainly relevant criterion.

A players capacity to improve is irrelevant if they are outperforming someone that has "potential" AND our goal is to win.

 

[Southerntakeover]

A players capacity to improve is irrelevant if they are outperforming someone that has "potential" AND our goal is to win.

No, that's far too simplistic. Our goal is to win when? Only to win the upcoming immediate match, or to win in September?

 

[Shaz2012]

He was our key player at the end of the game- there's no present evidence of an inability to complete a game.

The fitness narrative is largely baseless at this point. It appears to be predominantly centered on the assumption that his fitness has not improved as the result of his second pre-season.

Correct. If this assumption is false then we need to find a way to get him in the team as soon as possible. I have said already that I would like to see if he can be a swingman and take a spot on the bench to rest our talls. I know that is a huge ask, which is why I only say I would like to see it. Even if he is fit enough, I dont have him ahead of (or replacing) JJ or Lynch. But this is pre-season. Let him play, who knows where the pecking order will sit towards the latter half of the season.

 

[Deaneus!]

I’m not even gonna justify that with a response

dignify, not justify


i will write a poem:

Go Fog! is a palindrome
yet he is Mel Gibson
in the thunderdome
he stalks the land, defeating Mothra
Redgum knows his age
he cannot be defeated
he will be like Tex not Modra
all shall know his rage
soon his efforts will be repeated

Turning and turning in the set-shot run-up for goal,
The player cannot hear the runner;
Defences fall apart; the ruckman cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the field,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of Brownlow medal awarding is dumbed down;
The best follow the Crows, while the worst
Are full of platitudes about Port Power

 

[Scorpus]

No, that's far too simplistic. Our goal is to win when? Only to win the upcoming immediate match, or to win in September?

The two are linked, but I'm sure you know that.

 

[Reakts97]

long term the fog will benefit from this 6-6-6 rule a lot

 

[Southerntakeover]

The two are linked, but I'm sure you know that.

And I'm sure you know where this is going, which is why you're not answering. I'll just complete the puzzle for you. The answer should be september. Winning in september is most important.

Given that, let's say you have two players: let's call them Player A and Player B.

Player A is currently the better player, but will not improve.

Player B is not the better player presently, but your best projection is if they are capable of developing within the course of the season to be better by seasons end- if played now.

Who should you prioritise?

 

[Betts are off]

Um...

Ok I missed that one (not surprising considering it was weeks ago) but still, did you even read the rest of the post... You know, the parts with context?

 

[Scorpus]

And I'm sure you know where this is going, which is why you're not answering. I'll just complete the puzzle for you. The answer should be september. Winning in september is most important.

Given that, let's say you have two players: let's call them Player A and Player B.

Player A is currently the better player, but will not improve.

Player B is not the better player presently, but your best projection is if they are capable of developing within the course of the season to be better by seasons end- if played now.

Who should you prioritise?

There is no right option because you don't know selecting player B will be better. You are guessing they will be and taking a risk that may work and may not.

Which is why I said there must be a balance between development and selecting a team to win. If a senior player is outperforming a guy with lots of potential (as in, not a borderline case) then it doesn't make sense to choose the guy with potential because you are jeopardizing your chance of winning. And you need to win H&A matches to be there in September.

Of course in a borderline case, like Mackay vs Jones or Fogarty v Otten then yeah, you'd choose the player with potential. But that doesn't seem to be what people are suggesting here, with calls to not retain Lynch for example.

 

[beartoo]

dignify, not justify


i will write a poem:

Go Fog! is a palindrome
yet he is Mel Gibson
in the thunderdome
he stalks the land, defeating Mothra
Redgum knows his age
he cannot be defeated
he will be like Tex not Modra
all shall know his rage
soon his efforts will be repeated

Turning and turning in the set-shot run-up for goal,
The player cannot hear the runner;
Defences fall apart; the ruckman cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the field,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of Brownlow medal awarding is dumbed down;
The best follow the Crows, while the worst
Are full of platitudes about Port Power

2nd stanza is great. Reminds me of something I read somewhere........

 

[beartoo]

And I'm sure you know where this is going, which is why you're not answering. I'll just complete the puzzle for you. The answer should be september. Winning in september is most important.

Given that, let's say you have two players: let's call them Player A and Player B.

Player A is currently the better player, but will not improve.

Player B is not the better player presently, but your best projection is if they are capable of developing within the course of the season to be better by seasons end- if played now.

Who should you prioritise?

You were isolating winning the next match against winning in September. If we don't win the matches, we don't play in September.
Fog will play games this year. How many is the question. He will have to perform well in games this year to replace any of our existing forward line in September action.

 

[Brenton Davy]

dignify, not justify


i will write a poem:

Go Fog! is a palindrome
yet he is Mel Gibson
in the thunderdome
he stalks the land, defeating Mothra
Redgum knows his age
he cannot be defeated
he will be like Tex not Modra
all shall know his rage
soon his efforts will be repeated

Turning and turning in the set-shot run-up for goal,
The player cannot hear the runner;
Defences fall apart; the ruckman cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the field,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of Brownlow medal awarding is dumbed down;
The best follow the Crows, while the worst
Are full of platitudes about Port Power

Stop trying to sound ejamacated and toffy.

No place for that hereabouts...

 

[Deaneus!]

2nd stanza is great. Reminds me of something I read somewhere........

Nope, completely made that up all by myself. Yeat it does sound a bit familiar now i think about it

 

[Southerntakeover]

There is no right option because you don't know selecting player B will be better. You are guessing they will be and taking a risk that may work and may not.

Which is why I said there must be a balance between development and selecting a team to win. If a senior player is outperforming a guy with lots of potential (as in, not a borderline case) then it doesn't make sense to choose the guy with potential because you are jeopardizing your chance of winning. And you need to win H&A matches to be there in September.

Of course in a borderline case, like Mackay vs Jones or Fogarty v Otten then yeah, you'd choose the player with potential. But that doesn't seem to be what people are suggesting here, with calls to not retain Lynch for example.

I don't think we're actually that far apart really. It's a question of fact (or predicted fact), and degree in each instance.

As it relates to senior players- there are some who's current performance doesnt require growth to remain plainly selectable- your A+ players are always to be selected. Where it becomes more complicated is when you're dealing with your senior B graders, or your C+ers. In my view those players have to be both clearly better now, and likely to remain clearly better with development invested, to be selected above youth.

In some parts the disagreement is whether players are B's or C+s etc I'm sure.

Whether I would have retained Lynch (as opposed to selecting him now that he is retained) is perhaps more complicated. I think you've got to factor in the cap space and opportunity cost as well on the retention issue.