adelaide youngsters vs essendon youngsters

[1990crow]

My first input into this thread was to make a good case for the Bombers young brigade, as the first few posts on the thread seemed to agree that Adelaide's younger guys and prospects were superior to those from Windy Hill. I wasn't trying to claim ours were better, just felt like putting a case forward, to show we had some good kids as well.

After taking part in some lively debate, and seeing some of the arguments put forward, I have to say, Essendon's younger guys and prospects appear to be hands down superior to that of Adelaide. This is particularly supported by some of the 'one line' responses to some of the more thought out and presented posts.

Not saying Adelaide don't have a great set of kids, nor do I claim that ours will eventually prove better (because you never know), but everything presented thus far in this thread suggests Essendon's are superior, and by a margin.

Stereotyping, i just love the arrogance that the few bomber supporters i have met have for their 'far superior' younger players who must at some point dominate the game. You just have to look at the fact you guys got belted by a side in an EF where we had our younger players playing too. I am sorry but, I just don't see what all the fuss is about Essendon's youngsters. I mean, only perhaps Ryder, Hurley and monfries would have made our side this year. But, this discussion is pretty much irrelevant. The superior talent will rise to the top and the loser will look pretty stupid and I think I know which younger players I would prefer. (Hint, its Adelaides).

 

[Jade]

Stereotyping, i just love the arrogance that the few bomber supporters i have met have for their 'far superior' younger players who must at some point dominate the game. You just have to look at the fact you guys got belted by a side in an EF where we had our younger players playing too.

Indeed you did, along with a couple of champion elder statesmen.

I also note that Collingwood beat you the week after (and I rate Adelaide's young kids superior to Collingwood), and then Collingwood got mauled by Geelong (I rate both Adelaide AND Collingwoods young kids ahead of Geelong). But alas, I knew that this sort of discussion would eventually come to, "well we finished ahead of you". Always happens, whenever the supporters of a side that didn't finish last get into a lively discussion, eventually someone gets frustrated and goes down that path. A sign of desperation, really.

I am sorry but, I just don't see what all the fuss is about Essendon's youngsters. I mean, only perhaps Ryder, Hurley and monfries would have made our side this year.

Quietly confident that Watson, Pears, Ryder and Hurley would have made pretty much any side in the league this year - with the possible exception of Geelong and St Kilda as far as the defensive positions go.

But, this discussion is pretty much irrelevant. The superior talent will rise to the top and the loser will look pretty stupid and I think I know which younger players I would prefer. (Hint, its Adelaides).

Two points here, and I agree on the first - that the discussion is largely irrelevant. We have no idea what will happen in the future. These two teams might play off for the next ten flags, or both could be barren for twenty years.

Second point, that the 'loser' will look stupid is bizarre... who says there has to be a loser? Both teams look in fine shape going forward.

 

[twentydollarnote]

Essendon supporters who is going to kick your goals, monfries? Thats the difference tippett, walker, knights >>>>monfires, neagle. Ryder needs to go to FF ASAP.

 

[Bombers1234]

Ryder, Gumbleton, Hurley, Neagle, Monfries, Davey. I think we'll be right but thank you for your concern.

 

[WN123]

True. Lucas seemed to do OK though...

Walkers first year
Games - 14
Goals - 23
Scoring Shots - 42

3 Scoring shots per game

Lloyds first & 2nd year combined
Games - 16
Goals - 25
Scoring Shots - 38

2.37 shots per game


Very similar, with Walker just ahead in each aspect. Lloyd was slightly younger so pretty even...

Slightly younger - Lloyd was 17 in his first year -18 in his second. Walker is 20. When Lloyd was 20 he kicked 80 odd goals.

 

[Hirdy_5]

Essendon supporters who is going to kick your goals, monfries? Thats the difference tippett, walker, knights >>>>monfires, neagle. Ryder needs to go to FF ASAP.

Hurley, Neagle, Gumbleton are our KKP. (Hille will also play alot more football deep in the 50.) Monfries, Riemers, Davey, McPhee are our Flankers. Hurely is the swith man, able to play forward or back.

Who is going to defend your goals? Pears,Hooker,Hurley > Davis.

Ryder will not play FF. He showed massive promise in the ruck this year. As a resting ruckman in the 50, Yes. As a perminate player in the 50, No.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Essendon supporters who is going to kick your goals, monfries? Thats the difference tippett, walker, knights >>>>monfires, neagle. Ryder needs to go to FF ASAP.

Less than a year ago, I seem to remember the very same thing said about Adelaide...

 

[moogerfooger]

everything presented thus far in this thread suggests Essendon's are superior, and by a margin.

That's really a load of subjective garbage. Essendon supporters have worked a lot harder to try and prove their point. Maybe that says something?

All I've seen is plenty of evidence that Essendon has MORE young players on it's list but having bottomed out recently that's inevitable. Quantity does not equal quality.

Adelaide supporters know full well what we have up our sleeve and are quite happy for you to be ignorant about it for a little while longer.

 

[Preth]

Depends what the definition of young is, I consider young as first 4 seasons so anyone 23 and under and not 23+ so my opinion will be based on my definition of young. I think anyone 23+ is hardly young. Keeping in mind players peak at around 24-28 years old and most retire or delisted before 32
That would disclude Vince (24) and Van Berlo (23.5) Stanton (23.5) Prismall (23.5) Dyson (24)

So I will include players whom are <23 and not rookies and have played at least 1 game only

Adelaide players
Cook (3), Dangerfield (23), Douglas (56), Jacky (3), Knights (70), MacKay (39), McKernan (1), Moran (17), Otten (26), Sellar (12), Tippett (43), Sloane (1), Walker (14)

Verse

Essendon players
Bellchambers (9), Daniher (6), Dempsey (30), Gumbleton (5), Hocking (23), Hooker (18), Houli (21), Hurley (10), Jetta (28), Lonergan (37), Monfries (93), Myers (14), Neagle (21), Pears (28), Reimers (27), Ryder (73), Zaharakis (10)

Forwards
Adelaide have better KP forwards than Essendon. Tippett/Walker/Sellar > Gumbleton/Neagle/Daniher by a mile on exposed form. Walker is 19 and will be a once in a lifetime player and Tippett will be a gun. Daniher yet to show anything, Gumbleton can't even get on the park, Neagle is better than his stats suggest, Lloyd and Lucas has held him back but 2010 should be his year. If Gumbleton can live up to his hype then Tippett/Walker might not be that far ahead when matched up against Neagle/Gumbleton

Backs
Dons have better KP backs but only due to crows not having blood their KP backs due to Rutten/Bock so Kite and Davis (Pick #10 2008 Draft) both 19yo's and yet to play a game, but hard to see those two topping Pears/Hurley/Hooker

Rucks
Dons easily Ryder is a gun. Ryder/Bellchambers > Mackernan/Moran
Mackernan and Moran both are atheletic and both shown potential but Ryder is way ahead of the both of them combined even though Mackernan is 19

Midfield/HBF/HFF
Knights is easily better than Monfries whom play similar roles
and I would rate Douglas/Dangerfield/Otten/MacKay/Cook slightly better than Riemers/Houli/Hocking/Lonergan/Zaharakis/Myers

Overall I would take the Bomber youngsters over the Crows on exposed form, only because the Bombers seem to be more balanced across the board and have more depth than the Crows

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

Slightly younger - Lloyd was 17 in his first year -18 in his second. Walker is 20. When Lloyd was 20 he kicked 80 odd goals.

My friend, Taylor Walker was born April 25, 1990, making him 19 years, 5 months of age. 18 Upon debut.

Matthew Lloyd debut on 8th July, a few months over the age of 17. Less than a year in age difference between when they each debut.

 

[Yoda_]

lol, i love how tayte pears is in the proven category - danger is mere potential...

Wouldnt mind you having a look to see a kd in the proven category for the crows, one Andy Otten, played every game this year (did he not?), played defence (which is no mean feet for a kid) and did alot of good things, Tayte is in the proven category because he held down a key position all year, came third in the rising star award (acknowledged by the true football followers ) and i would not be surprised to see him finish in the top 10 in our Best and Fairest for season 2009.

Leave the talking to the grown ups now thanks.

Dangerfield had a somewhat of an inconsistent year, and had back problems, yes he could become an out and out star, but how many games was he in the best, playing in a midfielders game, how many best on grounds did he win. Dont argue Tayte didnt get as many as Danger because they play completely different roles. Tayte stood up in a much tougher position all year, whereas Dangerfield was in and out all year.

Case Closed.

 

[Yoda_]

My friend, Taylor Walker was born April 25, 1990, making him 19 years, 5 months of age. 18 Upon debut.

Matthew Lloyd debut on 8th July, a few months over the age of 17. Less than a year in age difference between when they each debut.

How about you come back in 3 years and compare them, will Walker kick 3 goals in the next 3 years?

Doubt it. Tippet has all but taken that away from him now.

 

[Yoda_]

Depends what the definition of young is, I consider young as first 4 seasons so anyone 23 and under and not 23+ so my opinion will be based on my definition of young. I think anyone 23+ is hardly young. Keeping in mind players peak at around 24-28 years old and most retire or delisted before 32
That would disclude Vince (24) and Van Berlo (23.5) Stanton (23.5) Prismall (23.5) Dyson (24)

So I will include players whom are <23 and not rookies and have played at least 1 game only

Adelaide players
Cook (3), Dangerfield (23), Douglas (56), Jacky (3), Knights (70), MacKay (39), McKernan (1), Moran (17), Otten (26), Sellar (12), Tippett (43), Sloane (1), Walker (14)

Verse

Essendon players
Bellchambers (9), Daniher (6), Dempsey (30), Gumbleton (5), Hocking (23), Hooker (18), Houli (21), Hurley (10), Jetta (28), Lonergan (37), Monfries (93), Myers (14), Neagle (21), Pears (28), Reimers (27), Ryder (73), Zaharakis (10)

Forwards
Adelaide have better KP forwards than Essendon. Tippett/Walker/Sellar > Gumbleton/Neagle/Daniher by a mile on exposed form. Walker is 19 and will be a once in a lifetime player and Tippett will be a gun. Daniher yet to show anything, Gumbleton can't even get on the park, Neagle is better than his stats suggest, Lloyd and Lucas has held him back but 2010 should be his year. If Gumbleton can live up to his hype then Tippett/Walker might not be that far ahead when matched up against Neagle/Gumbleton

Backs
Dons have better KP backs but only due to crows not having blood their KP backs due to Rutten/Bock so Kite and Davis (Pick #10 2008 Draft) both 19yo's and yet to play a game, but hard to see those two topping Pears/Hurley/Hooker

Rucks
Dons easily Ryder is a gun. Ryder/Bellchambers > Mackernan/Moran
Mackernan and Moran both are atheletic and both shown potential but Ryder is way ahead of the both of them combined even though Mackernan is 19

Midfield/HBF/HFF
Knights is easily better than Monfries whom play similar roles
and I would rate Douglas/Dangerfield/Otten/MacKay/Cook slightly better than Riemers/Houli/Hocking/Lonergan/Zaharakis/Myers

Overall I would take the Bomber youngsters over the Crows on exposed form, only because the Bombers seem to be more balanced across the board and have more depth than the Crows

Thank you Preth, a true, non biased opinion.

 

[WN123]

My friend, Taylor Walker was born April 25, 1990, making him 19 years, 5 months of age. 18 Upon debut.

Matthew Lloyd debut on 8th July, a few months over the age of 17. Less than a year in age difference between when they each debut.

Noted. When I looked him up yesterday the first site I looked at has him born in 89. (AFL site says 90)

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

I think it all comes down to the current situation at both clubs...

Essendon have

McVeigh (28, 12 games)
Hille (28, 5 games)
Fletcher (34, 18 games)
Lucas (31, 14 games)
Lloyd (31, 18 games)

Essendons "old" heads are either not so old at 28, inj all year, or have been in and out of the team with suspension, form, or injury. Played average of 13.4 / 23 games each

Then in the mid age group of 25, 26, 27 there is

Davey (25, 20 games)
Lovett (26, 22 games)
Lovett-Murray (26, 14 games)
Skipworth (26, 11 games)
Welsh (26, 11 games)
McPhee (27, 21 games)

Injuries, suspensions or whatever else has kept this group out of the side a fair bit too. Works out average of 16.5 / 23 games each


Adelaides old heads:

Burton (31,7 games)
Doughty (30, 24 games)
Edwards (33, 22 games)
Goodwin (32, 21 games)
McLeod (33, 24 games)
Shirley (29, 11 games)

A bit more consistant, averaged 18.2 out of 24 games each

25, 26, 27 year olds:

Bock (26, 14 games)
Hentchel (26, 7 games)
Johncock (26, 22 games)
Reilly (25, 20 games)
Rutten (26, 24 games)
Stevens (27, 22 games)
Thompson (26, 23 games)

Average of 18.9 games out of possible 24 each

Essendons experienced players averaged 13.4 games each to Adelaides 18.2

Essondons middle aged players averaged 16.5 games each to Adelaides 18.9.

Works out just over 7 rounds of the year where essendon had no choice but to put more time into the youth, where as Adelaides guys were fit and playing.

Switch the numbers to Essendons favour, and all of a sudden SLoane, Davis, McKernan, Armstrong, Martin, Cook, and possibly a few others who were all emergencies throughout the year, all would have games under their belts, and be better known.

Essendons youth are great, and so are Adelaides. Its too hard to tell who is better unless each have all had game time. A lucky run of injuries to Adelaide and an unlucky run for Essendon has forced exposure to more of Essendons players than Adelaides.

Take Pears and Hurley for example. If they hadnt played yet, and Adelaide due to injuries had to put 10-12 games into Davis and Armstrong, Essendon fans would still rate Pears and Hurley, but no one else would really know much about them.

Exposure is the key, and Essendon have done that. Adelaide have not had to.

 

[Jade]

I think it all comes down to the current situation at both clubs...

Essendons youth are great, and so are Adelaides. Its too hard to tell who is better unless each have all had game time. A lucky run of injuries to Adelaide and an unlucky run for Essendon has forced exposure to more of Essendons players than Adelaides.

Take Pears and Hurley for example. If they hadnt played yet, and Adelaide due to injuries had to but 10-12 games into Davis and Armstrong, Essendon fans would still rate Pears and Hurley, but no one else would really know much about them.

Exposure is the key, and Essendon have done that. Adelaide have not had to.

Well said, and I agree.

 

[munckz]

tippet and walker are guns but will tippet still be with adelaide with GC17 coming in? vince is just awesome & dangerfield, I had him in both dt & sc, he was so inconsistent but the all the hype about him I stuck with him and hardly delivered but will still very very good IMO.
& knights, I actually thought he was older but really looks good on the field
The Essendon youngsters, I love most of them. pears is awesome, hurley on his very limited exposure WOW! but I think both team are on par

 

[docker_champ29]

Who cares...

Freo youngsters; Rhys Palmer, Stephen Hill, Nic Suban, Chris Mayne, Matt DeBoer, Garrick Ibbotson, Hayden Ballantyne, Greg Broughton, Michael Walters, Clancee Pearce, Casey Sibosado(you'll see next year)

Edit: And Morabito I'm guessing

 

[1990crow]

Who cares...

Freo youngsters; Rhys Palmer, Stephen Hill, Nic Suban, Chris Mayne, Matt DeBoer, Garrick Ibbotson, Hayden Ballantyne, Greg Broughton, Michael Walters, Clancee Pearce, Casey Sibosado(you'll see next year)

Edit: And Morabito I'm guessing

ha ha, good one

Nah, Freo do have a good group of young mids but the problem lies with KPP. If you draft Butcher ahead of Morabito I think you'll be better placed as you have plenty of young mids.

You could say that these three teams are probably going to be top four in about five years time based on the list turnarounds of the past couple of seasons. As for collingwood and Carltank, they can fight between each other for fifth.

 

[twentydollarnote]

freo's premiership window is about 2020ish

 

[Synth]

Who cares...

Freo youngsters; Rhys Palmer, Stephen Hill, Nic Suban, Chris Mayne, Matt DeBoer, Garrick Ibbotson, Hayden Ballantyne, Greg Broughton, Michael Walters, Clancee Pearce, Casey Sibosado(you'll see next year)

Edit: And Morabito I'm guessing

*yawn*

 

[amer]

Speaking of wagers, I wouldn't mind betting that Taylor Walker will end up a better player than Hurley. Absolute lock as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Speaking of wagers, I wouldn't mind betting that Taylor Walker will end up a better player than Hurley. Absolute lock as far as I'm concerned.

I'll take this bet...




Just leave the keys to your house under the mat in 10 years, I'll be around to collect.

 

[Jade]

Speaking of wagers, I wouldn't mind betting that Taylor Walker will end up a better player than Hurley. Absolute lock as far as I'm concerned.

I'd take that..... might as well bet on the Washington Generals while you're at it mate.

 

[twentydollarnote]

there'd have to be a lot of doubt about whether hurley can make it as a forward which gives walker the edge by quite a margin.