#26 Sam Weideman - traded to Essendon. Adieu

Remove this Banner Ad

gillo94 said:
Demons also kept in close contact with Parish and few other players including Curnow

Think Demons last week were slightly favouring Curnow but after his arrest took Weideman as thought even or just behind Curnow
Click to expand...
You may be right. My impression - and it's no more than that - was that we originally traded up our picks to get Parish at 3 & Weideman at 7, and would only have considered Curnow if neither were there at 7 (tho' as time went on, Oliver just shaded Parish).

My impression was that Curnow & Francis were second-line, not first-line. But they were definitely in the half-dozen that we were considering for 3 & 7.

Curnow seemed to split demon posters - it's fair to say that a lot were very keen on him and wanted him at 3, but a fair few thought he was overrated, even before his brain fart.
 
Amarula said:
You may be right. My impression - and it's no more than that - was that we originally traded up our picks to get Parish at 3 & Weideman at 7, and would only have considered Curnow if neither were there at 7 (tho' as time went on, Oliver just shaded Parish).

My impression was that Curnow & Francis were second-line, not first-line. But they were definitely in the half-dozen that we were considering for 3 & 7.

Curnow seemed to split demon posters - it's fair to say that a lot were very keen on him and wanted him at 3, but a fair few thought he was overrated, even before his brain fart.
Click to expand...

If you had a choice would you prefer to have Charlie Curnow instead of Weideman?
 
gillo94 said:
If you had a choice would you prefer to have Charlie Curnow instead of Weideman?
Click to expand...
No.
I think opposition coaches will be having kittens trying to find the best way to combat the Hogeman duo. Quelling two contested marking, big bodied forwards that are relatively quick as well as agile when the ball hits the deck is a tough ask. Like trying to match up on Brown and Lynch in 2002. Curnow will be a tricky match-up as well, don't get me wrong, but I think teams would find it easier to cover that combination instead of the twin towers.
The knock on Weideman pre-draft was his body/fitness whereas the questions around Curnow were character and best position (is he big enough to be a forward? Can he transform in to a mid at AFL level) I'm confident our recruiting staff did their due diligence and Sam will be right. Knowing if Charlie will pull his head in as well as finding his best spot is more of an unknown.
Given all that, plus the fact that or recruiting team made the choice of Weideman over Curnow with a gazillion times more insight than me, I would prefer Weideman over Curnow.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

gillo94 said:
If you had a choice would you prefer to have Charlie Curnow instead of Weideman?
Click to expand...

I'd have Weideman over Curnow and by a very big margin. It's not only that I think he'll be a better player, he's a much better fit for Melbourne.

There's a need at Melbourne for a quality key fwd to develop with Hogan, so on that alone I'd take Sam. Curnow isn't
KP size and as yet it's not even known which position he will play.

I'm not much of a fan of Curnow in general actually. I can't see the hype. I have heard the Stringer comparisons but I don't agree with them.
 
gillo94 said:
If you had a choice would you prefer to have Charlie Curnow instead of Weideman?
Click to expand...

Sorry at the Demons we back our recruiting staff 100% these days.

We are investing more money than we have ever before and the results are starting to show.

PS pass my best wishes on to BP , top bloke, but got the hard end of the stick in an under financed and under resourced FD, such is life.
 
suspect footskills said:
I'd have Weideman over Curnow and by a very big margin. It's not only that I think he'll be a better player, he's a much better fit for Melbourne.

There's a need at Melbourne for a quality key fwd to develop with Hogan, so on that alone I'd take Sam. Curnow isn't
KP size and as yet it's not even known which position he will play.

I'm not much of a fan of Curnow in general actually. I can't see the hype. I have heard the Stringer comparisons but I don't agree with them.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting matchup and comparison over next few years to see who will become the better forward. I was watching a Geelongs Falcons highlights of Charlie kicking 4 and highlights of Sam playing in the academy game against the Northern Blues and did well

Won't know for few years who the better pairing with Hogan will be. Commentators were comparing Weideman to Tom Lynch and Charlie to Stringed so need keep a look out for both players developments. I still think Charlie Curnow prior to his incident was heading to either Essendon but more likely to Demons pick 9 and after the incident slipped few places
 
gillo94 said:
If you had a choice would you prefer to have Charlie Curnow instead of Weideman?
Click to expand...
I personally always preferred Weideman.

We've had a number of past picks whose strengths at under-age level haven't transferred well to senior AFL level and I think this may happen with Curnow. Then there's the other problem of where he best fits - is he a largish mid or a smallish KPF? - which I think would have been a big issue had he come to us. That might not be as much of a problem with you guys so I'm happy to concede that he may do better with you than he might have done with us.

Curnow was certainly one of the six that we had a good look at for picks 3 & 7, but I would have been surprised if we'd ever picked him ahead of the others.
 
Queen's Birthday debut?

Surely...
 
To be honest I don't want to see him in 2015. Unless I'm going to Casey.

Let him tune his body to playing against men and allow him to develop his game at Casey. If he starts completely destroying it, bring him in towards the end of the year.
 
Striker475 said:
To be honest I don't want to see him in 2015. Unless I'm going to Casey.

Let him tune his body to playing against men and allow him to develop his game at Casey. If he starts completely destroying it, bring him in towards the end of the year.
Click to expand...
If he's ready bring him in. I tust our footy dept to know by now. Last player brought in too early was Toumpas.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Striker475 said:
To be honest I don't want to see him in 2015. Unless I'm going to Casey.

Let him tune his body to playing against men and allow him to develop his game at Casey. If he starts completely destroying it, bring him in towards the end of the year.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget he has a season ending injury to sustain and recover from before he plays a game.
 
givemethecure said:
Let's not forget he has a season ending injury to sustain and recover from before he plays a game.
Click to expand...

If he has two hands with opposable thumbs, as long as he can stand up he'll do better than Dawes.
 
Bluelegs said:
If he's ready bring him in. I tust our footy dept to know by now. Last player brought in too early was Toumpas.
Click to expand...
It's still too early for the Toump IMO
 
Striker475 said:
To be honest I don't want to see him in 2015. Unless I'm going to Casey.

Let him tune his body to playing against men and allow him to develop his game at Casey. If he starts completely destroying it, bring him in towards the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Only bring him in if he starts dominating the 2s consistently. He will be at best 4th in line for a spot as a key forward (Behind Hogan Pedo Dawes, Frost potentially) so unless we have an injury crisis or he is kicking 3 every week with 8+ marks he shouldn't play in 2016.

Just quietly though I wouldn't mind the QB debut, with his Collingwood history and all.
 
schmuttt said:
Agree with this. Only bring him in if he starts dominating the 2s consistently. He will be at best 4th in line for a spot as a key forward (Behind Hogan Pedo Dawes, Frost potentially) so unless we have an injury crisis or he is kicking 3 every week with 8+ marks he shouldn't play in 2016.

Just quietly though I wouldn't mind the QB debut, with his Collingwood history and all.
Click to expand...

I'd be pretty confident in saying that there is no chance of seeing him until he's absolutely banging the door down to be picked ... Games for the sake of it just isn't Roosy's way. I still think he'll make an appearance next year tho
 
Im not against him playing, if he deserves a game, play him, awesome s**t. Y'all know Roos won't be rushing him in for no good reason. Dont put any restrictions on what can happen, if he plays seniors this year he will have earned it.

Not the end of the day if he doesn't.
 
Last edited:
Striker475 said:
To be honest I don't want to see him in 2015. Unless I'm going to Casey.

Let him tune his body to playing against men and allow him to develop his game at Casey. If he starts completely destroying it, bring him in towards the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Be great if this was the scenario next year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top