Beams, Wellingham, Sidebottom

[Zahki]

Another issue I have with certain sections of Collingwood support. If you aren't bigging up a kid to be a superstar, you are obviously calling them a talentless hack. I haven't said anything of the sort, and neither has anyone else in the thread. I'm just being realistic about the talent we have. But apparently every Collingwood kid that comes through is a superstar of the future, and anything said differently is blasphemy.

Well you're giving a 19 year old player an absolute whipping, and it's entirely undeserved. Players improve, Sharrod Wellingham was a fringe player who many thought would stay that way, look at him now, look at Dale Thomas.

Maybe Sidebottom will be a superstar maybe not, how about we wait and see instead of starting threads about how he doesn't possess enough talent to be anything more than a good ordinary player?

Sidebottom is playing good footy, and has slotted into a top 4 midfield with 4 wins and 1 loss, give the kid some credit geez.

 

[jerry springer]

1.sidebottom -has shown ability in big games early on,a natural footballer
2.Wellingham-just has all the skills
3.Beams-just a great 2nd round pick

overall a very promising trio

 

[Quicky]

I agree with the OP.

I'd have them:

Wellingham
Beams
Sidebottom

on potential. Beams has every chance to be the best on will power alone though. Wellingham has a great combination of pack busting pace and a great inside game which will see him be a fantastic player if he keeps his head.

I think Rusty is better than you are giving him credit for Dundalis. His combo of reading the game so well + endurance + excellent dual sided footskills will see him be a very good linking midfielder for us. I think we havn't seen the best of his footskills yet as good judges suggest he was much better at TAC level. That may well just be an experience thing where he needs more time to adjust to AFL level footy.

We've got three gems in this lot.

Well you're giving a 19 year old player an absolute whipping, and it's entirely undeserved.

I wouldn't say Dundalis was giving him an absolute whipping. He might be a bit critical but he's said on a few occasions he expects him to be a good player. Really we are trying to judge potential here which is open to interpretation. I think it's fair to argue that aspects of Rusty's game may well limit his potential. I'd argue that a combination of his other strengths will make up for it. Irrespective, i'd say it's a fair debate either way.

 

[Ickirus]

All three look to be great young promising midfielders.

Based on pure potential:
1) Sidebottom: a footballers footballer. Sidebottom just has footy smarts by the bucket full, things like little tap ons, or kicks along the ground to our advantage, the ability to trap the ball, and outmonover opponents when the ball is in dispute is brilliant., and is something that can't be taught.

His elite endurance is a huge asset, runs all day, which diminishes his limited speed, and allows him to find space all over the ground. He is the best 20m pass by foot in the team for mine, always perfectly weighted, his longer kicking is good, and he is the best tackler of the lot.

2) Wellingham: his clearance work is simply brilliant, and his ability to burst away from the packs is something no other player on our list is really capable of doing at the moment. He has hardness, and his skills are generally good.

I'd rate Wellingham the highest if it was not for his kicking and decision making, which can let him down on occassions, however I've always thought this might have to do with his eyesight, which he has said himself is pretty bad, and is worsened as he can't wear contacts when playing.

3) Beams: is hard at it, and you can see he puts in 100% every time. For mine, he doesn't create heaps of space when he gets it in the packs, which often sees him getting the ball, but being tackled straight away, this is not a bad thing as he is getting the ball, but the others have the ability to create the space and dish off. He has good skills, and he keeps his kicking up to the level it was against the Bombers, then he could be the best of the lot.

I think all three young mids are pretty evenely matched, and IMO the gap between their potential is small, and the fact that all three offer something different and unique compared to each other, is exactly what our midfield needs to be elite.

 

[sr36]

Athletic ability goes far beyond pace. In fact when it comes to a midfielder give me elite balance and endurance over elite pace. sidebottom has these two in spades. Those who claim he doesn't possess the athletic ability to be top shelf, have been sucked into the pace = athleticism theory. Frankly due to his endurance and balance Sidebottom already possesses the athletic ability to be an AFL midfielder, meanwhile Daisy who is considered by many to be athletically outstanding, is only just beginning to approach the necessary athletic attributes of an AFL mid.

Those of us who think he is going to be a star, think so because of his solid skills that should develop into top shelf, his outstanding balance and endurance, and his awesome awareness and game sense. Obviously he'll never have elite pace, but I'd be very surprised if he didn't develop the necessary strength, especially seeing that his balance means that he doesn't have to be as strong as most in order to hold his ground. I'd like to know what Simon Black, Scott West and James Bartell had over him at the same age, Obviously he may not end up being as good, but I'm very confident that he will.

 

[dogbert]

I have so much faith in Rusty, that i went and got his number on the back of my gernsey. Give him time.

 

[mdc]

Simon Black and Bartel have 2-3 inches on him. And all 3 had immediately obvious in-and-under ability. That's not something that develops, that's something that you either have or don't. Sidebottom's best games have come playing effectively on the flank or wing.

But again, I don't want to be disparaging. I think Sidebottom will easily be a 200-gamer (barring injuries), and will consistently finish in the top 10 of the Copeland. He'll be a very good player.

But Beams has the potential to be our best player (at least 2nd-best behind Pendles).

 

[TradeDraft]

Let's Just all 3 should be Guns for the Pies

 

[sr36]

Simon Black and Bartel have 2-3 inches on him. And all 3 had immediately obvious in-and-under ability. That's not something that develops, that's something that you either have or don't. Sidebottom's best games have come playing effectively on the flank or wing.

But again, I don't want to be disparaging. I think Sidebottom will easily be a 200-gamer (barring injuries), and will consistently finish in the top 10 of the Copeland. He'll be a very good player.

But Beams has the potential to be our best player (at least 2nd-best behind Pendles).

I'll give you Bartel's height advantage, but not Black's. I can barely recall Black taking the ball arms extended above his head, eihter in a marking or a clearance situation, so I don't see his extra height as an advantage.

Bartel was playing as a flanker at the same age, therefore I don't see how your point about Sidebottom's best games being as a flanker is relevant. I actually think that Sidebottom has shown enormous potential as an inside ball winning mid, due to his positioning, awareness, clean hands and deft touches. Obviously we won't see his full potential in that area until he has a couple more preseasons on the weights.

What I disagree most strongly with is the notion that "in-and-under ability [is not] something that develops, that's something that you either have or don't." Show me a quality inside mid who was anywhere near as affective in that role at 18 as 25. Inside players develop a lot more slowly than the outside receivers.

Anyway, it's a nice argument to be having. You think that Sidebottom will become a very good 200 game player, and Beams will become a star. I think it's the other way around.

 

[mdc]

Re: Black's height, I think it's more an issue of being able to reach a ball where Sidey mightn't be able to (not above his head, but in a general sense), or get his hands clear of a tackler where Sidey mightn't be able to. It's marginal, but then again inside packs it's a game of margins.

Re: Developing inside ability - I don't mean to say that I expect a young player to dominate the clearances early on. But there is something of a stylistic mark that inside players carry from an early age imo. Guys like Beams and Pendlebury, even if they didn't start in the middle, it was (to me at least) patently obvious that they were inside mids. With Sidebottom I see a link-up guy with nice evasion skills once he has the ball.

There's also the empirical slant. Basically, jot down every very good or great inside mid in the AFL. Now cross out those with above-average pace. Then cross out those over 6"0. Finally cross out the head-first maniacs (the Selwood/Ball/Beams types). Barring an oversight on my part, I reckon you'll be left with one name - Sam Mitchell. That's a pretty exclusive club (of one).

But yes, it's certainly a great discussion to have. With picks 11 & 29, just one 200-gamer is a good result. That we've snagged what surely looks like two, is an undisputable triumph.

 

[Jonno_]

There's also the empirical slant. Basically, jot down every very good or great inside mid in the AFL. Now cross out those with above-average pace. Then cross out those over 6"0. Finally cross out the head-first maniacs (the Selwood/Ball/Beams types). Barring an oversight on my part, I reckon you'll be left with one name - Sam Mitchell. That's a pretty exclusive club (of one).

I think quite a silly argument. If you take out height, pace and courage you won't be left with many footballers at all. They are almost pre-requisites these days.

To intimate that Sidebottom can't be any of these players is rough. He is more than an adequate height to play midfield in any role, inside or outside. There are countless examples of players who have little pace, or height (which I don't think applies to Sidebottom) and have made it is champions of the game. R Harvey was only 181 or something. I'm not saying that he is going to be Harvey, but to discount a kid as he is not "elite speed" or 186+ is ridiculous. It also implies that the necessary requisite for a footballer is both pace and height, and that a football brain, vision, composure, skill come a significant distant second.

He is 19, possibly still growing (he has grown 2 cm since he has been at the club). To also say that a player has a stylistic trademark if they are going to be an inside player seems strange. Many players start their game more outside, and it is only when they develop the confidence, or more importantly strength (as Wellingham has seemingly done this year) that they become more and more inside. Judd was much more outside in his younger days than he is now at Carlton.

Of course there are examples like Selwood, but he is an exceptionally brave man who will probably end up decapitated.

I'm not saying he will become an amazing player. But to discount a kid on the basis of about 1 inch, and explosive leg speed when he possesses so much of everything else, which can be equally if not more important, seems premature.

 

[Smoky]

I'll just wait...

and then I'll just class them all as 2010 Premiership players

 

[danielnajdek]

Last night on AFL League Teams (think it's called that ) Tony Shaw was talking up all three of these guys.He must read Big Footy posts At last he has something positive to say about Collingwood. Now all we need is for Caro to say we'll win the premiership and I would've heard it all.Unlikely as she doesn't seem to like us one bit which i'm quite happy with

 

[shawthing09]

1. Beams [Best case: Joel Selwood, Worst case: rich man's Marc Murphy]
2. Wellingham [Best case: Daniel Kerr, Worst case: Jaredd Brennan circa 2009]
3. Sidebottom [Best case: poor man's Sam Mitchell, Worst case: rich man's Tarkyn Lockyer]

Wasn't terribly difficult for me. Wellingham's best game might be better than Beams' best game, but Beams has it all over him for leadership, consistency and hardness (mind you he has it all over any of our mids for hardness).

Pretty much sums it up for me. Wellingham is the best in the athletic sense which makes him look like a more talanted or skillful all round player but I think things like fitness, football smarts, hard work, gut running etc all have to be considered skills.

Beams is the one who is most likely to consistantly have the biggest impact on matches which IMO makes him the most talanted.

Wellingham has the extra hurt factor which means on his day he will probably have a higher impact but won't have the regular impact that Beams has.

Sidebottom is likely to be ultra consistant but at the moment it is hard to see him having that real game changing influence on matches.

 

[Optimax]

Simon Black and Bartel have 2-3 inches on him. And all 3 had immediately obvious in-and-under ability. That's not something that develops, that's something that you either have or don't. Sidebottom's best games have come playing effectively on the flank or wing.

But again, I don't want to be disparaging. I think Sidebottom will easily be a 200-gamer (barring injuries), and will consistently finish in the top 10 of the Copeland. He'll be a very good player.

But Beams has the potential to be our best player (at least 2nd-best behind Pendles).

I agree both Steele and Dayne will be great players for us, but Beams goes about his work like a young buckely has captain, future BnF winner and possible brownlow written all over him

 

[smiddaz123]

There's also the empirical slant. Basically, jot down every very good or great inside mid in the AFL. Now cross out those with above-average pace. Then cross out those over 6"0. Finally cross out the head-first maniacs (the Selwood/Ball/Beams types). Barring an oversight on my part, I reckon you'll be left with one name - Sam Mitchell. That's a pretty exclusive club (of one).

Which category would Boyd fit into? He'd be about bang on 6"0 looking at him. Kane Cornes is another I wouldn't say fits into ay of those three categories either.

I don't see a reason why Sidebottom can't be a very good inside midfielder, provided he puts on adequate muscle and core strength.

Although I agree in that he won't be as good inside as the likes of Pendlebury or Black. Hasleby would be a reasonable comparison for Sidebottom I'd say.

 

[mdc]

Which category would Boyd fit into? He'd be about bang on 6"0 looking at him. Kane Cornes is another I wouldn't say fits into ay of those three categories either.

Boyd is listed at 184cm, but looks taller to me than that. Kane Cornes is a better tagger than he is an inside mid. Not a big fan of his at all.

Although I agree in that he won't be as good inside as the likes of Pendlebury or Black. Hasleby would be a reasonable comparison for Sidebottom I'd say.

But see, Hasleby is another that was an immediately obvious in-and-under player (much like Mitchell). Plus I'm not sure I'd put Hasleby in the "very good to great" category either.

Actually, maybe Hasleby's former team-mate in Peter Bell is a nice best-case scenario. Quicker and shorter than Sidebottom, but not too different a player overall, especially in his later years when he lost a bit of footspeed.

 

[Go Pies!!!!!]

Last night on AFL League Teams (think it's called that ) Tony Shaw was talking up all three of these guys.He must read Big Footy posts At last he has something positive to say about Collingwood. Now all we need is for Caro to say we'll win the premiership and I would've heard it all.Unlikely as she doesn't seem to like us one bit which i'm quite happy with

No way can anyone confirm this

 

[TradeDraft]

Pretty much sums it up for me. Wellingham is the best in the athletic sense which makes him look like a more talanted or skillful all round player but I think things like fitness, football smarts, hard work, gut running etc all have to be considered skills.

Beams is the one who is most likely to consistantly have the biggest impact on matches which IMO makes him the most talanted.

Wellingham has the extra hurt factor which means on his day he will probably have a higher impact but won't have the regular impact that Beams has.

Sidebottom is likely to be ultra consistant but at the moment it is hard to see him having that real game changing influence on matches.

Agree on Sidebottom he should be Super Consistant but Can he be a Match Winner? as he lacks(at the moment) Goal Kicking and Pentration on his Kicks.

Beams is probably the best of Each as he is a Footballer with some Athletic Ability and has a Good Long Kick

 

[OniAu]

interesting thread to come back to in 3 or 4 years time.

I honestly cant split them atm, last year i questioned wellinghams hunger and hardness. This year thats been his biggest positive.

very exciting though

thomas, sidey, wellingham and beams all stepping up at a similar time and consistently so far. Add to that swanny and pendles. Gives us a great young core group for years to come. Thats not even including some that have yet to prove themselves with massive potential in JMac and sinclair and a few others.

 

[HFF]

It doesn't matter because we have all three.

They are all career players (10+yrs) for the footy club.

 

[smiddaz123]

Boyd is listed at 184cm, but looks taller to me than that. Kane Cornes is a better tagger than he is an inside mid. Not a big fan of his at all.

Boyd looks about 6"0 to me personally. Either way, he definitely is taller, and plays taller than Sidebottom. Cornes was a very good inside mid back in his prime imo, and he didn't really possess any of the three attributes in his prime.

But see, Hasleby is another that was an immediately obvious in-and-under player (much like Mitchell). Plus I'm not sure I'd put Hasleby in the "very good to great" category either.

Actually, maybe Hasleby's former team-mate in Peter Bell is a nice best-case scenario. Quicker and shorter than Sidebottom, but not too different a player overall, especially in his later years when he lost a bit of footspeed.

I get the impression that Sidebottom isn't able to demonstrate his inside work due to his small stature, get seems to get monstered a fair bit. Sidey seems to be able to read the ball off packs and hands quite well, and he's a quick thinker in close with very good handballing skills. I think he has enough attributes to become a very good inside midfielder if he fills out a fair bit.

 

[Cyclops]

Interesting thread and some good posts.

I'd break it down out of 10:

Hands: 9-SW 8-DB 8-SS.

All good here, Wellingham gets an awful lot of hard ball for a matchstick.

Feet: 8-SS 7-SW 6-DB.
Beams can spray but doesn't crumble under pressure. Sidey close to a 10 except has to improve range, he has both feet and sweet touch.

Body: 6-DB 3-SW 3-SS
Beams well ahead but they're all kids-Sidey's endurance will improve and Wellingham will put on weight (I hope).

Brain: 8-SS 6-SW 6-DB
Sidey thinks like 100 gamer. The others are AFL grade already and improving

Heart: 9-DB 7-SW 7-SS.
Beams presents like Burns so the jumper choice is no joke. The other two make uneccesarily brave decisions.

Totals: 35-DB 34-SS 32-SW.

Beams is pretty much a senior player, the other two ware earning their spots and may go past him when they mature further.

 

[Dundalis]

Doesn't possess yet. If you don't think a 19 year old kid will be stronger in a contest and kick the ball further after a few more pre-seasons, you don't know shit from clay.

You are comparing Sidey, to Bartel and Harvey at the peak of their powers. I personally don't see alot of Harvey in Sidey, but once he fills out, and he will (different physique all together then Daisy whose taller and rangier) you'll see those 50 to 55m passes. Not many players can kick 65m accurately, I can't remember ever seeing Bartel do that. I'm not saying he'll be a superstar but he'll be a bloody good player at a minimum. Have a look at the size of Bartel when he was drafted. Very similar.

Sidey is very dual sided, good mark for his size, has elite endurance already, can read the game and can play inside and outside. Granted he is not quick with leg speed, but he plays quick with his reading of the game and decision making. I've seen him do this many times and he's only in his 2nd year. Whether he becomes as good as Bartel is another matter but I wouldn't say he'll be another O'Bree or Lockyer this early.

I'm sorry, but I've never seen a player add 10 metres depth to his kicking. Players with big kicks, are big kicks from the start. A player might add a couple of metres depth through strength work but that's it. And we are NOT talking about simply the ability to kick 50-55 metres on any given kick. We are talking regular depth at that range. All the big kicks going around were big kicks when they came into the league, minus a few metres on average due to strength. Plus as I said, Sidebottom IMO is not going to develop a hude amount of strength due to his limited frame. At the moment, from what I've seen he is 40-45 metres, with possibly 50-52 on a good connection or with wind. So pretty much Sam Mitchell range, or even currently Luke Ball.

I've seen Bartel kick it 60-65 metres pinpoint before. That's the high end for a player who hits it well, that is a genuine 50-55 metre kick on average (Buckley, Rocca etc.). People IMO don't talk up Bartel's kicking ability enough, IMO he is a fantastic kick and one of the best in the comp. I like his kicking more than someone like Lindsay Gilbee for example whom everyone talks up.

Ultimately it's more examples of supporters talking up attributes that aren't there or simply assuming they will develop. 99% of the time you can tell an inside midfielder from when they start, simply through the instinctive pieces of play a player performs, regardless of how young they are or whether they have the strength or not. The only times you can't is when they don't play enough in the midfield at the start of their career to be able to genuinely tell (i.e. Judd). A player like Judd also did not need to be an inside midfielder due to his ridiculous athletic ability which meant he could dominate games without it. Which would make it more difficult to tell whether it was instinctual for him. Now that's he's lost that, or at least part of it, he's showing his inside game more, because he can't rely on the outside stuff to dominate. It's like Roger Federer being a great volleyer but never needing to in a game because he could dominate without it, so you likely wouldn't know at first glance.

Selwood is obvious. However it's always been clear that Beams would be an inside mid, even when he wasn't spending a huge amount in the midfield. Sidebottom hasn't shown it at all. He's shown the ability to hunt the spillage like Shane O'Bree. But not to go into a pack or heavily contested situation and win the ball from scratch. He's spent enough time in the midfield to show whether he has the propensity for it. So again to simply say he will develop it is pure speculation and not something he has shown at all.

I think his strengths are very good and he will be a 10 year Collingwood player and a pretty good one. The massive hype and overelaborate use of adjectives to describe parts of his game that simply aren't there, as well as silly player comparisons have me perplexed though, and as I said, was partly the reason for me starting the thread, to get a bit of a handle on what others see that I don't.

 

[Dundalis]

Interesting thread and some good posts.

I'd break it down out of 10:

Hands: 9-SW 8-DB 8-SS.

All good here, Wellingham gets an awful lot of hard ball for a matchstick.

Feet: 8-SS 7-SW 6-DB.
Beams can spray but doesn't crumble under pressure. Sidey close to a 10 except has to improve range, he has both feet and sweet touch.

Body: 6-DB 3-SW 3-SS
Beams well ahead but they're all kids-Sidey's endurance will improve and Wellingham will put on weight (I hope).

Brain: 8-SS 6-SW 6-DB
Sidey thinks like 100 gamer. The others are AFL grade already and improving

Heart: 9-DB 7-SW 7-SS.
Beams presents like Burns so the jumper choice is no joke. The other two make uneccesarily brave decisions.

Totals: 35-DB 34-SS 32-SW.

Beams is pretty much a senior player, the other two ware earning their spots and may go past him when they mature further.

Pace isn't important also? Put that in and Wellingham would likely jump to the lead, he's so far ahead of the other two. I also think Wellingham is excellent overhead. I know it seems like I have a thing for Wellingham, but ultimately I do. I just think he's the total package basically, his only weakness is occasionally mental (but improving). He is good to excellent in pretty much every physical and technical (skill) area.

Even in terms of his body, he actually is in far less need of a strongly built body than either Sidebottom or Beams, because of his athleticism and pace, his outside game. In fact his current build is almost perfect. He could stand to put on a little, simply to help improve his inside ability but he is wiry and has an almost Pendlebury like ability to stand up in a crowd of players and basically get a disposal out without being touched, plus too much weight would reduce his speed.