Player Watch Flynn Appleby (Delisted 2020)

Remove this Banner Ad

jackcass said:
Not even close but hardly surprising given the disparate roles, 1 a lock down defender, the other an intercept player. The only measure Appleby has that surpassed Tommy is 1%ers (pressure acts), and we know how supporters love that. If this kid can have as good a debut season as Langdon I'd be thrilled.

Happy for you to post their respective time trial and sprint records in support of this assertion that Appleby is just so much quicker than Langdon.

https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy...&pid1=6542&pid2=3975&fid1=S&fid2=P&fopt2=2014
Click to expand...

The only measure? You obviously didn't look at Clangers then
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-collingwood-magpies--flynn-appleby
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-collingwood-magpies--tom-langdon

also this from the preseason:
COLLINGWOOD

Pies midfielder Tom Phillips continues to be the standout time trial runner at the club, holding off a fast-finishing Josh Smith to take out their 2km time trial.

Smith finished second and Magpies rookie Flynn Appleby finished third.

Perennial top-five finishers Steele Sidebottom and Jack Crisp came in fourth and fifth respectively.

Flynn wasn't at the AFL draft combine, but at the RookieMe combine he ran the agility test in 8.07. That would have won him the test at the 2017 draft combine and put him 2nd in Langdon's year of 2013 (where Langdon was a 19 year old).

Tom's draft profiles all had the same weaknesses/improvements, he's a poor kick. Flynn's profiles suggested he needed to get more of the footy. Endurance you can build, but poor kicks tend to stay poor kicks, that's why Hawthorn put such a high value on good kicks.

I know they're different style players, but if you look at it objectively, Flynn is what we need more of.
 
Spatfers said:
The only measure? You obviously didn't look at Clangers then
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-collingwood-magpies--flynn-appleby
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-collingwood-magpies--tom-langdon

also this from the preseason:
COLLINGWOOD

Pies midfielder Tom Phillips continues to be the standout time trial runner at the club, holding off a fast-finishing Josh Smith to take out their 2km time trial.

Smith finished second and Magpies rookie Flynn Appleby finished third.

Perennial top-five finishers Steele Sidebottom and Jack Crisp came in fourth and fifth respectively.

Flynn wasn't at the AFL draft combine, but at the RookieMe combine he ran the agility test in 8.07. That would have won him the test at the 2017 draft combine and put him 2nd in Langdon's year of 2013 (where Langdon was a 19 year old).

Tom's draft profiles all had the same weaknesses/improvements, he's a poor kick. Flynn's profiles suggested he needed to get more of the footy. Endurance you can build, but poor kicks tend to stay poor kicks, that's why Hawthorn put such a high value on good kicks.

I know they're different style players, but if you look at it objectively, Flynn is what we need more of.
Click to expand...

Clangers were in the comparison I provided, listed as CG. Across his first season Langdon averaged 2.1, Appleby, in his first game had 1. Factor in Langdon averaged >16 possessions relative to Appleby's 8 and you'll note there 3/5's of FA difference. Get the ball twice as much, make twice as many mistakes. This fixation on Langdon making clangers is just completely over the top. His figures this season skewed by 1 pretty poor game against GWS but generally averages <2.5 a game, on a par with Howe, on a par with Crisp, on a par with Dunn in his time at Collingwood, on a par with Maynard, on a par with Pendlebury.

Langdon was also listed as one of the quickest players on our team on occasions last year according to in-game GPS data. This myth that he's slow is just that. As I say, head to head sprint, wouldn't be too much in it from what little I've seen of Appleby. Be nice to have some actual times to compare.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Run n Spread said:
1 on 1 outstanding, has poise, wins own ball reasonable skill.

Think he will be a gun that's all. Same as I did Pendles. Sure we all get some right and wrong but like the way he goes about it.
Click to expand...

Fair enough mate.
 
jackcass said:
Clangers were in the comparison I provided, listed as CG. Across his first season Langdon averaged 2.1, Appleby, in his first game had 1. Factor in Langdon averaged >16 possessions relative to Appleby's 8 and you'll note there 3/5's of FA difference. Get the ball twice as much, make twice as many mistakes. This fixation on Langdon making clangers is just completely over the top. His figures this season skewed by 1 pretty poor game against GWS but generally averages <2.5 a game, on a par with Howe, on a par with Crisp, on a par with Dunn in his time at Collingwood, on a par with Maynard, on a par with Pendlebury.

Langdon was also listed as one of the quickest players on our team on occasions last year according to in-game GPS data. This myth that he's slow is just that. As I say, head to head sprint, wouldn't be too much in it from what little I've seen of Appleby. Be nice to have some actual times to compare.
Click to expand...

But that's just the thing, Langdon isn't in his 1st season, he's in his 5th and still averaging 3+ clangers a game. The fact that he made 6 against GWS (the 3rd best team in the comp) is what goes heavily against him in that his kicking just hasn't improved and it gets exposed by the better teams.

Howe is an example you made of getting a lot more of the ball so making more clangers. Crisp is on par with clangers but provides much more run than Tom, you'd say the same with Murray. Scharenberg plays the same role (intercept marker) and is far better by foot. Dunn plays on the key forwards, he has 1 less clanger playing 1 more game than Tom.

As you said Flynn plays a lock-down role which is not something we have in abundance. I just don't see Tom in the team ahead of Flynn on what Flynn has to offer.
 
You cannot compare Langdon and Appleby after one game nor solely based on clangers.

Langdon averages 19 possessions per game (6.74 contested) and 2.2 clangers per game over his 62 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Maynard averages 16 possessions per game (4.9 contested) and 2.5 clangers per game over his 57 games. 27% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Howe averages 20 possessions per game with the Pies (6.6 contested) and 2.54 clangers per game over his 47 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Langdon's and Howe's stats are similar but I do not hear anybody bagging Howe's dissposal.
 
Roverjg said:
You cannot compare Langdon and Appleby after one game nor solely based on clangers.

Langdon averages 19 possessions per game (6.74 contested) and 2.2 clangers per game over his 62 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Maynard averages 16 possessions per game (4.9 contested) and 2.5 clangers per game over his 57 games. 27% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Howe averages 20 possessions per game with the Pies (6.6 contested) and 2.54 clangers per game over his 47 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Langdon's and Howe's stats are similar but I do not hear anybody bagging Howe's dissposal.
Click to expand...

I agree I think Howe's disposal is suspect also. Always scares me when he has ball in hand.
 
Roverjg said:
You cannot compare Langdon and Appleby after one game nor solely based on clangers.

Langdon averages 19 possessions per game (6.74 contested) and 2.2 clangers per game over his 62 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Maynard averages 16 possessions per game (4.9 contested) and 2.5 clangers per game over his 57 games. 27% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Howe averages 20 possessions per game with the Pies (6.6 contested) and 2.54 clangers per game over his 47 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Langdon's and Howe's stats are similar but I do not hear anybody bagging Howe's dissposal.
Click to expand...

I agree re Howe's disposal, it often leads me to call him 'Howler'. You can't directly compare Flynn and Tom on Clangers no, but on the roles they play I still think Flynn is a better option, especially considering the small forwards the better teams have.
 
Roverjg said:
You cannot compare Langdon and Appleby after one game nor solely based on clangers.

Langdon averages 19 possessions per game (6.74 contested) and 2.2 clangers per game over his 62 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Maynard averages 16 possessions per game (4.9 contested) and 2.5 clangers per game over his 57 games. 27% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Howe averages 20 possessions per game with the Pies (6.6 contested) and 2.54 clangers per game over his 47 games. 22% of his possessions per game are ineffective and do not hit a target.

Langdon's and Howe's stats are similar but I do not hear anybody bagging Howe's dissposal.
Click to expand...
But then Langdon's effective kicks are only chip kicks or kicks up the line, sure he gets allot of the ball but he doesn't hurt the opposition, it's why I can forgive Crisp and Murray for their occasional turnover but not it Langdon.

Personally I'd rather Langdon come i for Maynard and Maynard to become apart of our forward/mid rotation.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

mike123 said:
Personally I'd rather Langdon come i for Maynard and Maynard to become apart of our forward/mid rotation.
Click to expand...

Besides Maynard's decent game against the Demons in round 23, why do you think Maynard would be effective as a rotating mid-forward?
 
JB1975 said:
Besides Maynard's decent game against the Demons in round 23, why do you think Maynard would be effective as a rotating mid-forward?
Click to expand...
It will free him up to be more attacking and his mistakes up the field will be less costly. I really liked the signs he showed in the Melbourne game, Iirc he won the first couple of clearness and he just looked like bull there. I think we should have kept developing him in that role but I can cop that we had to leave him in defence because of lack of options. Now that Appleby looks solid enough I think we should try it again. He's shown he can kick a goal and tackle so I think he could do well as a resting forward as well.

Really I just think Maynard is the type of player who needs to be freed up to allow him to just hunt the ball.
 
mike123 said:
It will free him up to be more attacking and his mistakes up the field will be less costly. I really liked the signs he showed in the Melbourne game, Iirc he won the first couple of clearness and he just looked like bull there. I think we should have kept developing him in that role but I can cop that we had to leave him in defence because of lack of options. Now that Appleby looks solid enough I think we should try it again. He's shown he can kick a goal and tackle so I think he could do well as a resting forward as well.

Really I just think Maynard is the type of player who needs to be freed up to allow him to just hunt the ball.
Click to expand...

Fair enough mate, I'm sceptical myself. I haven't seen enough of him forward of the ball, only one decent effort on the ball, and his work --good and bad-- behind the ball.

As far as the costliness of his turnovers, most of the mistakes I remember him making this season have been high half-back or along the wing, which are also the sorts of places he'd turn the ball over as a mid. In any case, turning the ball over in the forward half of the ground can be just as costly as a clanger in the middle, especially against better teams.

I'm happy for us to persist with Maynard as well as Appleby. Richmond and Collingwood aren't the only teams with a spread of small-mid forwards (e.g. Bulldogs), so we need to develop some options/keep our options open on that front.
 
The Dawes said:
agree - a couple of absolute shockers the last couple of games in particular.
Click to expand...

I am blaming it on vertigo.......too many high marks.
 
Buckleys_Chance said:
The thing that annoys people about Langdon is not that he is a poor kick, but that he kicks poorly under pressure. That is terrible attribute for backman.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
Yes he does kick poorly under pressure. However Howe gives up more goals due to poor disposal when kicking and moreso when under no pressure. Who do you think are our better kickers our the backline? and across the AFL? I for one can't pin point one but would offer up Scharenberg without looking at any stats.

I would be interested in doing a comparison to see if our fears are real or perceived.
 
JB1975 said:
Fair enough mate, I'm sceptical myself. I haven't seen enough of him forward of the ball, only one decent effort on the ball, and his work --good and bad-- behind the ball.

As far as the costliness of his turnovers, most of the mistakes I remember him making this season have been high half-back or along the wing, which are also the sorts of places he'd turn the ball over as a mid. In any case, turning the ball over in the forward half of the ground can be just as costly as a clanger in the middle, especially against better teams.

I'm happy for us to persist with Maynard as well as Appleby. Richmond and Collingwood aren't the only teams with a spread of small-mid forwards (e.g. Bulldogs), so we need to develop some options/keep our options open on that front.
Click to expand...

I would agree. Most of Maynard's kicks have ben from HB and after he has roosted the ball. Howe's turnovers are dicky kicks from the last line. I am happy to persist with Maynard and Appleby. My beef with Maynard would be that he is the second Pies player in a tackling contest and always goes high or when the opposition has been tackled and on the ground he falls into their back. He doesn't need to be there
 
Roverjg said:
I would agree. Most of Maynard's kicks have ben from HB and after he has roosted the ball. Howe's turnovers are dicky kicks from the last line. I am happy to persist with Maynard and Appleby. My beef with Maynard would be that he is the second Pies player in a tackling contest and always goes high or when the opposition has been tackled and on the ground he falls into their back. He doesn't need to be there
Click to expand...

Yep, his kicks down the line have an annoying habit of straying over the line, or his low kicks up the ground don't find a Collingwood jumper. And true enough, his tackles tend towards the overzealous, which I admit s**** me more than his kicking. Overall he's going okay, just that his work this season hasn't been spiced up with some of the fantastic offensive play we saw from him last year.
 
Impressive highlights vid for a young defender

We are in desperate need of an actual lock down defender , Flynn looks likely for that
 
Roverjg said:
Yes he does kick poorly under pressure. However Howe gives up more goals due to poor disposal when kicking and moreso when under no pressure. Who do you think are our better kickers our the backline? and across the AFL? I for one can't pin point one but would offer up Scharenberg without looking at any stats.

I would be interested in doing a comparison to see if our fears are real or perceived.
Click to expand...

Dunn is pretty reliable by foot coming out of defense. Howe is a good kick most of the time. He shanks the odd one that stands out, but does hit passes with a higher degree of difficulty than most out of the d50 and his kicking is generally low and flat. Shaz is a good kick but until recently has always tended to take safer, more sideways options. He is mixing that up now though and is clearly improving.

On topic though I was rapt with Flynn's debut. Plays without fear, times his spoils really well and holds his own in 1on1 contests at such a young age. Has the makings of a very good defender.

As others have said in front of that crowd, against the best side of the comp he didn't look out of place one bit. I hope we give him another game irrespective of Langdon coming back. With Aish going out I wonder if we'd be bold enough to try Murray further up the ground, possibly opening up a spot for a small defender?
 
Spatfers said:
But that's just the thing, Langdon isn't in his 1st season, he's in his 5th and still averaging 3+ clangers a game. The fact that he made 6 against GWS (the 3rd best team in the comp) is what goes heavily against him in that his kicking just hasn't improved and it gets exposed by the better teams.

Howe is an example you made of getting a lot more of the ball so making more clangers. Crisp is on par with clangers but provides much more run than Tom, you'd say the same with Murray. Scharenberg plays the same role (intercept marker) and is far better by foot. Dunn plays on the key forwards, he has 1 less clanger playing 1 more game than Tom.

As you said Flynn plays a lock-down role which is not something we have in abundance. I just don't see Tom in the team ahead of Flynn on what Flynn has to offer.
Click to expand...

As you've no doubt gathered, I'm happy to agree to disagree. The 6 against GWS was a career high with a couple of games around 5 prior to that. It's clearly an outlier. But at the same time he has more games where he's had 0 or 1. I'm confident that (barring injury) he'll be close to his career average come the end of the season and I'm also confident you'll also see that Appleby's numbers will climb, likely without any substantial increase in possessions.

Dunn is building (0, 1, 5, 3, 3, 4), don't worry, he'll get there, averaged 2.7 last year and heading in the same direction.
 
The most impressive thing for me is that the game was played in a "finals type" high intensity standard.

You couldn't even tell it was his first game.

Did his job well. :thumbsu:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maggie5
List Mgmt. Teams Delistings and Retirements
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
pablo disco bar
pablo disco bar

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top