Player Watch Finlay Macrae

Remove this Banner Ad

No SPIN said:
It’s an absurd comparison- if you can’t see that then I can’t help.
We have no one at his standard much like all teams lack a Nick Daicos.
All teams would need to delist virtually all their upcoming mids if Wardlaw is the benchmark.
Click to expand...
In Year 4 (same as macrae):
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Even degoey who played forward more in his 4th season (2018) averaged 16 touches but also averaged 2.3

How is fin tracking in year 4 compared to that handful spinny?

They are getting his VFL numbers at AFL lvl.

He’s not tracking to make it. That’s just a fact.

Where you are picked in the draft is irrelevant for a small. The benchmark is there you either meet it or not.

As one commentator who’s names escapes me once said “smalls get 5min to prove they can play, talls get 5 years to prove they can’t”

And a bigger issue is the games sped up. All highlighted by this article.

www.foxsports.com.au

‘You’re in real trouble’: Ben Dixon concerned pure inside midfielders could soon be ‘redundant’ in new AFL style

‘You’re in real trouble’: AFL great warns five star midfielders could soon be ‘redundant’
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au

Macrae is an inside mid. Nothing else. That’s the problem. He can’t play any other position, and the games evolving past players like him.

We can all wish for every kid we draft to make it, but most won’t.


I think we are worlds apart on this, so even though I’ve said it once, I’ll leave it at that.

I honestly hope the kid proves me wrong
 
Last edited:
Just an alternate view but Fin will never get to be "Fin" until he's playing full time in the guts and NOT having Mitchell hanging over his shoulder. Yes he didn't stack up numbers but he did get a couple of early clearances, he did set McCreery on to his running goal and he was in on the early tackling pressure.

Of the players mentioned above:
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Neale had played 70 odd games, Mitchell 40+, Oliver 80 odd, and Adams 60+.
Fin has played LESS than 20 games and been sub in 25% of his matches. Its hardly a fair comparison with these guys.

Just for reference: Dane Swan's first 4 years yielded 30 games and he only averaged 16 disposals a game back then as well...

I reckon we should give the kid a break, play him regularly (in his proper position) and then see how he's travelling after he reaches the 40-50 game mark.
 
No SPIN said:
It’s an absurd comparison- if you can’t see that then I can’t help.
We have no one at his standard much like all teams lack a Nick Daicos.
All teams would need to delist virtually all their upcoming mids if Wardlaw is the benchmark.
Click to expand...

You’re talking nonsense, Spinny.

As good as he is, Wardlaw isn’t yet in the top 20 mids in the comp. So he’s a very relevant comparison for Fin. Wardlaw’s not yet in the league of Bontempelli, Petracca, Oliver, Cripps, Walsh, Neale, McLuggage, Serong, Rowell, Anderson, Dusty, Tarranto, Tom Green, Coniglio, Heeney, Gulden, Dawson, Dangerfield, Butters, Wines, etc, etc. and they’re all exactly the types of players Fin needs to be able to go head to head with, if he’s going to play in the engine room for us.

I’m sure Fin is a great young man who gives his absolute best but if you can’t see how far off the pace he is of those listed above, then I can’t help you.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Robroy22 said:
Just an alternate view but Fin will never get to be "Fin" until he's playing full time in the guts and NOT having Mitchell hanging over his shoulder. Yes he didn't stack up numbers but he did get a couple of early clearances, he did set McCreery on to his running goal and he was in on the early tackling pressure.

Of the players mentioned above:
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Neale had played 70 odd games, Mitchell 40+, Oliver 80 odd, and Adams 60+.
Fin has played LESS than 20 games and been sub in 25% of his matches. Its hardly a fair comparison with these guys.

Just for reference: Dane Swan's first 4 years yielded 30 games and he only averaged 16 disposals a game back then as well...

I reckon we should give the kid a break, play him regularly (in his proper position) and then see how he's travelling after he reaches the 40-50 game mark.
Click to expand...
Great post - I honestly can’t understand the lengths people are going to try malign Macrae. It’s refreshing to have someone offer data, rationality and logic to oppose these views.
 
Last edited:
No SPIN said:
Great post - I honestly can’t understand and absurd length people are going to try bag Macrae. It’s refreshing to have someone offer data, rationality and logic to discredit these views.
Click to expand...
I’m not bagging macrae spinny. I’m offering measured realistic criticism of where he’s at compared to where he needs to be.

If I called him a dud or hopeless then I’d be bagging him.
 
LuckyLee said:
You’re talking nonsense, Spinny.

As good as he is, Wardlaw isn’t yet in the top 20 mids in the comp. So he’s a very relevant comparison for Fin. Wardlaw’s not yet in the league of Bontempelli, Petracca, Oliver, Cripps, Walsh, Neale, McLuggage, Serong, Rowell, Anderson, Dusty, Tarranto, Tom Green, Coniglio, Heeney, Gulden, Dawson, Dangerfield, Butters, Wines, etc, etc. and they’re all exactly the types of players Fin needs to be able to go head to head with, if he’s going to play in the engine room for us.

I’m sure Fin is a great young man who gives his absolute best but if you can’t see how far off that pace he is of those listed above, then I can’t help you.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
If you can’t see superstar written all over Wardlaw then I’m not sure what I can say.
He will be as good as all those guys.
 
Robroy22 said:
Just an alternate view but Fin will never get to be "Fin" until he's playing full time in the guts and NOT having Mitchell hanging over his shoulder. Yes he didn't stack up numbers but he did get a couple of early clearances, he did set McCreery on to his running goal and he was in on the early tackling pressure.

Of the players mentioned above:
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Neale had played 70 odd games, Mitchell 40+, Oliver 80 odd, and Adams 60+.
Fin has played LESS than 20 games and been sub in 25% of his matches. Its hardly a fair comparison with these guys.

Just for reference: Dane Swan's first 4 years yielded 30 games and he only averaged 16 disposals a game back then as well...

I reckon we should give the kid a break, play him regularly (in his proper position) and then see how he's travelling after he reaches the 40-50 game mark.
Click to expand...

Isn’t winning matches the highest priority for a professional football team? Especially a reigning Premier? If so, shouldn’t we be selecting our best possible side, rather than gifting games to fringe players in the name of development?

It’s amusing too that people defend Fin by saying things like “he’s been sub in 25% of his matches”.

Why do you think he has been sub so often? I’d suggest that it’s because his performances haven’t been impactful enough to justify selection in our Best 22. So to a large extent, it’s actually on Fin that he has started as sub, or been subbed-off, so many times.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
No SPIN said:
If you can’t see superstar written all over Wardlaw then I’m not sure what I can say.
He will be as good as all those guys.
Click to expand...

Yes, quite possibly - and all those guys incl Wardlaw are exactly who our midfielders (potentially incl Macrae) need to be able to match/beat if we are going to climb the mountain again. It’s a bloody tough gig no doubt but that’s what’s required if you want to play in the centre square. Very few will ever make it.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
LuckyLee said:
You’re talking nonsense, Spinny.

As good as he is, Wardlaw isn’t yet in the top 20 mids in the comp. So he’s a very relevant comparison for Fin. Wardlaw’s not yet in the league of Bontempelli, Petracca, Oliver, Cripps, Walsh, Neale, McLuggage, Serong, Rowell, Anderson, Dusty, Tarranto, Tom Green, Coniglio, Heeney, Gulden, Dawson, Dangerfield, Butters, Wines, etc, etc. and they’re all exactly the types of players Fin needs to be able to go head to head with, if he’s going to play in the engine room for us.

I’m sure Fin is a great young man who gives his absolute best but if you can’t see how far off the pace he is of those listed above, then I can’t help you.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
So you’d play Carmichael or Richards??

We can’t play blokes we don’t f’n have. Six players will be retiring within the next 18 months.

A leader’s major responsibility is to develop people, be they parents, managers, directors or coaches. It is not to win ‘employee of the month’ by sacrificing everything for the attainment of some stat.
 
Robroy22 said:
Just an alternate view but Fin will never get to be "Fin" until he's playing full time in the guts and NOT having Mitchell hanging over his shoulder. Yes he didn't stack up numbers but he did get a couple of early clearances, he did set McCreery on to his running goal and he was in on the early tackling pressure.

Of the players mentioned above:
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Neale had played 70 odd games, Mitchell 40+, Oliver 80 odd, and Adams 60+.
Fin has played LESS than 20 games and been sub in 25% of his matches. Its hardly a fair comparison with these guys.

Just for reference: Dane Swan's first 4 years yielded 30 games and he only averaged 16 disposals a game back then as well...

I reckon we should give the kid a break, play him regularly (in his proper position) and then see how he's travelling after he reaches the 40-50 game mark.
Click to expand...
There's a part of me that agrees with you, but those other blokes played some really good footy to get their first 50 games - albeit not necessarily consistently.

Finn's got to show that he deserves 50 games. Why choose him to get to 50 games rather than Harrison, Sullivan, Bianco or Roscoe?
 
Mick F said:
So you’d play Carmichael or Richards??

We can’t play blokes we don’t f’n have. Six players will be retiring within the next 18 months.

A leader’s major responsibility is to develop people, be they parents, managers, directors or coaches. It is not to win ‘employee of the month’ by sacrificing everything for the attainment of some stat.
Click to expand...

Fin is 22 years old and has played 15 games since debut in 2021 for very modest results, despite giving 100% and preparing like a true professional. IMO, we would be better to rotate McCreery, Shultz or Elliott through the engine room rather than gifting more games to Fin.

Guys like Sullivan, Allan, Bytel and DiMattia are all possibles who are yet to debut. I’d like to see what each of them has to offer when opportunities, such as injuries, arise. Until then, I hope we select the best possible side on merit, unless we fall out of finals contention, at which time development becomes the priority.

Anyway, clearly this is a polarising topic. I wish Fin nothing but success and happiness and will be delighted if he proves me wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Perhaps the club isn't going to rush Fin. Maybe they are happy to continue to develop him this year and expect a lot more next year when we lose a few midfielders. Maybe we are trying to win another flag while we have these champions this year. I have no idea if Fin will make it but as long as he keeps improving in the VFL, he'll get opportunities but I think next year, the club would expect a very big improvement
 
No SPIN said:
Great post - I honestly can’t understand the lengths people are going to try malign Macrae. It’s refreshing to have someone offer data, rationality and logic to oppose these views.
Click to expand...
These other 40-70 game players didn't get their games at the roulette table. Oliver may have butchered some kicks, but jeez he won a lot of footy to get his first 50 games. Finn has to play some good footy to get his first 50 games.

Hopefully he gets it done. He's just been signed to a fifth year, so they obviously rate him. But he needs to show why to get fifty games. This whole he deserves it attitude, because he's been around for a while, is rubbish.
 
sr36 said:
There's a part of me that agrees with you, but those other blokes played some really good footy to get their first 50 games - albeit not necessarily consistently.

Finn's got to show that he deserves 50 games. Why choose him to get to 50 games rather than Harrison, Sullivan, Bianco or Roscoe?
Click to expand...

Ummm just spitballing but Bianco was too small and too slow, Ruscoe was just another HBF of which we were overburdened. Sullivan has just arrived and he looks likely to get his chance at some stage also....and Harrison has been working (like Fin) on reaching AFL fitness and "size" to play the roles expected of him. I too like what Harvey is showing this season and could see him getting games during the season. Seems like Fin has been told to bide his time in the two's work on his craft and be ready to go when one of Mitchell, Pendles or previously Adams got injured or retired. His time is now and he deserves the support of regular time on ground to find his feet. (IMHO)
 
sr36 said:
These other 40-70 game players didn't get their games at the roulette table. Oliver may have butchered some kicks, but jeez he won a lot of footy to get his first 50 games. Finn has to play some good footy to get his first 50 games.

Hopefully he gets it done. He's just been signed to a fifth year, so they obviously rate him. But he needs to show why to get fifty games. This whole he deserves it attitude, because he's been around for a while, is rubbish.
Click to expand...
You are either being completely disingenuous with comparison with a superstar like Oliver, or you over rate McRae.
In either case you’re wrong to use Oliver as the benchmark.
 
LuckyLee said:
Your 38% game time reference as an excuse for Fin’s woeful performance is misleading.

The AFL website says Fin played 50:04 mins and Crisp 51:39 mins.

Fin was on the ground for 70% - 75% of the available game time before he was subbed, and then obviously 0% of it after Crisp replaced him.

Across the two and a bit quarters that he played, Fin was on the field for 50:04 mins in the busiest and most important part of the ground and could barely get a touch.

We cannot afford to essentially play one midfielder down in the name of development. The place for development is the VFL. Anyone who comes into our AFL midfield needs to be able to play at the level almost immediately.

It would be different if he was playing forward pocket but he’s trying to make it in the centre square.

Let’s see what Sullivan and Allan can do by comparison.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
I think Finn's perceived/actual lack of versatility is holding him back. Traditionally you get young midfielders up to speed by giving them a role on the flanks or pocket as they develop. He is not ideal as a forward, but you really need to leave some roles in the team for development. This is part of why I'm lukewarm on the Lachie Schultz recruitment . And because of versatility, Harvey Harrison may have a better shot at making it at AFL level
 
No SPIN said:
You are either being completely disingenuous with comparison with a superstar like Oliver, or you over rate McRae.
In either case you’re wrong to use Oliver as the benchmark.
Click to expand...
That's my point Spinny. He shouldn't be compared to these mids who'd played 50 games to this point of their career, as they'd been good enough to get selected 50 times. His contemporaries are 4th year players who havent yet performed well enough to have played a lot of games by their 4th year. His recent contemporaries in terms of years and games for us are Ruscoe, Bianco, Kelly, Tyler Brown, Murphy. Murphy should give him a bit of hope - the others not so much.
 
It's astounding that posters are writing Macrae off after three games as sub and saying he's failed to grab his chance when he's a sub-20 gamer where you expect inconsistencies and need to give them opportunity to develop.

Meanwhile everyone is making excuses for Schultz when Macrae basically had the same stats and impact as him in half a game when Schultz is a 100 gamer that's meant to be the finished product and the reason we trade a first rounder so that you don't have to waste games like these to develop them. Instead it's all about giving him time, cause you can't write him off after 4 full games and learning the game plan blah blah.

Wish a developing Macrae was afforded the same leeway as Schultz.
 
Ugene41 said:
It's astounding that posters are writing Macrae off after three games as sub and saying he's failed to grab his chance when he's a sub-20 gamer where you expect inconsistencies and need to give them opportunity to develop.

Meanwhile everyone is making excuses for Schultz when Macrae basically had the same stats and impact as him in half a game when Schultz is a 100 gamer that's meant to be the finished product and the reason we trade a first rounder so that you don't have to waste games like these to develop them. Instead it's all about giving him time, cause you can't write him off after 4 full games and learning the game plan blah blah.

Wish a developing Macrae was afforded the same leeway as Schultz.
Click to expand...
A Schultz in poor form still offers more than Macrae atm.
 
Last edited:
Ugene41 said:
It's astounding that posters are writing Macrae off after three games as sub and saying he's failed to grab his chance when he's a sub-20 gamer where you expect inconsistencies and need to give them opportunity to develop.

Meanwhile everyone is making excuses for Schultz when Macrae basically had the same stats and impact as him in half a game when Schultz is a 100 gamer that's meant to be the finished product and the reason we trade a first rounder so that you don't have to waste games like these to develop them. Instead it's all about giving him time, cause you can't write him off after 4 full games and learning the game plan blah blah.

Wish a developing Macrae was afforded the same leeway as Schultz.
Click to expand...

You’re making an erroneous comparison.

For a team to win, its centre square mids must perform at a consistently high, impactful level. The same is not true for small forwards.

So, by necessity, there’s much less latitude in the centre square for players who go missing or need development, especially in teams aspiring to play finals and win Premierships.

Anyone wanting to play in the centre square in such teams needs to be able to come in and perform at the required level, almost immediately. Their development needs to occur in the VFL and/or in less vital AFL positions, such as forward pocket, the flanks and wings, before moving into the centre square as the near-complete package.

It’s very tough on Fin, especially because he seems unsuitable for other positions at AFL level. But that’s just the way it is at the pointy end of an elite competition.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Last edited:
Robroy22 said:
Just an alternate view but Fin will never get to be "Fin" until he's playing full time in the guts and NOT having Mitchell hanging over his shoulder. Yes he didn't stack up numbers but he did get a couple of early clearances, he did set McCreery on to his running goal and he was in on the early tackling pressure.

Of the players mentioned above:
Neale: averaged 27 touches and played 24 out of 27 games
Mitchell: averaged 27 touches and played 19 of 27 games
Oliver: averaged 30 touches and played 22 of 27
Adams: averaged 27 touches and played 18 of 27

Neale had played 70 odd games, Mitchell 40+, Oliver 80 odd, and Adams 60+.
Fin has played LESS than 20 games and been sub in 25% of his matches. Its hardly a fair comparison with these guys.

Just for reference: Dane Swan's first 4 years yielded 30 games and he only averaged 16 disposals a game back then as well...

I reckon we should give the kid a break, play him regularly (in his proper position) and then see how he's travelling after he reaches the 40-50 game mark.
Click to expand...
Do you think there might be a reason behind those A graders playing so much early on?
 
Ugene41 said:
It's astounding that posters are writing Macrae off after three games as sub and saying he's failed to grab his chance when he's a sub-20 gamer where you expect inconsistencies and need to give them opportunity to develop.

Meanwhile everyone is making excuses for Schultz when Macrae basically had the same stats and impact as him in half a game when Schultz is a 100 gamer that's meant to be the finished product and the reason we trade a first rounder so that you don't have to waste games like these to develop them. Instead it's all about giving him time, cause you can't write him off after 4 full games and learning the game plan blah blah.

Wish a developing Macrae was afforded the same leeway as Schultz.
Click to expand...
You need medical help for your obsession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top