What is more important, getting Tex to 300 or Draper to 50?

[Samcro24]

Done

Need votes visible

 

[Interloperer]

Making a note to check back on this thread when there's the inquest over how pick 4 came to be spent on Draper.

 

[dogs105]

Can't believe there's so many "no" votes!

 

[PCORF]

Even if Walker finishes on 299 games who would say he wasn't a great player.

But yep, got to get Draper more minutes. I am predicting he'll reach 50 games in 2027.

 

[spenze]

Can't believe there's so many "no" votes!

Can't believe I can't edit the poll to a serious question

 

[spenze]

It will be interesting to see how much we rest Tex after the bye...I'm betting we won't

 

[dogs105]

Can't believe I can't edit the poll to a serious question

Scorpus can fix it

 

[spenze]

Scorpus can fix it

Ehhh, leave it as it is

 

[dogs105]

Ehhh, leave it as it is

It's far better now

 

[spenze]

It's far better now

It just has that je ne sais quoi

 

[Samcro24]

It just has that je ne sais quoi

And an ooga booga to you

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

They've made a rod for their own backs now.

If they drop or "rest" Tex now, it will be a MASSIVE issue. Major controversy, distraction, immense scrutiny, intense pressure on his replacement.

Needed to take the 300 off the table from the beginning of the season. Pre-emptive rests, focus on the only thing that's important; winning finals.

Instead they crossed their fingers, hoped that his early season form would carry on, that we'd be able to win games and keep Tex chugging along each week. It threatens to blow up in their face.

 

[cleanhands]

OR replace Nicks

 

[Golumless]

Neither are particularly important, so probably Tex getting to 300. Though, that's more about celebrating an important pillar of the club and getting a nice ending to a career. That said, the biggest reason is the natural replacement for Tex is injured, and the idea of going smaller is misguided; especially as we have **** all depth in this part (remember Murphy is in the best 22)

Any kid to 50 games is an incredibly overrated part to development. This period is about finding roles that suit a players skill set and getting preseasons in the body (after all, most improvement is physical). In saying that, we probably should be using Draper as a permanent half forward at this point in time whilst his body isn't ready for inside midfield as his leg speed would be handy to get a bit more defensive power in our half forward line.

 

[skittlebrew]

Tex could still get injured or suspended playing, eliminating his chance of making 300 games.

We all love Tex but making 300 games is exponentially less important than the team possibly making finals and/or possibly getting a second chance in finals.

Initially I was against him playing in the side, but a few early bags seemingly justified his spot in the side. But his offensive output needs to be weighed up against his defensive liabilities. Ultimately it's a no from me, even as a sub.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Neither are particularly important, so probably Tex getting to 300. Though, that's more about celebrating an important pillar of the club and getting a nice ending to a career. That said, the biggest reason is the natural replacement for Tex is injured, and the idea of going smaller is misguided; especially as we have **** all depth in this part (remember Murphy is in the best 22)

Any kid to 50 games is an incredibly overrated part to development. This period is about finding roles that suit a players skill set and getting preseasons in the body (after all, most improvement is physical). In saying that, we probably should be using Draper as a permanent half forward at this point in time whilst his body isn't ready for inside midfield as his leg speed would be handy to get a bit more defensive power in our half forward line.

Why did Phil Walsh think it was important?

 

[spenze]

Why did Phil Walsh think it was important?

Sheedy did too.

 

[Syd Crow]

Based on history, seems more important to get our draftee midfielders to play in any other position apart from midfield preferably in the SANFL.

 

[Scorpus]

Any kid to 50 games is an incredibly overrated part to development. This period is about finding roles that suit a players skill set and getting preseasons in the body (after all, most improvement is physical). In saying that, we probably should be using Draper as a permanent half forward at this point in time whilst his body isn't ready for inside midfield as his leg speed would be handy to get a bit more defensive power in our half forward line.

Couldn't disagree more.

Physical development is obviously one component, but so is understanding the speed and style of game played at AFL level. The only way you achieve that is through playing at that level.

If anything I think it's underrated how massive the step up is between lower league footy (eg SANFL) and U18 competitions to AFL. Not just in terms of pace, but also in size of opponent, quality of team mate, the gameplan, roles in the team and even the rules. Our SANFL team whenever I've watched them often look totally different to how we play at AFL, and not in a good way

The only thing the lower level is good for in terms of young player development is miles in the legs, confidence at ball winning against a lower standard and the chance to tweak a few technical aspects of how a player plays. Most learning is done at AFL level and that's why if you play a guy in the SANFL for 3 years they still struggle coming up to AFL after all that development time, and still require those 50 games to blossom

 

[Cromulant]

Based on history, seems more important to get our draftee midfielders to play in any other position apart from midfield preferably in the SANFL.

Weve wanted our guys to be able to play multiple roles, especially if you're a midfielder by trade.

On the face of it, thats not necessarily a bad thing. But when you realise the coach himself is not flexible at all then its a bit of a laugh.

 

[GameofSloanes]

Now, I know the usual belly ticklers will squeal "they don't play the same position" but it isn't about that, it is about us being serious as a club.

I have little doubt we want to reward Tex, he has been a great club servant but is it the clubs responsibility to get him there?

Are we focused on winning flags or are we more interested in milestones for long term players because we aren't winning a flag this year and we won't next year unless we get our priorities right.

If Tex only gets to 290 odd, so be it and we should be playing Draper as much as we can, not putting games into god damned fringe players and playing older players more than we have to. Last year we said Tex would be rested through the year...but it seems to be rested enough to get him to a milestone.

If we want to win flags, we need to make unpopular decisions and if that means he doesn't get to 300 and we start prioritising a gun midfielder instead of "Murphy" or "Taylor" or "Pedlar" then we are moving in the right direction.

Everyone here knows the correct answer.

The club has the opposite opinion

 

[Syd Crow]

Everyone here knows the correct answer.

The club has the opposite opinion

Yup. Tex 300, nice to have and the heart wants. Draper 50, the head knows this is imperative.

 

[Soggy2112]

Couldn't disagree more.

Physical development is obviously one component, but so is understanding the speed and style of game played at AFL level. The only way you achieve that is through playing at that level.

If anything I think it's underrated how massive the step up is between lower league footy (eg SANFL) and U18 competitions to AFL. Not just in terms of pace, but also in size of opponent, quality of team mate, the gameplan, roles in the team and even the rules. Our SANFL team whenever I've watched them often look totally different to how we play at AFL, and not in a good way

The only thing the lower level is good for in terms of young player development is miles in the legs, confidence at ball winning against a lower standard and the chance to tweak a few technical aspects of how a player plays. Most learning is done at AFL level and that's why if you play a guy in the SANFL for 3 years they still struggle coming up to AFL after all that development time, and still require those 50 games to blossom

There was an article earlier in the year quoting Hardwick saying he felt that 1 game in the AFL was worth about 10-20 reserves games in terms of player development.

 

[adelaidecrows]

There was an article earlier in the year quoting Hardwick saying he felt that 1 game in the AFL was worth about 10-20 reserves games in terms of player development.

the saying 'Cant soar like an Eagle if you hang around Turkeys' is a saying that exists for a reason.

The idea of reserves is to show enough that you can take the next step and develop further at AFL level. Im not sure how anyone could argue that Draper, Dowling, Edwards have anything more to learn at Sanfl level.

 

[Soggy2112]

the saying 'Cant soar like an Eagle if you hang around Turkeys' is a saying that exists for a reason.

The idea of reserves is to show enough that you can take the next step and develop further at AFL level. Im not sure how anyone could argue that Draper, Dowling, Edwards have anything more to learn at Sanfl level.

I also think there’s a real risk that players develop bad habits if they spend too much time at SANFL level.

I reckon Strachan is a great example. He dominated SANFL for years. The narrative was always “best ruck in the SANFL”, but he never actually got tested. Then when he got his shot it turns out his fitness just was not up to AFL level, and his strengths were not able to mask it in the way it could at SANFL level. He’s now in his late 20s and it’s really too late.

However, if he was given more exposure to the level in his development years, who knows?

Dowling is another good example. He showed he has potential at AFL level. He’s performing pretty consistently at SANFL level, however, he needs the spotlight of the AFL, the pace, the physicality, the pressure etc to poke holes in his game so he can be tested and improve. Then we’ll either find out he’s good enough, or he’ll drift away.

At the moment I’d say that on our list, Pedlar, Edwards, Cook, Taylor, Nank, Dowling and Bond are all in the category of maybe. But we need to get 20-50 games in to them to know first, and will probably find 2-3 quality AFL players there, and the rest will drift away.

Obviously, that’s hard to do when you’re not a rebuilding side (which is why we should have been picking far more youth when we had the chance), however, Nicks needs to take the opportunity to pick these guys when it arises. That means not using Smith as sub, pick Dowling instead of Murphy if it’s just a one off game while Peatling is out, drop/rest Tex instead of trying to nurse him to 300. These are ruthless calls but they are necessary.