Cam Rayner

[danster168]

22 V GWS was a career high

Rayner could quite easily have been 20/3 missed an easy one and gave one off.

yeah, and Rayners career high is 22. lol. And this is for a guy that plays more midfield time. lol.

 

[danster168]

You didn't watch that game did you ? He worked his backside off

He's still unfit. I saw him running to the bench and barely able to lift his legs. so yeah, working hard because he's unfit.

 

[00Stinger]

Rayner is 186cm and 94kg.
He's a big body.

Remember, it took Petracca a while to find consistency. Rayner is now at about that same stage of his career (70-90 games) where he will find consistency.
Is coming from a long way back too after the ACL injury.

He did to an extent but this has been majorly overblown

His first 4 years after he missed his first season with an ACL he went at between 17.4-20.2 touches per game & 0.7-1.2 goals per game

Rayners first 3 years he went at between 9.5-13.5 touches per game & 0.8-1 goal per game

Now I know that progression isn't linear and starting a career slowly doesn't mean a players peak won't get elite level high but the comparisons between the two are detrimental to Rayner. The two aren't that similar other than being a decent size and being able to play forward.

Petracca could find the ball but didn't have a midfielders tank and played more high HF. Rayner plays a deeper role and struggles to find the football however he is probably the better contested mark of the two

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Rayner is 186cm and 94kg.
He's a big body.

Remember, it took Petracca a while to find consistency. Rayner is now at about that same stage of his career (70-90 games) where he will find consistency.
Is coming from a long way back too after the ACL injury.

Firstly, I dismiss the height and weight of players that are publicly available. They are more often than not grossly out of date, or just inaccurate. Or both.


He's big in the bottom half. But he's not tall.

He is very good overhead which helps to mitigate this, but I'm not sure I see the day where he could be isolated in the F50 as a genuine target like the Bonts, Dangers, Petraccas and Fyfes of the world are.

It's obviously very early days, but personally I where guys like Martin, Petracca etc. grew after they were drafted, Rayner doesn't seem to have.

Midfielders with height are versatile. That's often what makes them so dangerous. The ones that aren't have to bring something seriously good to their game, to be pure midfielders. Power, speed, endurance, ball finding - or all of the above.

As I said, it's early days really for him, but I see the fact that he didn't grow after he was drafted meaning he will never be that big bodied power midfielder that can go forward like Martin (whom he was compared to early on).

He's going to have to get super fit and be a pure mid.

 

[My Tilly]

Firstly, I dismiss the height and weight of players that are publicly available.

Well that settles it then

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Well that settles it then

Come on man, it's like people's LinkedIn profile pictures.

There either misleadingly flattering or from 10 years ago. Either way, they're not accurate.

It seems that they weight them when they're drafted and measure their height, then just either leave it at that, or guess from then on.


There is no way that Tom Hawkins is only 4kgs heavier than Max King.

And there's now way that Cam Rayner is the same height and weight as Dustin Martin.

FWIW, I find it hard to believe than Harry McKay is 5kgs heavier than his twin brother also.

 

[My Tilly]

Come on man, it's like people's LinkedIn profile pictures.

There either misleadingly flattering or from 10 years ago. Either way, they're not accurate.

It seems that they weight them when they're drafted and measure their height, then just either leave it at that, or guess from then on.


There is no way that Tom Hawkins is only 4kgs heavier than Max King.

And there's now way that Cam Rayner is the same height and weight as Dustin Martin.

FWIW, I find it hard to believe than Harry McKay is 5kgs heavier than his twin brother also.

I reckon Rayner looks every bit of 94kg's. His legs are like tree trunks and he isn't exactly a slender build either. Has a compact torso. Almost similar to Daniel Rich.

You can see various images which illustrate he does indeed look to be 6ft'1 (in the old)



And yes, it is well known that Tom Hawkins shed a bit of weight when he hit his early 30's. In fact, there are numerous reports on this as he stipulated that in order to remain relevant in the game today, he needed to be able to work up and down the ground and in doing so, lost about 5kg's.
He is clearly slimmer than what he was in 2015 etc.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I reckon Rayner looks every bit of 94kg's. His legs are like tree trunks and he isn't exactly a slender build either. Has a compact torso. Almost similar to Daniel Rich.

You can see various images which illustrate he does indeed look to be 6ft'1 (in the old)

View attachment 1384344

And yes, it is well known that Tom Hawkins shed a bit of weight when he hit his early 30's. In fact, there are numerous reports on this as he stipulated that in order to remain relevant in the game today, he needed to be able to work up and down the ground and in doing so, lost about 5kg's.
He is clearly slimmer than what he was in 2015 etc.

Tom Hawkins would do turds that weigh more than Max King.


I would guess that Rayner is 6.1, and 94kgs would be about right.

But that's not a big midfielder really these days. As I said, certainly not big in the sense that you can go forward and play a key target role like the good ones do.

 

[bungalow_bill]

I reckon Rayner looks every bit of 94kg's. His legs are like tree trunks and he isn't exactly a slender build either. Has a compact torso. Almost similar to Daniel Rich.

You can see various images which illustrate he does indeed look to be 6ft'1 (in the old)

View attachment 1384344

And yes, it is well known that Tom Hawkins shed a bit of weight when he hit his early 30's. In fact, there are numerous reports on this as he stipulated that in order to remain relevant in the game today, he needed to be able to work up and down the ground and in doing so, lost about 5kg's.
He is clearly slimmer than what he was in 2015 etc.

Rayner is a unit

FWIW Cameron is 183 CM

 

[JasRulz63]

Wouldn't have a clue. I don't measure a guy that plays forward pocket by how many 20+ disposal games he gets.

You're the one that decided 20 disposals and 1 goal is "what good players do", and the one that decided to bring said forward pocket into the discussion.

 

[JasRulz63]

Now I know that progression isn't linear and starting a career slowly doesn't mean a players peak won't get elite level high but the comparisons between the two are detrimental to Rayner. The two aren't that similar other than being a decent size and being able to play forward.

Petracca could find the ball but didn't have a midfielders tank and played more high HF. Rayner plays a deeper role and struggles to find the football however he is probably the better contested mark of the two

I tend to agree with your point. I think comparing Rayner to arguably the most damaging player in the competition is a tough comparison, and will probably just lead to disappointment.

I think Petracca and Rayner had not dissimilar stats playing through the midfield in their draft years in the TAC cup/U18s, and arguably had a similar weakness of lacking the tank to have a consistent impact on the game.

Petracca's improvement once hitting AFL level is the exception and shouldn't necessarily be the expectation.

 

[danster168]

You're the one that decided 20 disposals and 1 goal is "what good players do", and the one that decided to bring said forward pocket into the discussion.

Rayner had 13 centre bounce attendances on the weekend, no? 20 possessions for 13 centre bounces is poor.

If Spargo played as much midfield as Rayner, he would've hit 30 by now, several times.

 

[blueiris]

Rayner had 13 centre bounce attendances on the weekend, no? 20 possessions for 13 centre bounces is poor.

If Spargo played as much midfield as Rayner, he would've hit 30 by now, several times.

No it’s not you’re delusional

 

[danster168]

No it’s not you’re delusional

ok fine, i'll take the time to prove another amateur wrong. Lets look at some mids that got 15 or lower centre bounces this weekend:

Seb Ross 24 touches (7 cba's)
Coniglio 21 touches (1 cba)
Libba 33 touches (13 cba's)
Bailey Smith 29 touches (11 cba's)
Macrae 26 touches (11 cba's)
Treloar 22 touches (9 cba's)
Boak 34 touches (14 cba's)
Willem Drew 26 touches (12 cba's)
Amon 25 touches (6 cba's)
Noah Anderson 33 touches (15 cba's)
Tom Sparrow 24 touches (4 cba's)
Neale Bullen 27 touches (3 cba's)
Tom Mitchell 26 touches (15 cba's)
Chad Warner 24 touches (9 cba's)
Pendlebury 25 touches (10 cba's)
Nick Daicos 23 touches (7 cba's)

Now Rayner gets 13 Centre Bounce Attendances for 20 touches. It's below average.

20 touches is nothing these days.

Do some research and get back to me when you're on my level.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

ok fine, i'll take the time to prove another amateur wrong. Lets look at some mids that got 15 or lower centre bounces this weekend:

Seb Ross 24 touches (7 cba's)
Coniglio 21 touches (1 cba)
Libba 33 touches (13 cba's)
Bailey Smith 29 touches (11 cba's)
Macrae 26 touches (11 cba's)
Treloar 22 touches (9 cba's)
Boak 34 touches (14 cba's)
Willem Drew 26 touches (12 cba's)
Amon 25 touches (6 cba's)
Noah Anderson 33 touches (15 cba's)
Tom Sparrow 24 touches (4 cba's)
Neale Bullen 27 touches (3 cba's)
Tom Mitchell 26 touches (15 cba's)
Chad Warner 24 touches (9 cba's)
Pendlebury 25 touches (10 cba's)
Nick Daicos 23 touches (7 cba's)

Now Rayner gets 13 Centre Bounce Attendances for 20 touches. It's below average.

20 touches is nothing these days.

Do some research and get back to me when you're on my level.

If Rayner was in 13 CBA’s that was just 36% of the CBA’s, about half the load of a full time mid. It means he is playing as a centre forward. You are comparing him to a load of around the ground accumulators. Rayner due to his one on one and aerial prowess is attending some centre bounces then mainly stationing himself forward of the ball, but never as the deepest forward.

He racks up 20 touches, 433m gained, 1 goal 2 behinds, 2 goal assists, 6 score involvements, 2 contested marks, 9 contested possessions, winning some massive contests, and you try to compare him to a list of players who play nothing like a similar role and likely not one of them had anywhere near the scoreboard impact.

You seem to be squirming danster, because Rayner is just 22yo, 6 games off an ACL having missed what would most likely have been his breakout season, He is playing decent footy and on the up, and you have committed yourself to him being the 30th best player from the 2017 draft. 19 places below Will Powell, who in the same game on the weekend seems to have had a shocker. 12 places below workmanlike small forward Chuck Spargo. 26 places below serial Joe the Goose uncontested specialist Bayley Fritsch. . 11 below Worpel. 8 below the biggest squib in footy, Cryin Miers. . 1 below Roarke Smith. 5 below Xerri. And my favourite bit, both 3 and 6 places below Ben Paton because you were searching for any possible device you could locate to squeeze Rayner out of the all important top 29.

Danster, Rayner played a really nice game his 6th game back from an ACL. I know it will kill you, but just type words to the effect he played a nice game, looks to be on the up and good on him.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Rayner had 13 centre bounce attendances on the weekend, no? 20 possessions for 13 centre bounces is poor.

If Spargo played as much midfield as Rayner, he would've hit 30 by now, several times.

Spargo is nowhere near the level of player Rayner is or will be anyway.

Everything is not all about a pissing contest with Melbourne ya know, yes we know you have a great team that us very very likely to go back to back, but you gotta stop with trying to know good young players from other teams to push this this see Dees are the best team of all time narrative (or so it seems to me)

 

[danster168]

If Rayner was in 13 CBA’s that was just 36% of the CBA’s, about half the load of a full time mid. It means he is playing as a centre forward. You are comparing him to a load of around the ground accumulators. Rayner due to his one on one and aerial prowess is attending some centre bounces then mainly stationing himself forward of the ball, but never as the deepest forward.

He racks up 20 touches, 433m gained, 1 goal 2 behinds, 2 goal assists, 6 score involvements, 2 contested marks, 9 contested possessions, winning some massive contests, and you try to compare him to a list of players who play nothing like a similar role and likely not one of them had anywhere near the scoreboard impact.

You seem to be squirming danster, because Rayner is just 22yo, 6 games off an ACL having missed what would most likely have been his breakout season, He is playing decent footy and on the up, and you have committed yourself to him being the 30th best player from the 2017 draft. 19 places below Will Powell, who in the same game on the weekend seems to have had a shocker. 12 places below workmanlike small forward Chuck Spargo. 26 places below serial Joe the Goose uncontested specialist Bayley Fritsch. . 11 below Worpel. 8 below the biggest squib in footy, Cryin Miers. . 1 below Roarke Smith. 5 below Xerri. And my favourite bit, both 3 and 6 places below Ben Paton because you were searching for any possible device you could locate to squeeze Rayner out of the all important top 29.

Danster, Rayner played a really nice game his 6th game back from an ACL. I know it will kill you, but just type words to the effect he played a nice game, looks to be on the up and good on him.

Spargo had 22 touches, 1 goal, 478m gained and 9 score involvements last week from only 70% game time and 0 centre bounce attendances. Do we talk about it? no. because he's a good player.

Raynor gets a hype article written about him for having average games because he's done nothing to his career to date.

i stand by all of my rankings. Not sure why you'd have the audacity to mention a 59 goals goal kicker in bayley fritsch. you're not helping yourself.

Wil Powell has shown much more than Rayner. Rayner may turn out better, but he won't make up the ground from doing nothing for 3 years whilst the other names are producing.

Do you even watch football? Xerrie is arguably going to win a BnF for north. Rayner wouldn't even finish in north's top 15 in their Bnf.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Spargo had 22 touches, 1 goal, 478m gained and 9 score involvements last week from only 70% game time and 0 centre bounce attendances. Do we talk about it? no. because he's a good player.

Raynor gets a hype article written about him for having average games because he's done nothing to his career to date.

i stand by all of my rankings. Not sure why you'd have the audacity to mention a 59 goals goal kicker in bayley fritsch. you're not helping yourself.

Wil Powell has shown much more than Rayner. Rayner may turn out better, but he won't make up the ground from doing nothing for 3 years whilst the other names are producing.

Do you even watch football? Xerrie is arguably going to win a BnF for north. Rayner wouldn't even finish in north's top 15 in their Bnf.

You haven’t stfu about it.

Regarding Rayner needing to make up ground, none of these guys have even entered their prime yet, they are all more or less bit part players to this point.

But let me get this straight, because your position takes some working out here…..

Are you saying Spargo is a good footballer for producing this season so far when not coming off an ACL, whereas Rayner is a spud for doing better overall, coming off an ACL? If so, then .

 

[Toump Ass]

You haven’t stfu about it.

Regarding Rayner needing to make up ground, none of these guys have even entered their prime yet, they are all more or less bit part players to this point.

But let me get this straight, because your position takes some working out here…..

Are you saying Spargo is a good footballer for producing this season so far when not coming off an ACL, whereas Rayner is a spud for doing better overall, coming off an ACL? If so, then .

View attachment 1384637

My boy Charles getting twice as many Inside 50's without even playing midfield.
More score involvements from a team that barely scores too, not bad.

Not gonna get into an argument about who is a better player but I will say that Spargo is a gun and a good pick and Raynor is not a gun and is a shit pick.

As an aside, why all of a sudden we can't call Pick 1's garbage? We gave it to Watts didn't we?
Bigfooty did their very best to turn him into a meme.
Now all of a sudden it's "oh let's just wait and see".
**** that.
Watts is twice the player Raynor could even hope to be and that other number 1 pick Jamarra Ugle Hagas, they're garbage.
Let them know about it.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

My boy Charles getting twice as many Inside 50's without even playing midfield.
More score involvements from a team that barely scores too, not bad.

Not gonna get into an argument about who is a better player but I will say that Spargo is a gun and a good pick and Raynor is not a gun and is a shit pick.

As an aside, why all of a sudden we can't call Pick 1's garbage? We gave it to Watts didn't we?
Bigfooty did their very best to turn him into a meme.
Now all of a sudden it's "oh let's just wait and see".
fu** that.
Watts is twice the player Raynor could even hope to be and that other number 1 pick Jamarra Ugle Hagas, they're garbage.
Let them know about it.

He has to be outside 50 to get an inside 50 Toump.

I see you are supporting your stablemate danster with some similarly perplexing logic. Spargo is a gun and Rayner is not a gun but you are are not going to get into an argument about who is a better player…..

Jack Watts proved himself to be an uncontested beast across his non-illustrious 174 game career, that was by far more remarkable for creating new ways of explaining away a coke habit than it was for any particular ability or inability displayed onfield. He actually tracked well in his first few years until they reminded him he was a big boy now and needed to go and win his own footy….then he descended slowly but surely on a dead straight line to obscurity. Now he makes K Mart rip off board shorts. I used to have a snuggy with patterns like that on it when I was a baby.

 

[Some Idiot]

He's just never shown the ability to run a game out. Not even close, it'd be generous to say he can run out a half of football

 

[Toump Ass]

Now he makes K Mart rip off board shorts.

 

[danster168]

You haven’t stfu about it.

Regarding Rayner needing to make up ground, none of these guys have even entered their prime yet, they are all more or less bit part players to this point.

But let me get this straight, because your position takes some working out here…..

Are you saying Spargo is a good footballer for producing this season so far when not coming off an ACL, whereas Rayner is a spud for doing better overall, coming off an ACL? If so, then .

View attachment 1384637

What are you even looking at? Spargo's stats are better...

 

[danster168]

He has to be outside 50 to get an inside 50 Toump.

I see you are supporting your stablemate danster with some similarly perplexing logic. Spargo is a gun and Rayner is not a gun but you are are not going to get into an argument about who is a better player…..

Jack Watts proved himself to be an uncontested beast across his non-illustrious 174 game career, that was by far more remarkable for creating new ways of explaining away a coke habit than it was for any particular ability or inability displayed onfield. He actually tracked well in his first few years until they reminded him he was a big boy now and needed to go and win his own footy….then he descended slowly but surely on a dead straight line to obscurity. Now he makes K Mart rip off board shorts. I used to have a snuggy with patterns like that on it when I was a baby.

Your argument is perplexing. Rayner may turn out to be a better player but to date Rayner hasn't done anything. Zilch. Spargo has far more runs on the board. With the amount of midfield time he gets rayner's disposal number should be up to 18-20. Instead they are hovering around Spargo's 14 who is a defensive pressure forward. Let's not even talk about Rayner's defensive pressure :S

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Your argument is perplexing. Rayner may turn out to be a better player but to date Rayner hasn't done anything. Zilch. Spargo has far more runs on the board. With the amount of midfield time he gets rayner's disposal number should be up to 18-20. Instead they are hovering around Spargo's 14 who is a defensive pressure forward. Let's not even talk about Rayner's defensive pressure :S

Maybe let’s talk about Rayner’s ability to win huge contests then danster. . But we know you love your Joe the Goose receivers, and handball round in a circle stat padders. Rayner crashes packs open, something that won’t show up in your disposal stats, but has a huge impact on a team’s fortunes.

And even if your assessment that Rayner had done zilch was anywhere near right last week(it wasn’t,) it is now one week out of date. I doubt you even watched the game, you surely couldn’t have.

As for Spargo having far more runs on the board. Wtf. Rayner matches or outmatches Spargo in just about all key areas, despite playing more of his games when younger and more of his games were in 2020 when matches were shortened, and doing an ACL when he looked like he was about to break out. In other words, if you adjusted for those items, Rayner would be clearly ahead. You are delusional comrade.