Player Watch #15: Andrew Moore

[TiggerDK]

If Moore plays every game Miles is injured and no more, and contributes on the day to help us still get the 4 points, then fantastic.
I don't understand what some people are expecting to get as an alternative for the cost? Crowley? Has no chance of upside the following 3-4 yrs like Moore. Some kid at pick 70+? Would have to be an absolute longshot to ever make the grade.

 

[mopsy]

Why so passionately negative ?

He is a Tig now.

Just embrace.

Do you really need to ask why a decent portion of tiger supporters are negative?
Hmm Shaun Hampson 7 yr afl history like Moore's very poor. 70 something games performances mostly below standard with no outstanding redeeming feature to his game yet we took him.

Look im happy to cop a belting over this. It will happen if Moore improves and plays well but seriously in some ways its not all about the players we take but the processes we go thru in selecting them.
Ah well im over it any way. Its the off season time to go away and let people be positive and optimisti. It may be the only time for these things to happen.

 

[GoTigers2015]

I seem to remember Mopsy a few years ago a change in direction where the list development team announced there would be a change in the type of player taken in r4/r5 and rookies. We had been taking kids but they were not be able to step up if required when injuries hit the main group and they would be kept on the list for 2- 3 years or more with the knowledge they were kids and needed development time.
When the inevitable happened and they were cut they had served no purpose at all except disappointment a rough diamond hadn't eventuated.
So mature age were targeted and they have at least bern able to play AFL in emergencies and then been cut.
That is Moore's role as worse case scenario...insurance for a year rather than a kid that gets kept on the list for 2-3 years, playing vfl and doing 60kg bench presses, trying to get some AFL ready size.
Moore CAN play AFL...nothing more and nothing less.

Horse for course IMO as we have picked up dud recycled players as rookies also.

The majority were happy picking juniors as rookies last year and there is plenty to be excited about. Both Short and George both have shown enough to suggest they will be good AFL players. Lambert as mature age player has really hit his straps and will only get better as an AFL player. Not sure about Soldo but he is not denying any other players a spot as is a Cat B rookie.

For this years draft if there is not much on offer then we should go with mature agers as rookies or another DFA (1 year contract). Although I didn't rate Moore, from what Port supporters have been saying he has an upside. Plus I liked his interview and sounds like he is hungry for a change.

 

[Bobby Sands]

Andrew Moore is a p

Do you really need to ask why a decent portion of tiger supporters are negative?
Hmm Shaun Hampson 7 yr afl history like Moore's very poor. 70 something games performances mostly below standard with no outstanding redeeming feature to his game yet we took him.

Look im happy to cop a belting over this. It will happen if Moore improves and plays well but seriously in some ways its not all about the players we take but the processes we go thru in selecting them.
Ah well im over it any way. Its the off season time to go away and let people be positive and optimisti. It may be the only time for these things to happen.

Choose another side please.. Or did this elsewhere.

 

[THE_GUN]

Really cant see the issue with Andrew Moore trade

We had 9 spots to fill on the list after Knights,Newman,Foley,Petterd,Thomas retired and delistings of Arnot,Gordon,Dea,McDonough
All the above players were mature bodies and players that have been in the system for 4-5-6 years plus (mcDonough 3 years)

We cannot simple go out and get 9 kids and expect them to be ready to play incase of injuries, Yarran,Townsend,Moore all add to areas of our list we are deficient in and we still have 6 more positions to fill on the list with 2 and maybe 3 kids to be taken in the national draft.

Still leaves another 3 positions to fill, I would even argue we are short another inside mid thats had another 3 or so years in the afl like Ballard or Colledge/Holman for depth and 1 might just be able to get to the next level and become a 150-200 game player as well as a mature nippy foward like a Shane Yarran

What people must realise is that we went deep into the draft last year drafting kids 6 and we simply cannot get another 6-7 kids this year if we want to maintain being competative next year and need ready to go mature depth when injuries hit.

We have been extremely lucky with injuries and cant expect that will continue for ever and will need to reach down to depth and 18 yo 76kgs 1st year players will not cut it

 

[_RT_]

I have basically replied to your posts and others from the view that yes we have taken Moore but should we have? I understand you and most others have said he must prove himself in one yr. I am arguing That a bloke who is 24 played 55 games had 6 yrs and has been taken to alleviate a need we should not be taking unproven players. The price has little to do with it. In Moores circumstances it should be a PROVEN AFL PLAYER we are taking.It is not that hard to comprehend.
Yes you make excuses for why he could not get a game at Port. The simple truth is he has not been good enough, ffs some ordinary blokes have also got games in front of him.His AFL record when given OPPORTUNITY, and there has been lots of them is poor.It is something that should not just be flicked under the carpet to justify taking him.

Houli and Grigg had shown plenty,In fact were just coming into their own, They had 4 yrs at their clubs and those clubs did not want to lose them.
Grigg played the last 8 games of 2010 and his output and stats are little different to today. Griggy didnt get early games in 2010 because of weak defensive efforts and a lack of hardness, traits that had gone unchecked at richmond.His time at the tiges has hardly been different to his time at Carlton.He is basically the same player and only now are his weaknesses being improved upon.

Houli well a similar story. Houli was not getting many games at the bombers but when he did his output then was not so different to what we get now.

Unlike Moore, Grigg and Houli left because they felt they were not getting a decent go. Moore was delisted after two whole yrs more in the system.

We tried to get proven players to fill the role. Shields Treloar Hartlett Trengove Adams Armitage & Greenwood are among those we chased but were unable to get. So we looked at the type of Hartley pickup that is a fringe player looking for opportunities hence Townsend and Moore being picked up. Effectively we got them for a 4th round pick in a shallow draft.

So who should we have got instead of Moore and Townsend that has played at AFL level and shown they are capable of playing as an inside midfielder. There isn't much better that was available. I believe that both will prove to be handy additions to the club and will have many happy that we got them for the price we did in 12 months time.

 

[RememberRoyce]

. Both Short and George both have shown enough to suggest they will be good AFL players.

A tad over optimistic here GT?
Neither of them has played a single AFL game. I didnt see any VFL games, but even if they did show some there, big step up to becoming 'good AFL players'. Fingers crossed though for me!

 

[GoTigers2015]

A tad over optimistic here GT?
Neither of them has played a single AFL game. I didnt see any VFL games, but even if they did show some there, big step up to becoming 'good AFL players'. Fingers crossed though for me!

Would expect George to debut next season as he was really close to select last season. I agree that we will need to see how good he is (and Shorty) when they play in the seniors, but they both had promising starts to their careers. Could be our best ever draft croft.

 

[theflea]

Reckon Hunt gets a bad wrap. Cost us nothing but a spot on our list and how much did our run improve with him and McIntosh in our side.

Never going to be a star and others may claim his spot as the side gets better and better but we definitely didn't go backwards with him in the side IMO.

Not fussed with picking up Moore. Cost us nothing and more to gain than loose.

I agree, as a times, he was the only player running from the backline, and then is sold under the bus when he does so. This is why Yarran will be a huge help.

 

[theflea]

Make no mistake campaigner i am happy for us to take the risk. What im really asking is. Is there a need for the risk to be so great when taking a Mature 24 yr old 55 game Afl player WHO WILL BE REQUIRED TO PERFORM.

Grow up, wtf are you on about? Its a debate about the merits of taking Andrew Moore OR NOT. Oh i see you dont want to talk about the cons you only want the positives. I am sorry mate but a forum does not work like that, maybe its you who should grow up, life is not all roses mate.

Hey its a debate, positive or negative there are things to be learned from both sides.
Why is it your view of things is more important than mine and plenty others. How about i say to you, jog on bud your too positive, get real a lot of us think we are grasping at straws here. Yet i have never ever gone down that path. Yes i have a negative point of view on this issue should it not be voiced and the position defended in debate as others debate opposing views.

No i would never come back and say i told you so.My expectations arent high like most around here so im not likely to get my nose out of joint.I am sure about one thing though. It will be the positive types coming back on here saying i told you if wrong.

How is the risk so great?

 

[Rumballs]

How is the risk so great?

Agree, the risk is in the cost, not the outcome. Late pick equivalent in a shallow draft is cheap.
Personally, I'm meh about Moore and his chances but he's here now so good luck.
In my mind, I've decided he replaced Gordon and I feel better about it already.

 

[theflea]

Agree, the risk is in the cost, not the outcome. Late pick equivalent in a shallow draft is cheap.
Personally, I'm meh about Moore and his chances but he's here now so good luck.
In my mind, I've decided he replaced Gordon and I feel better about it already.

Exactly.

 

[Tigerbob]

Jacob Townsend and Andrew Moore for pick 70. Winning.

 

[SplintWhisky]

Jacob Townsend and Andrew Moore for pick 70. Winning.

 

[mopsy]

I seem to remember Mopsy a few years ago a change in direction where the list development team announced there would be a change in the type of player taken in r4/r5 and rookies. We had been taking kids but they were not be able to step up if required when injuries hit the main group and they would be kept on the list for 2- 3 years or more with the knowledge they were kids and needed development time.
When the inevitable happened and they were cut they had served no purpose at all except disappointment a rough diamond hadn't eventuated.
So mature age were targeted and they have at least bern able to play AFL in emergencies and then been cut.
That is Moore's role as worse case scenario...insurance for a year rather than a kid that gets kept on the list for 2-3 years, playing vfl and doing 60kg bench presses, trying to get some AFL ready size.
Moore CAN play AFL...nothing more and nothing less.

I have long been an advocate for taking state league players who meet the right criteria. That is players who have never had a chance, have the right physical attributes for afl, have no glareing weaknesses that will stop them making the grade and finally they have done well in both their club and league B/Fs.
I have actually been an advocate for taking PROVEN MATURE PLAYERS from other AFL clubs regardless of age.
I fully understand the problems with taking skinny kids with glaring weakneses in their games.I have long advocated a balance between junior and mature players.

What i disagree with is the premise that we take mature players for nothing but cover. We take mature players from other clubs who can play AFL as you say, but they should have shown they can play AFL consistently well. The debate about Andrew Moore is he has not shown that in 6yrs so far.

If you think taking rookies and late nd picks for no other reason than depth is okay, go look at what can be achieved. Look at Collingwood and what their recruiters have achieved with late nd and rookie picks.They won a premiership with well over half their team coming from these areas.

I also have to ask what change of direction?.Jackson has been there since 05 so i went back to that year.
We have regularly taken more mature players in rounds 4 5 and the rookie draft than we have juniors.
I count 38 rookies from 05 to now and twenty of them were 22 or older give or take.
I count 13 players taken from 05 to now in nd rounds 4 and 5 and seven of them were 22 or older.
I would also say that mostly the mature types are lasting no longer that the juniors.

 

[RememberRoyce]

Good points Mopsy and I agree with most of them. Obviously though if an AFL player is playing 'consistently well', then we are giving up picks or players, but I guess that is what you assumed as a given. I also like the idea of taking state league performers, who can be got cheaply, but I think younger players (20-22) is the target age group for them. I think the change of direction was more towards the rookies now I think about it, rather than r4-5. The fact they may not stay on the list longer than kids is not the point because they are for insurance (but that's the stategy you disagree with).

 

[_RT_]

I have long been an advocate for taking state league players who meet the right criteria. That is players who have never had a chance, have the right physical attributes for afl, have no glareing weaknesses that will stop them making the grade and finally they have done well in both their club and league B/Fs.
I have actually been an advocate for taking PROVEN MATURE PLAYERS from other AFL clubs regardless of age.
I fully understand the problems with taking skinny kids with glaring weakneses in their games.I have long advocated a balance between junior and mature players.

What i disagree with is the premise that we take mature players for nothing but cover. We take mature players from other clubs who can play AFL as you say, but they should have shown they can play AFL consistently well. The debate about Andrew Moore is he has not shown that in 6yrs so far.

If you think taking rookies and late nd picks for no other reason than depth is okay, go look at what can be achieved. Look at Collingwood and what their recruiters have achieved with late nd and rookie picks.They won a premiership with well over half their team coming from these areas.

I also have to ask what change of direction?.Jackson has been there since 05 so i went back to that year.
We have regularly taken more mature players in rounds 4 5 and the rookie draft than we have juniors.
I count 38 rookies from 05 to now and twenty of them were 22 or older give or take.
I count 13 players taken from 05 to now in nd rounds 4 and 5 and seven of them were 22 or older.
I would also say that mostly the mature types are lasting no longer that the juniors.

Shaun Grigg when we picked him up had played 43 games in 4 years and averaged 17.2 disposals 4 marks 2.3 tackles. Only once in those 4 seasons did he play more than 10 games, which was his second season when he played 20 games. Hardly what I'd say was a proven AFL standard recruit when picked up. He had shown some glimpses but hadn't exactly been an up and coming star. Many Carlton fans were quite happy to see the back of him. Since then in 5 years with us he has played 104 games only once playing less than 20 games and that was 2014 when he was injured. He has averaged 22.1 disposals 5.2 marks & 3 tackles.

Bachar Houli was a little different, had shown a little more in his 4 years at Essendon but he'd only played 23 games, only making 10 games in a season once while averaging 18.8 disposals 4 marks & 2.8 tackles. Essendon wanted to keep him and Hird had begged him to stay when he came on board. Since coming across he has played 111 games in 5 seasons averaging 21.8 disposals 5.3 marks & 2.3 tackles.

The common theme between those 2 and Moore is that they showed glimpses but had never really managed to establish themselves in their sides best 22s. Grigg & Houli when they came across were given consistency in their roles and have since flourished. You can also add the likes of Miles Hunt & Lambert to that mature aged recruit group that have flourished after being picked up and given a role to play.

Thinking about Moores recruitment, I'm no longer of the opinion that he has been recruited as depth. Like Hunt I can see Moore coming in from round 1 to give us that Tuck/Jackson type of big bodied midfielder that we've been missing the last couple of seasons. Townsend I can also see doing the same thing as there is a bit of a change in way we line up next year. It's been shown that we're lacking the ability to genuinely compete in tough contested style games that finals are played. I wouldn't be surprised to see a very different 22 running our next year than what most believe given the recruiting we've done this off season.

 

[TJTIGER]

Also 903RT can I add it will be interesting to see how the rotation cap impacts on the squad. I think we won't be disadvantaged due to the guys we've picked with big engine's. Ellis, KMac, Drummond, Grigg to name a few...

 

[Mr Magic]

Do you really need to ask why a decent portion of tiger supporters are negative?
Hmm Shaun Hampson 7 yr afl history like Moore's very poor. 70 something games performances mostly below standard with no outstanding redeeming feature to his game yet we took him.

Look im happy to cop a belting over this. It will happen if Moore improves and plays well but seriously in some ways its not all about the players we take but the processes we go thru in selecting them.
Ah well im over it any way. Its the off season time to go away and let people be positive and optimisti. It may be the only time for these things to happen.

Still Moore did not cost us a second pick for 12 months of Hampson

 

[RememberRoyce]

Thinking about Moores recruitment, I'm no longer of the opinion that he has been recruited as depth. Like Hunt I can see Moore coming in from round 1 to give us that Tuck/Jackson type of big bodied midfielder that we've been missing the last couple of seasons. Townsend I can also see doing the same thing as there is a bit of a change in way we line up next year. It's been shown that we're lacking the ability to genuinely compete in tough contested style games that finals are played. I wouldn't be surprised to see a very different 22 running our next year than what most believe given the recruiting we've done this off season.

Fair call. The problem is if both these two are to start r1, and CEllis and Lennon are considered ins, Newman comes out, so who are the other 3 who also come out for Moore and Townsend to come in.

 

[_RT_]

Fair call. The problem is if both these two are to start r1, and CEllis and Lennon are considered ins, Newman comes out, so who are the other 3 who also come out for Moore and Townsend to come in.

Out: Hunt, Lambert, Griffiths, Newman, Batchelor
In: Yarran, Moore, Townsend, C.Ellis, Lennon

Would see a side like this lining up:

B: Vlastuin Chaplin Grimes
HB: Houli Rance Yarran
C: C.Ellis Grigg B.Ellis
HF: Deledio Riewoldt Martin
F: Lennon Vickery Edwards
R: Maric Cotchin Miles
INT: Conca McIntosh Moore Townsend

 

[captain cotch 9]

Fair call. The problem is if both these two are to start r1, and CEllis and Lennon are considered ins, Newman comes out, so who are the other 3 who also come out for Moore and Townsend to come in.

Yarran in as well for Lloyd. Moore is depth IMO.
C.Ellis > Lambert
Lennon > Lloyd
Yarran > Newman
They are the only changes IMO

 

[theflea]

I have long been an advocate for taking state league players who meet the right criteria. That is players who have never had a chance, have the right physical attributes for afl, have no glareing weaknesses that will stop them making the grade and finally they have done well in both their club and league B/Fs.
I have actually been an advocate for taking PROVEN MATURE PLAYERS from other AFL clubs regardless of age.
I fully understand the problems with taking skinny kids with glaring weakneses in their games.I have long advocated a balance between junior and mature players.

What i disagree with is the premise that we take mature players for nothing but cover. We take mature players from other clubs who can play AFL as you say, but they should have shown they can play AFL consistently well. The debate about Andrew Moore is he has not shown that in 6yrs so far.

If you think taking rookies and late nd picks for no other reason than depth is okay, go look at what can be achieved. Look at Collingwood and what their recruiters have achieved with late nd and rookie picks.They won a premiership with well over half their team coming from these areas.

I also have to ask what change of direction?.Jackson has been there since 05 so i went back to that year.
We have regularly taken more mature players in rounds 4 5 and the rookie draft than we have juniors.
I count 38 rookies from 05 to now and twenty of them were 22 or older give or take.
I count 13 players taken from 05 to now in nd rounds 4 and 5 and seven of them were 22 or older.
I would also say that mostly the mature types are lasting no longer that the juniors.

The only problem of not taking mature players for cover, with small list sizes, is good proven players from other clubs want game time( why leave if they have that now), and if you can't guarantee that, then a lot wont come( and even your own players pushed back, or coming want game time so we leave if this is the case). Then you are relying on draftees, with their smaller bodies or just not ready for AFL for whatever reason. This is the reason why you get mature players for cover. You have to have players in all categories, and if you get them for free it is even better.

 

[THE_GUN]

Another thing to note about both Townsend & Moore is that there was genuine top shelf quality at their previous clubs in the positions these 2 boys were competing for so its not just they couldnt make it at afl level - They were against elite players for their positions

 

[RememberRoyce]

Another thing to note about both Townsend & Moore is that there was genuine top shelf quality at their previous clubs in the positions these 2 boys were competing for so its not just they couldnt make it at afl level - They were against elite players for their positions

The problem if they then both walk into our midfield is it is an indictment on our midfield and indicates Port and GWS have far superior midfields. I prefer to 'hope' they will have difficulty breaking into our midfield. They are not like Treloar. They couldn't get a game in their teams for a reason, and if it was mostly because there were too many better players doesn't build my hope for a big improvent. It just means GWS and Port still have better midfields.