The Fact
Club Legend
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
yes there are players better than north players
yes there are players better than north players-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
That's hilarious, Murphy would be just 2nd behind Pendlebury.
That's hilarious, Murphy would be just 2nd behind Pendlebury.
- Banned
- #278
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Pendlebury would be second behind Murphy who hasn't put a foot wrong since he was a gun from day one. Wasn't at his absolute best last year due to having surgery in January that wrecked his pre-season. Stiff to miss the AA selection in 2009 after being named in the AA squad. Has more ticker than Dal Santo who was named in that team.
Pendlebury would be second behind Murphy who hasn't put a foot wrong since he was a gun from day one. Wasn't at his absolute best last year due to having surgery in January that wrecked his pre-season. Stiff to miss the AA selection in 2009 after being named in the AA squad. Has more ticker than Dal Santo who was named in that team.
- Oct 5, 2004
- 14,145
- 7,088
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Rochester FC, Waroona FC, Pacers
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Dec 17, 2003
- 18,583
- 13,177
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Glasgow Rangers, Liverpool, Storm.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Gee we had a shocker in the draft that year. Although we did win the flag and our first pick was 19. Which was given to Essendon for Ted Richards.
The 3 players we took in the National Draft have all been delisted by now i'm fairly sure.
Although we did manage to get Kieran Jack in the Rookie Draft.
Gee we had a shocker in the draft that year. Although we did win the flag and our first pick was 19. Which was given to Essendon for Ted Richards.
The 3 players we took in the National Draft have all been delisted by now i'm fairly sure.
Although we did manage to get Kieran Jack in the Rookie Draft.
- Banned
- #282
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Leave those comments for the Bay.
Pendlebury comfortably ahead of Murphy.
Leave those comments for the Bay.
Pendlebury comfortably ahead of Murphy.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
I've got em' neck and neck heading into 2011. Murphy has been the better player every year up until his injury/surgery last pre-season.
No surprises that Pendles in a premiership year slipped ahead, while Murph wasn't even able to train mid-week, but IMO it would be naive to move him ahead overall on the basis of one season.
If we're talking about best from draft kinda stuff, then I've gotta wait another year to see a clear gap between these two. Definitely 1-2 from their draft.
I've got em' neck and neck heading into 2011. Murphy has been the better player every year up until his injury/surgery last pre-season.
No surprises that Pendles in a premiership year slipped ahead, while Murph wasn't even able to train mid-week, but IMO it would be naive to move him ahead overall on the basis of one season.
If we're talking about best from draft kinda stuff, then I've gotta wait another year to see a clear gap between these two. Definitely 1-2 from their draft.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Of course you do. Meanwhile all non-Carlton fans can see that Pendlebury is clearly a better player.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
What a load of rubbish. I've even had Collingwood posters on BF agree with this opinion; which is far less hyperbolic than the counter IMO.
You tell me when - apart from last year - Pendles has been better than Murphy?
And why one year over an injured player would be automatic elevation?
The logic behind my opinion is up for all to see; rather than revert to this type of posting, at least tackle my opinion on its merits.
What a load of rubbish. I've even had Collingwood posters on BF agree with this opinion; which is far less hyperbolic than the counter IMO.
You tell me when - apart from last year - Pendles has been better than Murphy?
And why one year over an injured player would be automatic elevation?
The logic behind my opinion is up for all to see; rather than revert to this type of posting, at least tackle my opinion on its merits.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Anyone who doesn't have him as a stand alone #1 is kidding themselves.
Their second year. The only year Murphy has been notably better was year 1, where Pendlebury had glandular fever pre-season. Can't ignore that and post about Murphy's problem.
Pendlebury eclipses Murphy massively defensively, with inside work and his hands. Pendlebury has marginally better skills. Murphy has Pendlebury in straight line speed and probably distance on his kicking. He's a far more complete player, and has proven finals performance.
Anyone who doesn't have him as a stand alone #1 is kidding themselves.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
http://www.finalsiren.com/PlayerCom...ame3=&PlayerName4=&SelectedPlayers=1656,1620,
Statistically they have had remarkably similar careers. Pendlebury marginally in front because is better inside (Carlton don't really need that with Judd) but anyone who suggests there is some massive gap is kidding themselves (or biased)
http://www.finalsiren.com/PlayerCom...ame3=&PlayerName4=&SelectedPlayers=1656,1620,
Statistically they have had remarkably similar careers. Pendlebury marginally in front because is better inside (Carlton don't really need that with Judd) but anyone who suggests there is some massive gap is kidding themselves (or biased)
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Pendlebury has averaged more disposals every year other than their first. He is a better user of the ball, more creative, takes more contested marks and has more impact on games.
Pendlebury has averaged more disposals every year other than their first. He is a better user of the ball, more creative, takes more contested marks and has more impact on games.
- Banned
- #290
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
I like how you hide your opinions amongst the facts so they seem one and the same.
Did I just see Birchall ranked lower than Mitch Clark?
I like how you hide your opinions amongst the facts so they seem one and the same.
Did I just see Birchall ranked lower than Mitch Clark?
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
The reason I note Murphy's problem is that it is the first time Pendles had a clearly better year than him ... surprise surprise! Had it been reversed I would do the same notation of the Collingwood players variable considerations; as I'm only interested in a fair comparison.
As for your contention Murphy was only better in his first year, I just shake my head. In 2007 Murphy was basically Carlton's No.1 mid and tagged incessantly. Similar average stats really are irrelevant. His 07' was better than Pendles, and the next similar and the next definitely better. Or are you trying to tell me now that Pendles was better in 2009 as well?
It took until 2010, when Murphy was injured, for Pendlebury to put a clear space between them; and IMO it wouldn't be a reasoned man who let a situation like that settle it overall. Hence why I give them neck and neck OVERALL at this point.
You guru you!
I've even seen Collingwood posters not do this; so I suggest you're a little off the mark here, as opinions do vary in football matters.
The reason I note Murphy's problem is that it is the first time Pendles had a clearly better year than him ... surprise surprise! Had it been reversed I would do the same notation of the Collingwood players variable considerations; as I'm only interested in a fair comparison.
As for your contention Murphy was only better in his first year, I just shake my head. In 2007 Murphy was basically Carlton's No.1 mid and tagged incessantly. Similar average stats really are irrelevant. His 07' was better than Pendles, and the next similar and the next definitely better. Or are you trying to tell me now that Pendles was better in 2009 as well?
It took until 2010, when Murphy was injured, for Pendlebury to put a clear space between them; and IMO it wouldn't be a reasoned man who let a situation like that settle it overall. Hence why I give them neck and neck OVERALL at this point.
You guru you!
I've even seen Collingwood posters not do this; so I suggest you're a little off the mark here, as opinions do vary in football matters.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
And? Look at 09' for example. 0.2 more disposals and 1 goal less. It's just an arsed up way to go about evaluating a player's performance for his team. Murphy's had a hard tag on him from day one and done very well.
And? Look at 09' for example. 0.2 more disposals and 1 goal less. It's just an arsed up way to go about evaluating a player's performance for his team. Murphy's had a hard tag on him from day one and done very well.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Thanks for editing out part of my post by the way. I take it you don't disagree with that part?
Nope, I'm telling you both players had fairly similar output between 2006 and 2010. Hilarity to say it's indisputable that Murphy was better for that entire stretch.
Thanks for editing out part of my post by the way. I take it you don't disagree with that part?
I seriously doubt Murphy's ability to match what Pendlebury produced. When there's such a clear difference in defensive accountability and inside work (can't blame injury on that) I don't see Murphy being as valuable, even if he gets a similar amount of touches. Pendlebury is the far more complete midfielder.
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
I don't care if Murphy has been a decent player for 4/5 years and Pendlebury could be deemed a plodder for his first 3 years
Pendlebury's best football is well ahead of Murphy's. His awareness in traffic and his delivery by foot is what stands him well ahead.
The fact that he stood up in a Prelim and a GF speaks volumes. Hell Endleperry's norm smith came less than a fortnight after he shed a heap of weight due to illness.
The guy is all class and is comfortably amongst the elite mids in the comp.
I don't care if Murphy has been a decent player for 4/5 years and Pendlebury could be deemed a plodder for his first 3 years
Pendlebury's best football is well ahead of Murphy's. His awareness in traffic and his delivery by foot is what stands him well ahead.
The fact that he stood up in a Prelim and a GF speaks volumes. Hell Endleperry's norm smith came less than a fortnight after he shed a heap of weight due to illness.
The guy is all class and is comfortably amongst the elite mids in the comp.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
00Stinger
100 - 7
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
I personally would still take Murphy over Pendelbury.
Pendelbury had a way better 2010, but I still feel that Murphy will be the better player
I personally would still take Murphy over Pendelbury.
Pendelbury had a way better 2010, but I still feel that Murphy will be the better player
schimma2snake
Senior List
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
Agree, but that might change.
Swallow is also a better midfielder than Thomas.
Agree, but that might change.
Swallow is also a better midfielder than Thomas.
Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done
This doesn't make any sense to me when talking about the best from a draft. Murphy was ready to take off after a fantastic 2009, an easily better 2009 than Pendles IMO; and obviously Pendles was ready to take the next step too.
The major difference being that one struggled to overcome injury most of the season, while the other played injury free in a star team. You want to claim Pendles the better player based on that and I want to wait and see how they both perform uninjured this season before willing to put one clearly ahead of the other overall.
What you may call bias, I call conservative common sense. If Pendles has the better injury free season in 2011, I'll happy call him the better player. Similarly if he's injured and Murphy streaks ahead, I would offer the same considerations.
In a comparison with Murhpy, this speaks little; not volumes.
This doesn't make any sense to me when talking about the best from a draft. Murphy was ready to take off after a fantastic 2009, an easily better 2009 than Pendles IMO; and obviously Pendles was ready to take the next step too.
The major difference being that one struggled to overcome injury most of the season, while the other played injury free in a star team. You want to claim Pendles the better player based on that and I want to wait and see how they both perform uninjured this season before willing to put one clearly ahead of the other overall.
What you may call bias, I call conservative common sense. If Pendles has the better injury free season in 2011, I'll happy call him the better player. Similarly if he's injured and Murphy streaks ahead, I would offer the same considerations.
In a comparison with Murhpy, this speaks little; not volumes.
