Traded 13. Lachlan Fogarty (2018 -2020)

[year of the cat]

Yeah not sure why people are having a crack at me. He was one if the slowest players tested. Most of the ruckman beat him in the sprints.

On his testing you have a good point. If you look at his highlights package he just appears to be significantly quicker in acceleration than his testing showed. Whether that is due to superior reading of the play or he just had a poor test (sand bagging?!), I'm not sure?

 

[Warhorse]

On his testing you have a good point. If you look at his highlights package he just appears to be significantly quicker in acceleration than his testing showed. Whether that is due to superior reading of the play or he just had a poor test (sand bagging?!), I'm not sure?

Maybe he is quick over 5m but has slow top end speed? Never looked particularly quick when i watched him

 

[year of the cat]

Maybe he is quick over 5m but has slow top end speed? Never looked particularly quick when i watched him

You also have to consider that he has elite endurance. His 3km time was exceptional. So while he may start slow, he likely is able to continue to run and run and perhaps his repeat sprint times don't deteriorate much during a match.

 

[Warhorse]

You also have to consider that he has elite endurance. His 3km time was exceptional. So while he may start slow, he likely is able to continue to run and run and perhaps his repeat sprint times don't deteriorate much during a match.

Athletically maybe he is similar to Rockliff then. Just slower over shorter distances

 

[year of the cat]

Athletically maybe he is similar to Rockliff then. Just slower over shorter distances

Maybe. We'll have to wait until the season starts I think to make a definitive judgement.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I’m pretty sure Peter Street holds the 20m sprint record at Geelong and the Dogs. Just for perspective.

I used to live near Peter street when I was in high school. It was a prick of a street to ride or run up ... always tested the fitness.

 

[David the Cat]

i wonder what Greg Williams time over 20m was.....

 

[Down at K Park]

If you use 20m in 3 secs as a "standard" then that equates to 6.666m/sec, not taking into account that you are starting from a standing position. Therefore at the very best 0.2sec equates to 1.33m. Because you are really considering the distance at the end of the sprint,where you are at your quickest, then I think it could be easily extrapolated to at least 2.5-3m. That is quite a significant distance over 20m. Which is why this test is actually conducted.

I get the feeling though that Miers might actually be a bit quicker than he tested.

Does the test take into account reaction times or just it just start the timer once a beam is broken?

I used to live near Peter street when I was in high school. It was a prick of a street to ride or run up ... always tested the fitness.

I still do live off peter st.

 

[Warhorse]

i wonder what Greg Williams time over 20m was.....

Probably the same as parfitts

 

[year of the cat]

Does the test take into account reaction times or just it just start the timer once a beam is broken?

.

Good question. I don’t know but it would be a pertinent point.

 

[CatRiot]

Do people think Fogarty will be better than Parfitt??

Both drafted at similar picks, both 179cm, both trying to break into the midfield and may spend time forward.

I have a funny feeling that Miers will still be a better Small Forward than both Fogarty and Parfitt, and Jones for that matter. Just a guess.

 

[Landgraft]

If you use 20m in 3 secs as a "standard" then that equates to 6.666m/sec, not taking into account that you are starting from a standing position. Therefore at the very best 0.2sec equates to 1.33m. Because you are really considering the distance at the end of the sprint,where you are at your quickest, then I think it could be easily extrapolated to at least 2.5-3m. That is quite a significant distance over 20m. Which is why this test is actually conducted.

I get the feeling though that Miers might actually be a bit quicker than he tested.

We're dealing with .35 m/s difference here but the problem is it's not clear whether he has a particular problem off the mark, lacks top speed or what. Just that he tested slower in a very short sprint but quite well over long distances.

If the difference between him and other players remained .35 m/s over long distances then he would be murdered in results. The other thing is that a game is a three dimensional occurrence and running to the right places saves you far more time than merely running well.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Do people think Fogarty will be better than Parfitt??

Both drafted at similar picks, both 179cm, both trying to break into the midfield and may spend time forward.

I have a funny feeling that Miers will still be a better Small Forward than both Fogarty and Parfitt, and Jones for that matter. Just a guess.

I really like Fogarty's footage when he's playing on the ball just works hard both ways and never gives up, think he might be wasted a bit in a forward pocket for long periods.

Will struggle to compare Parfitt and Fogarty until we see Fogarty at senior level though but as for Miers to me he looks the most natural small forward of the trio.

 

[Warhorse]

Do people think Fogarty will be better than Parfitt??

Both drafted at similar picks, both 179cm, both trying to break into the midfield and may spend time forward.

I have a funny feeling that Miers will still be a better Small Forward than both Fogarty and Parfitt, and Jones for that matter. Just a guess.

Parfitt will be better. Easily. But a forward he is not. People get sucked in as he is indigenous but he doesnt play like the typical indigenous player. Excellent hands and strong hips. Moves well in traffic. Not particularly fast and not a big goal kicker

Fogarty will play an important role in the side as a pressure forward and ahas phenomenal tackling numbers.

We're dealing with .35 m/s difference here but the problem is it's not clear whether he has a particular problem off the mark, lacks top speed or what. Just that he tested slower in a very short sprint but quite well over long distances.

If the difference between him and other players remained .35 m/s over long distances then he would be murdered in results. The other thing is that a game is a three dimensional occurrence and running to the right places saves you far more time than merely running well.

Also consider that most small forwards are extremely fast and break the 3 sec barrier. He is a smart player but he has completetly disappeared in games when a defender has played him close

 

[strauchnyy]

I think Fogarty will be a good player for the Cats. Not one of our top 5 superstars, but an important player who in his prime, will play HFF/FP with stints in the middle.

I think he will pair up beautifully with Miers and together, will have a dangerous set of smalls in the forwardline that compliment each other. Both are creative with miers the better crumber and goal scorer and Fogarty the better defensive forward that sets up team mates with vision, contested ball winning ability and tacking.

Right now we don't have this element at all in our team. We have no small forwards other than Mccarthy who never players.

In 3 - 5 years, I think Fogarty will be a small forward that has stints in the middle and when in the middle, will be not too dissimilar to Keiren Jack. Or a Seb Ross. A smaller contested mid that wins the footy back from the opposition that sets up team mates. The thing is, I believe Danger Parfitt, Cockatoo, Constable, Kelly will make up the core midfield with Fogarty a good compliment to that. But will be too valuable up forward combining with Miers to be a full time mid. Fogarty up forward reminds me of a bit of Tich Edwards (from tigs) when he was more in his prime as that tackling smaller forward.

 

[Ricketz]

If you use 20m in 3 secs as a "standard" then that equates to 6.666m/sec, not taking into account that you are starting from a standing position. Therefore at the very best 0.2sec equates to 1.33m. Because you are really considering the distance at the end of the sprint,where you are at your quickest, then I think it could be easily extrapolated to at least 2.5-3m. That is quite a significant distance over 20m. Which is why this test is actually conducted.

I get the feeling though that Miers might actually be a bit quicker than he tested.

I am not sure how you arrive at a sub 2m figure and then extrapolate it out to 2.5 - 3m? Maybe I have misunderstood what you wrote.

20/2.9*36 = 6.9 metres per second
20/3.1*36 = 6.45 metres per second

(Using Daz' original times as that was what I was commenting on.)

Scenario 1 winner keeps running until loser finishes
As the first keeps running until the second reaches the line, it takes them 2.9 seconds at 6.0m/s. It takes the second runner a further 0.2 seconds to reach the 20 metre mark. 6.9 x 0.2 = 1.38m

Scenario 2 loser stops when winner crosses the line
Loser runs for 2.9 seconds at 6.45m/s = 18.71m, a difference of only 1.29m

So even in the BEST CASE SCENARIO, it does not equate to more than 2 metres, anyway you look at it.

But as has been stated - that is not how it works on a footy field. You don't have controlled conditions, you need to incorporate agility, strength, stamina, smarts and natural instinct to burst of the mark. Its indicative, as you say, but to class a player as slow for being .2 seconds in a 20m sprint, behind someone who is considered fast, is silly. Here is a classic example - Harry Taylor was in the top 17 fastest players on the field this year, clocking a maximum speed of 34.6km. Now Harry is clearly slow off the mark, and might be beaten in the first 20 metres from a standing start - but when do you see Harry standing still? He is reading the play before his opponent every time, and negates his lack of immediate acceleration by being on the move in the right places.

Another issue is that players rarely run 20 metres flat out - in reality. It seems they do it all the time, but they only spend around 5 or 6 minutes a game at speeds above 18km/hr (half of Harry's max speed). Most of the time they are jogging, walking or resting. Of that 5 or 6 minutes, a lot of the time they are sprinting on the spread and are not going to receive the ball every time (unless they are a Danger/Dusty type key mid) - so if we say conservatively their sprints put them in contested situations 75% of the time, then the impact of .2 secs over 20m is even further marginalised.

People are reading too much into 20m time trials, and Lingy, Boris, Jimmy would all agree I am sure.

 

[Ricketz]

Yeah not sure why people are having a crack at me. He was one if the slowest players tested. Most of the ruckman beat him in the sprints.

Not having a crack at you - having a crack at your opinion and why it is incorrect, in my opinion.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Yeah not sure why people are having a crack at me. He was one if the slowest players tested. Most of the ruckman beat him in the sprints.

People have a crack at you because you act like you know everything and seem incapable to accept other people's opinions which are usually correct and instead go on a bullshit ridden rant for 3 pages of a thread.

 

[BORIS332]

Do people think Fogarty will be better than Parfitt??

Both drafted at similar picks, both 179cm, both trying to break into the midfield and may spend time forward.

I have a funny feeling that Miers will still be a better Small Forward than both Fogarty and Parfitt, and Jones for that matter. Just a guess.

Very tough question. I like that Fogarty has a lot of accolades:

- VM representative
- All Australian
- Captain of one of the All Stars teams
- 2nd in TAC B&F from 7 games

To me, this shows a strong combination of work ethic and talent. You might make a state squad based on talent, but you make AA largely through work ethic and performance. The fact he skippered Team Enright at the All Stars shows his strong character and the respect he demands. All of this tells me that he has everything required to be a 200 gamer.

As for whether he’ll be better than Parfitt? Such a tough question considering Parf had similar accolades at the time of his drafting. For now, I can’t split them. I reckon in five years or so, given a clean injury free run, we’ll still be debating this. I’m confident both will play a lot of footy for the hoops.

 

[Warhorse]

I am not sure how you arrive at a sub 2m figure and then extrapolate it out to 2.5 - 3m? Maybe I have misunderstood what you wrote.

20/2.9*36 = 6.9 metres per second
20/3.1*36 = 6.45 metres per second

(Using Daz' original times as that was what I was commenting on.)

Scenario 1 winner keeps running until loser finishes
As the first keeps running until the second reaches the line, it takes them 2.9 seconds at 6.0m/s. It takes the second runner a further 0.2 seconds to reach the 20 metre mark. 6.9 x 0.2 = 1.38m

Scenario 2 winner loser stops when winner crosses the line
Loser runs for 2.9 seconds at 6.45m/s = 18.71m, a difference of only 1.29m

So even in the BEST CASE SCENARIO, it does not equate to more than 2 metres, anyway you look at it.

But as has been stated - that is not how it works on a footy field. You don't have controlled conditions, you need to incorporate agility, strength, stamina, smarts and natural instinct to burst of the mark. Its indicative, as you say, but to class a player as slow for being .2 seconds in a 20m sprint, behind someone who is considered fast, is silly. Here is a classic example - Harry Taylor was in the top 17 fastest players on the field this year, clocking a maximum speed of 34.6km. Now Harry is clearly slow off the mark, and might be beaten in the first 20 metres from a standing start - but when do you see Harry standing still? He is reading the play before his opponent every time, and negates his lack of immediate acceleration by being on the move in the right places.

Another issue is that players rarely run 20 metres flat out - in reality. It seems they do it all the time, but they only spend around 5 or 6 minutes a game at speeds above 18km/hr (half of Harry's max speed). Most of the time they are jogging, walking or resting. Of that 5 or 6 minutes, a lot of the time they are sprinting on the spread and are not going to receive the ball every time (unless they are a Danger/Dusty type key mid) - so if we say conservatively their sprints put them in contested situations 75% of the time, then the impact of .2 secs over 20m is even further marginalised.

People are reading too much into 20m time trials, and Lingy, Boris, Jimmy would all agree I am sure.

Myers was a lot slower than 3.1. He was closer to 3.25

 

[ShaunWDT]

Miers had glandular fever slightly before the combine, not sure how relevant his testing will be in the long term.

 

[Warhorse]

Oh and i wouldn't use average speed. They are probably close to 30km/h at the 20m mark. Thats about 8.3m a second. His time of about 3.25 is about .3-.35 seconds slower than a quick small forward. Somewhere close to 3 meters.

As you said though, it doesnt account for reaction times or ability to read the play. He still has to overcome a speed disadvantage. Im not going to talk about miers anymore in this thread though.

The thing i like about fogarty is he will be servicable at worst. He has a very high floor

 

[DanA]

Parfitt will be better. Easily. But a forward he is not. People get sucked in as he is indigenous but he doesnt play like the typical indigenous player. Excellent hands and strong hips. Moves well in traffic. Not particularly fast and not a big goal kicker

Fogarty will play an important role in the side as a pressure forward and ahas phenomenal tackling numbers.



Also consider that most small forwards are extremely fast and break the 3 sec barrier. He is a smart player but he has completetly disappeared in games when a defender has played him close

I think Parfitt is Sam Mitchell without the foot skills

 

[Ricketz]

Myers was a lot slower than 3.1. He was closer to 3.25

Mate, your comment was in reply to Daz, so I am using the figures that you replied to. Miers isn't even in the conversation, Daz replied to Catriot who said Constable apparently got a 3.05 and was considered slow. The fastest time in the combine was 2.87 and Constable was only .04secs outside the top 10, so clearly labelling Constable as slow is silly, right?

 

[Warhorse]

Mate, your comment was in reply to Daz, so I am using the figures that you replied to. Miers isn't even in the conversation, Daz replied to Catriot who said Constable apparently got a 3.05 and was considered slow. The fastest time in the combine was 2.87 and Constable was only .04secs outside the top 10, so clearly labelling Constable as slow is silly, right?

Never labeled Constable slow. In fact I was impressed with his testing. Just shows how slow Miers is who is .2sec behind Constable.