- Joined
- Oct 18, 2004
- Posts
- 7,133
- Reaction score
- 6,280
- Location
- Vic
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- HFC.LFC.LAL.LAD.SF49.BB
Date Posted: 12:17:11 12/14/04 Tue
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: 211.28.195.49
Subject: Profile: Jack Juniper
Jack Juniper (Glenelg)
191/80 mid-age left foot
*STYLE LIKE: smaller early McKernan
*TRADEMARK:
- Huge leap and a raking left foot kick.
*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:
[I must stress that I have seen him on a couple of tapes only, so my sample size and external enquiries may not be completely reflective of his season or ability overall].
- 6'3" skinny athlete who plays taller. "Jack" by name, "Jumping Jack" by nature.
- A natural sportsman. Until a few weeks ago the indication was that he was not committed to footy long term, preferring golf. Is also a dynamic cricketer (fast bowler, bash-and-crash batsman).
- I hate having to assess kids who have not been tested against even reasonable opposition. School footy is very flattering. The better players can afford to play at 3/4 intensity and still be match-winners. The play is more open. The error rate is so high that you can afford to sweat on the spills. A goodish kid can take 10 marks in a game without any being against a half-decent opponent.
Jack's total exposure has been at school level in a dominant side, except for isolated SANFL U19s exposure late season, kicking 5 goals in a game but at the stage of the season when most of the quality kids were playing higher level so not there to test him. His work rate is inconsistent, often poor, and the talented players can prolong these bad habits if they only play school footy. There seems to be a tendency among the more talented players to play within themselves a fair bit. I don't know whether Juniper falls for that but he certainly lacks either concentration, intensity or footy instinct. I suspect a combination of all.
- To make assessment even harder, Jack plays much of his footy as a 191cm school ruck so its hard to gauge his capability as a potential KPP. Certainly he can run, jump, kick and is very clean off the ground. That sounds great but he doesn't get enough of the pill or actually hold enough marks or hurt the opposition enough for the low standard he is playing at. He reminds me so much of Ben Clifton in those regards (and even in appearance). At least Ben was playing U18s at a good level (TAC).
The bullet point is this. When he DOES turn it on, he is ultra impressive. eg
He is quick off the mark and has good pace and agility.
He can almost (but that's an important word) take a number of screamers, often coming from the most impossible angles.
His kicking range seems to be possibly 60m and he seems to be a usually good kick.
He is very clean off the ground (at least under schools footy pressure)
He will run with the flight into the face of a pack and really attack the mark.
He has a sharp sidestep out of traffic and good evasion on the run.
Traditional recruiting lore says that you primarily focus on what a kid shows he CAN do when firing, even if it is currently only in cameo. I'm less a disciple of this school of thinking. I am normally just as interested in what a player doesn't/can't do, and the basis of same, as I am in his highlights. Recruiters have to extrapolate. That's the very nature of the game. However I think sometimes we are too easily seduced by huge leap, speed and height and too prepared to overlook/excuse all manner of sins.
Anyone seeing just Jack's highlights tapes would crown him the next Riewoldt, but better below the knee. But that's the nature of highlights tapes. Don't show me the leap and tell me what a screamer it could have been. Show me who finished up with the ball because that's the guy who will hurt the opposition.
I've bent my own rules with Jack and a couple of others this year because of the very NQR quality of those I've ranked behind them.
The question in this draft is: "How many others are less flawed than Jack - AND - can do what he does when at his best?"
- Juniper is a conscientious student with an overly laid-back personality (AFL-wise) off field. Except for selective bursts that are very impressive, he seems to somewhat take the latter into a game as well. Gives the impression, in various ways, that he doesn't care about footy. At the very least, he has been a big fish in a tiny pond and has not the slightest idea of what commitment to AFL means in terms of how you present yourself. That rings alarm bells in my head, especially given that I'm told he also initially chucked in the idea of playing with Glenelg after just one or two training runs.
His sheer athleticism and raw talent do make very attractive noises in a draft like this year's though.
- Best is serious AFL. Worst is poor. I see him as an athlete trying to play footy rather than a natural footballer with instinctive smarts. I am convinced he has a good range of skills, some elite. I am not convinced he is "the good thing" that some suggested some months ago. Every year there are a handful of kids I never feel I have a handle on. Jack is one. He will possibly get drafted and I would not be overly surprised if he lived up to the earlier (but now much quieter) raps on him. I am agnostic though. His apparent lack of interest in an AFL career until recent weeks doesn't ring the right bells with me either.
I ranked him early at 34 - purely on his best cameos, upside-wise. It's hard to know where to rank him as he hasn't been exposed enough to any half-decent footy to see if can rise to a higher standard, and often doesn't have to break out of a trot at the level he has been almost exclusively playing (school). One 5g bag in an isolated SANFL U19s colts game at season-end shows his promise but is too small a sample from which to confidently draw a meaningful conclusion. I could have ranked him anywhere from about 30 to nowhere and felt equally justified.
I would consider taking him but not with a pick as early as 34. I ranked him on his on-field promise. I have a big query on whether he has sufficient commitment to an AFL career to do all it takes to prepare himself for a sustained AFL career and to stay committed to AFL if he initially does. Given the risk, he's an ideal "one year risk" Rookie punt if still around then.
Other than leap, it is his "small man" attributes that appeal, whereas I have queries on the "big man" stuff for which many were lauding him some months back. If he held more of his "almost" screamers I would be much more confident. On the other hand, the fact that they are indeed almost screamers mean he is theoretically not far off taking more.
In that sense he is similar to Jesse Wells. Wells the greater intensity (now), Juniper the better disposal. In fairness to Juniper, Wells himself displayed poor intensity prior to this year and lifted it by an order of magnitude in early '04.
Commitment-wise, let alone form-wise to date, my ranking flatters him and is likely to be much earlier than he will go, if at all.
Ready year 3, maybe year 2.
*DISPOSAL:
- Thumping left foot kick and usually reliable.
- I'm not sure if he has a right foot.
- Disposal by hand also seems to be generally reliable.
*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
- He is a smart kid off-field but I'm not convinced he is naturally footy smart.
- He does at times show excellent reflex quick thinking when getting the ball at traffic and sharply slipping into space.
- Doesn't position himself that well around the ground.
- Has a lovely sharp sidestep.
*HANDS:
- Very clean off the ground for his size, sometimes amazingly so.
- Not so, overhead.
*OVERHEAD MARKING:
- A mixed bag. Can take a screamer but can also go a whole game with barely a mark.
- When he does go for a mark, he usually hits the pack hard, fearlessly and with impressive athleticism.
- In general I would say he has hard hands in a contested situation, so-so judgement and ordinary balance. His contested marking efforts often look spectacular but, apart from isolated games I've been told about, to date have a poor return.
- Other than hands, I don't think he positions himself well around the ground so he is often having to arrive late to contest a mark. IMHO, it is the late arrival that creates the need for the spectacular late flies that he does at marking contests. A more footy-smart player would be in the right spot in the first place more often.
- His positioning when he is already there for the contest is not flash and he is not great at holding his ground.
- Doesn't protect the ball enough when in front one-on-one. Is inclined to rush to it and take it on his chest, giving his opponent easier access to a spoil than if he held back fractionally.
Some of those don't unduly bother me as they can be taught.
*ATHLETICISM:
- Very good pace. Seemingly better than his SS time. Is fairly quick off the mark but very fast after the first few metres
- Huge leap.
- Excellent agility
- Is fairly skinny and even somewhat gangly but will fill out into a very nice build.
- Has good evasion in-close.
- Balanced runner.
*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
- Intensity is a mixed bag, from the physical dynamo to the spectator. And he does a lot of spectating - even very close to the play. He is seriously athletic and it frustrates me to see him doing so much standing and casual walking.
He really attacks his ruck contests and marks and, when the mood suits, he chases hard and tackles hard. When the mood suits. However he is very prone to spectating after an initial contest eg he will contest a mark or ruck contest then figure his work is done and just stand back like a statue.
I suspect his spectating is not through lack of interest as much as lack of natural footy know-how. I have seen many kids who play with good intensity at higher levels eg U18 Champs but don't bother to show the same intensity at school level. Maybe Jack is one but I am far from convinced. I just wish he would routinely show the same intensity around the ground that he does at ruck contests.
*AFL VERSATILITY:
- What seems to me to be lack of footy smarts will hurt him. If he is good enough for AFL, I see him as a leading FF and that's the basis for my rating him. Minimises any footy smarts deficiencies, maximises his athletic and kicking attributes, especially depth.
- FP or HFF would suit also.
- Should he lift his intensity and show the footy smarts I've hardly noticed to date, could potentially play just about anywhere. On paper and ignoring his deficiencies, his best attributes are all in the job description of an attacking FB (if he can bulk up enough) or HBF (more likely).
*SCI (SCOPE FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT):
- High as, even though he is a natural sportsman and has fair skinfolds, he has a very under-developed body, doesn't look especially fit and hasn't had the footy development put into him that, say, TAC kids have.
*QUERY:
- Commitment to doing all he can towards getting the most out of himself. And maintaining that commitment.
- Intensity.
- Overhead reliability. (Not discounting that his best marks are rippers. I'm talking about consistently clean hands, judgement and balance).
- Footy smarts.
*OTHER STUFF:
- Played almost exclusively school footy '04. Played couple of SANFL U19s games late '04, kicking 5g (out of 20 though) in Rnd 22.
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: 211.28.195.49
Subject: Profile: Jack Juniper
Jack Juniper (Glenelg)
191/80 mid-age left foot
*STYLE LIKE: smaller early McKernan
*TRADEMARK:
- Huge leap and a raking left foot kick.
*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:
[I must stress that I have seen him on a couple of tapes only, so my sample size and external enquiries may not be completely reflective of his season or ability overall].
- 6'3" skinny athlete who plays taller. "Jack" by name, "Jumping Jack" by nature.
- A natural sportsman. Until a few weeks ago the indication was that he was not committed to footy long term, preferring golf. Is also a dynamic cricketer (fast bowler, bash-and-crash batsman).
- I hate having to assess kids who have not been tested against even reasonable opposition. School footy is very flattering. The better players can afford to play at 3/4 intensity and still be match-winners. The play is more open. The error rate is so high that you can afford to sweat on the spills. A goodish kid can take 10 marks in a game without any being against a half-decent opponent.
Jack's total exposure has been at school level in a dominant side, except for isolated SANFL U19s exposure late season, kicking 5 goals in a game but at the stage of the season when most of the quality kids were playing higher level so not there to test him. His work rate is inconsistent, often poor, and the talented players can prolong these bad habits if they only play school footy. There seems to be a tendency among the more talented players to play within themselves a fair bit. I don't know whether Juniper falls for that but he certainly lacks either concentration, intensity or footy instinct. I suspect a combination of all.
- To make assessment even harder, Jack plays much of his footy as a 191cm school ruck so its hard to gauge his capability as a potential KPP. Certainly he can run, jump, kick and is very clean off the ground. That sounds great but he doesn't get enough of the pill or actually hold enough marks or hurt the opposition enough for the low standard he is playing at. He reminds me so much of Ben Clifton in those regards (and even in appearance). At least Ben was playing U18s at a good level (TAC).
The bullet point is this. When he DOES turn it on, he is ultra impressive. eg
He is quick off the mark and has good pace and agility.
He can almost (but that's an important word) take a number of screamers, often coming from the most impossible angles.
His kicking range seems to be possibly 60m and he seems to be a usually good kick.
He is very clean off the ground (at least under schools footy pressure)
He will run with the flight into the face of a pack and really attack the mark.
He has a sharp sidestep out of traffic and good evasion on the run.
Traditional recruiting lore says that you primarily focus on what a kid shows he CAN do when firing, even if it is currently only in cameo. I'm less a disciple of this school of thinking. I am normally just as interested in what a player doesn't/can't do, and the basis of same, as I am in his highlights. Recruiters have to extrapolate. That's the very nature of the game. However I think sometimes we are too easily seduced by huge leap, speed and height and too prepared to overlook/excuse all manner of sins.
Anyone seeing just Jack's highlights tapes would crown him the next Riewoldt, but better below the knee. But that's the nature of highlights tapes. Don't show me the leap and tell me what a screamer it could have been. Show me who finished up with the ball because that's the guy who will hurt the opposition.
I've bent my own rules with Jack and a couple of others this year because of the very NQR quality of those I've ranked behind them.
The question in this draft is: "How many others are less flawed than Jack - AND - can do what he does when at his best?"
- Juniper is a conscientious student with an overly laid-back personality (AFL-wise) off field. Except for selective bursts that are very impressive, he seems to somewhat take the latter into a game as well. Gives the impression, in various ways, that he doesn't care about footy. At the very least, he has been a big fish in a tiny pond and has not the slightest idea of what commitment to AFL means in terms of how you present yourself. That rings alarm bells in my head, especially given that I'm told he also initially chucked in the idea of playing with Glenelg after just one or two training runs.
His sheer athleticism and raw talent do make very attractive noises in a draft like this year's though.
- Best is serious AFL. Worst is poor. I see him as an athlete trying to play footy rather than a natural footballer with instinctive smarts. I am convinced he has a good range of skills, some elite. I am not convinced he is "the good thing" that some suggested some months ago. Every year there are a handful of kids I never feel I have a handle on. Jack is one. He will possibly get drafted and I would not be overly surprised if he lived up to the earlier (but now much quieter) raps on him. I am agnostic though. His apparent lack of interest in an AFL career until recent weeks doesn't ring the right bells with me either.
I ranked him early at 34 - purely on his best cameos, upside-wise. It's hard to know where to rank him as he hasn't been exposed enough to any half-decent footy to see if can rise to a higher standard, and often doesn't have to break out of a trot at the level he has been almost exclusively playing (school). One 5g bag in an isolated SANFL U19s colts game at season-end shows his promise but is too small a sample from which to confidently draw a meaningful conclusion. I could have ranked him anywhere from about 30 to nowhere and felt equally justified.
I would consider taking him but not with a pick as early as 34. I ranked him on his on-field promise. I have a big query on whether he has sufficient commitment to an AFL career to do all it takes to prepare himself for a sustained AFL career and to stay committed to AFL if he initially does. Given the risk, he's an ideal "one year risk" Rookie punt if still around then.
Other than leap, it is his "small man" attributes that appeal, whereas I have queries on the "big man" stuff for which many were lauding him some months back. If he held more of his "almost" screamers I would be much more confident. On the other hand, the fact that they are indeed almost screamers mean he is theoretically not far off taking more.
In that sense he is similar to Jesse Wells. Wells the greater intensity (now), Juniper the better disposal. In fairness to Juniper, Wells himself displayed poor intensity prior to this year and lifted it by an order of magnitude in early '04.
Commitment-wise, let alone form-wise to date, my ranking flatters him and is likely to be much earlier than he will go, if at all.
Ready year 3, maybe year 2.
*DISPOSAL:
- Thumping left foot kick and usually reliable.
- I'm not sure if he has a right foot.
- Disposal by hand also seems to be generally reliable.
*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
- He is a smart kid off-field but I'm not convinced he is naturally footy smart.
- He does at times show excellent reflex quick thinking when getting the ball at traffic and sharply slipping into space.
- Doesn't position himself that well around the ground.
- Has a lovely sharp sidestep.
*HANDS:
- Very clean off the ground for his size, sometimes amazingly so.
- Not so, overhead.
*OVERHEAD MARKING:
- A mixed bag. Can take a screamer but can also go a whole game with barely a mark.
- When he does go for a mark, he usually hits the pack hard, fearlessly and with impressive athleticism.
- In general I would say he has hard hands in a contested situation, so-so judgement and ordinary balance. His contested marking efforts often look spectacular but, apart from isolated games I've been told about, to date have a poor return.
- Other than hands, I don't think he positions himself well around the ground so he is often having to arrive late to contest a mark. IMHO, it is the late arrival that creates the need for the spectacular late flies that he does at marking contests. A more footy-smart player would be in the right spot in the first place more often.
- His positioning when he is already there for the contest is not flash and he is not great at holding his ground.
- Doesn't protect the ball enough when in front one-on-one. Is inclined to rush to it and take it on his chest, giving his opponent easier access to a spoil than if he held back fractionally.
Some of those don't unduly bother me as they can be taught.
*ATHLETICISM:
- Very good pace. Seemingly better than his SS time. Is fairly quick off the mark but very fast after the first few metres
- Huge leap.
- Excellent agility
- Is fairly skinny and even somewhat gangly but will fill out into a very nice build.
- Has good evasion in-close.
- Balanced runner.
*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
- Intensity is a mixed bag, from the physical dynamo to the spectator. And he does a lot of spectating - even very close to the play. He is seriously athletic and it frustrates me to see him doing so much standing and casual walking.
He really attacks his ruck contests and marks and, when the mood suits, he chases hard and tackles hard. When the mood suits. However he is very prone to spectating after an initial contest eg he will contest a mark or ruck contest then figure his work is done and just stand back like a statue.
I suspect his spectating is not through lack of interest as much as lack of natural footy know-how. I have seen many kids who play with good intensity at higher levels eg U18 Champs but don't bother to show the same intensity at school level. Maybe Jack is one but I am far from convinced. I just wish he would routinely show the same intensity around the ground that he does at ruck contests.
*AFL VERSATILITY:
- What seems to me to be lack of footy smarts will hurt him. If he is good enough for AFL, I see him as a leading FF and that's the basis for my rating him. Minimises any footy smarts deficiencies, maximises his athletic and kicking attributes, especially depth.
- FP or HFF would suit also.
- Should he lift his intensity and show the footy smarts I've hardly noticed to date, could potentially play just about anywhere. On paper and ignoring his deficiencies, his best attributes are all in the job description of an attacking FB (if he can bulk up enough) or HBF (more likely).
*SCI (SCOPE FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT):
- High as, even though he is a natural sportsman and has fair skinfolds, he has a very under-developed body, doesn't look especially fit and hasn't had the footy development put into him that, say, TAC kids have.
*QUERY:
- Commitment to doing all he can towards getting the most out of himself. And maintaining that commitment.
- Intensity.
- Overhead reliability. (Not discounting that his best marks are rippers. I'm talking about consistently clean hands, judgement and balance).
- Footy smarts.
*OTHER STUFF:
- Played almost exclusively school footy '04. Played couple of SANFL U19s games late '04, kicking 5g (out of 20 though) in Rnd 22.
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
