Harry O'Brien vs Patrick Ryder

[thebigboy]

Yeh....tell me where you got me saying O'Brien has more upside from. Thanks.

Well most of your posts have been talking up O'Brien as if he's the next top AFL defender so one naturally assumes that he must have an amazing upside far greater than any other defender in the league.

I for one think he is a good defender and has been a success of the rookie list but I have no doubt that Ryder will be the better defender starting in '09.

 

[Winner]

I think Ryder is beginning to fill out into his body and warm up to the CHB position. In 09 he will smash O'Brien.

 

[smiddaz123]

Well most of your posts have been talking up O'Brien as if he's the next top AFL defender so one naturally assumes that he must have an amazing upside far greater than any other defender in the league.

No, my posts have been saying at the moment, he is a better defender than Ryder. Ryder is a better ruckman, forward, and I have no doubt he'd be a better midfielder. As a pure defender, O'Brien has been better than Ryder in 2008. Fact.

Your post makes zero sense mate, quote me where I said O'Brien is the 'next top defender'. Any chance you can stop putting words in my mouth?

It seems everyone is talking about Ryder and his upside, which is admittedly a lot higher than O'Brien's. These people seem to alos be under the impression O'Brien is near fully developed, which is just wrong. He is also a developing defender who still has upside.

I for one think he is a good defender and has been a success of the rookie list but I have no doubt that Ryder will be the better defender starting in '09.

Why?

Upside doesn't always mean they'll be better. Potential is sometimes not reached. You can't make such definitive statements like the one I've bolded. There is nothing to say that Ryder will definitely overtake O'Brien as of the start of 2009. He may very well do, but O'Brien is certainly ahead on output now, and it could easily stay that way for 2009, or at least the start of it.

As it stands, O'Brien is the better defender with some potential development left, Ryder is the inferior defender with HEAPS of potential development left.

 

[thebigboy]

No, my posts have been saying at the moment, he is a better defender than Ryder. Ryder is a better ruckman, forward, and I have no doubt he'd be a better midfielder. As a pure defender, O'Brien has been better than Ryder in 2008. Fact.

Your post makes zero sense mate, quote me where I said O'Brien is the 'next top defender'. Any chance you can stop putting words in my mouth?

It seems everyone is talking about Ryder and his upside, which is admittedly a lot higher than O'Brien's. These people seem to alos be under the impression O'Brien is near fully developed, which is just wrong. He is also a developing defender who still has upside.

Nobody has said Ryder is the better defender. Most essendon supporters have said that Ryder will be the better defender in the future but nearly all have agreed that O'Brien's output has been better so far.

My comment reguarding the best defender comes out of yours and a lot of other collingwood supporters rating of O'Brien, which IMO is way to high. He does a job week in week out but the collingwood supporters are making him out to be something that most football watching supporters know he's not gunna be.

Both Ryder and O'Brien are a long way apart in terms of development. O'Brien has always been a stronger body defender, Ryder, up until this season, has always been a very slight defender. So from a physical point of view, O'Brien is a much more advanced defender and his performances to date has been higher, you will get no argument from me on that one. There can be no doubting the fact that his stronger physique and the fact that he's playing in a stronger side means that generally, he's getting it alot easier than what Ryder has. Nobody is doubting that O'Brien has an upside either, how big an upside he has will depend on opinion.

Why?

Upside doesn't always mean they'll be better. Potential is sometimes not reached. You can't make such definitive statements like the one I've bolded. There is nothing to say that Ryder will definitely overtake O'Brien as of the start of 2009. He may very well do, but O'Brien is certainly ahead on output now, and it could easily stay that way for 2009, or at least the start of it.

As it stands, O'Brien is the better defender with some potential development left, Ryder is the inferior defender with HEAPS of potential development left.

What's to say that in '09 O'Brien will be a better defender than Ryder? Its nothing more than personal opinion which ive formed from watching Ryder's development over the past 3 season. No different to you probably believing that O'Brien will be the better defender.

Again nobody's arguing that Ryder has been the better defender, my argument is that based on what i've seen of Ryder in the last 3 seasons and his new, stronger body and the extra bit of confidence that he was playing with on Friday night, that he will IMO be the better defender in '09. If you want to put that down to bias then go ahead.

I've got no doubt that Ryder is judged alot harder due to his potential and the fact that he was a top 10 pick and the comments Sheedy made upon drafting him that if we had pick 1 we'd take him etc.

 

[smiddaz123]

Nobody has said Ryder is the better defender. Most essendon supporters have said that Ryder will be the better defender in the future but nearly all have agreed that O'Brien's output has been better so far.

My comment reguarding the best defender comes out of yours and a lot of other collingwood supporters rating of O'Brien, which IMO is way to high. He does a job week in week out but the collingwood supporters are making him out to be something that most football watching supporters know he's not gunna be.

He was Collingwood's best defender in 2008. Do you disagree with that? Because I think you'll find most Collingwood supporter's think he was.

Both Ryder and O'Brien are a long way apart in terms of development. O'Brien has always been a stronger body defender, Ryder, up until this season, has always been a very slight defender. So from a physical point of view, O'Brien is a much more advanced defender and his performances to date has been higher, you will get no argument from me on that one. There can be no doubting the fact that his stronger physique and the fact that he's playing in a stronger side means that generally, he's getting it alot easier than what Ryder has. Nobody is doubting that O'Brien has an upside either, how big an upside he has will depend on opinion.

Physically, he has always been quite developed, yes. But in terms of a football brain, he has had to come a very VERY long way, as well as his offensive areas of his game. Both areas have plenty of room to develop. There is more to development than physicality, much more. O'Brien can still develop his offensive side to his game and his decision making, he came into AFL with that far below what Ryder did.

What's to say that in '09 O'Brien will be a better defender than Ryder? Its nothing more than personal opinion which ive formed from watching Ryder's development over the past 3 season. No different to you probably believing that O'Brien will be the better defender.

But you said you had no doubt Ryder will be the better defender at the start of 2009. Surely there is still a chance in your mind that Ryder might be still behind at the start of 2009. It's a perfectly legitimate opinion to believe he will be, but such a definitive statement might be over the top. Anyway, I might be splitting hairs here, so it's probably not worth arguing over.

I've got no doubt that Ryder is judged alot harder due to his potential and the fact that he was a top 10 pick and the comments Sheedy made upon drafting him that if we had pick 1 we'd take him etc.

I don't think Ryder is judged harshly at all. Nearly everyone I've spoken to considers him a good footballing prospect.

I personally think his value is far greater creating player though, rather than negating.

What do you think of putting him in the ruck? Around the ground surely he'd be fantastic value, and his leap and stronger body would hold him in goos stead for ruck contests.

Far better than Laycock already I'd imagine, and pears seems a good prospect at CHB in his own right.

I've always been confused as to why Essendon sees him as a long term defender.

 

[Smyth94]

I don't think Ryder is judged harshly at all. Nearly everyone I've spoken to considers him a good footballing prospect.

I personally think his value is far greater creating player though, rather than negating.

What do you think of putting him in the ruck? Around the ground surely he'd be fantastic value, and his leap and stronger body would hold him in goos stead for ruck contests.

Far better than Laycock already I'd imagine, and pears seems a good prospect at CHB in his own right.

I've always been confused as to why Essendon sees him as a long term defender.

To put it simply - we don't have anyone else.

McPhee - no way
NLM - no way
Hurley - maybe in a couple of years
Pears - maybe in a couple of years
Hooker - project player
Daniher - not really suited to CHB

It may seem strange to keep such a natural talent in defence but at the moment he doesn't get the ball enough to be a damaging player around the ground (although this would improve with more exposure) and like I said before, we don't have anyone else really.

FWIW I reckon Paddy is in for a decent year, he looks more like a KPP instead of the tall wiry kid when he first started. He's got all the tools to become a very successful key defender

 

[smiddaz123]

What about Scott Lucas to CHB, Neagle as a KPF to develop in his place, Ryder in the ruck to replace Laycock, who goes to the VFL.

 

[Smyth94]

What about Scott Lucas to CHB, Neagle as a KPF to develop in his place, Ryder in the ruck to replace Laycock, who goes to the VFL.

Lucas' viability at CHB is long gone I reckon - he would be far too slow

 

[thebigboy]

He was Collingwood's best defender in 2008. Do you disagree with that? Because I think you'll find most Collingwood supporter's think he was.

He probably was in the games that I saw him play.

But you said you had no doubt Ryder will be the better defender at the start of 2009. Surely there is still a chance in your mind that Ryder might be still behind at the start of 2009. It's a perfectly legitimate opinion to believe he will be, but such a definitive statement might be over the top. Anyway, I might be splitting hairs here, so it's probably not worth arguing over.

At the start of '09 he may still be, I believe at the end of '09 he will be a better defender.

I don't think Ryder is judged harshly at all. Nearly everyone I've spoken to considers him a good footballing prospect.

I personally think his value is far greater creating player though, rather than negating.

What do you think of putting him in the ruck? Around the ground surely he'd be fantastic value, and his leap and stronger body would hold him in goos stead for ruck contests.

Far better than Laycock already I'd imagine, and pears seems a good prospect at CHB in his own right.

I think we'd love to play him in the Ruck but with the way that our defence is Knights has no choice but to use him as a key defender.

As a pure ruckman, he's probably better than Laycock although my beef with Laycock is that he can't do anything around the ground and his lack of effort.

When he first came into the league I thought he had the potential to be a roaming player similar to what Adam Goodes plays but I think defence is his best position at the moment. Maybe in 2 -3 years Knights may move him around.

I've always been confused as to why Essendon sees him as a long term defender.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

Showing your ignorance right there, but thats OK I think most football followers can only accurately describe 4 or 5 players from other clubs due to not seeing enough of them.

You are the only one showing ignorance here.

I am not comparing O'Brien to Presti, I clarified that before, if you bothered to read the whole thread. What I was suggesting is that for someone to be one eyed enough to consider O'Brien to have loads of natural football ability, then they would probably think Presti did also.

They are clearly different players, however, both have been highly effective footballers, without having much natural ability.

 

[kickingoals]

ryder averages for 2008 per game
5.4 kicks
4.6 handballs
4.1 marks
2.3 hit outs
2.1 tackles


o'brien
7.8 kicks
5.8 handballs
4.4 marks
0.1 hit outs
1.8 tackles

stats say they are very similar in their development , i would rate o'brien just ahead but he does play in a stronger side , both should be the centre of their clubs future plans over the next ten years . CHB is the cornerstone to success .

 

[lookkg386]

I like them both, but I'd take paddy first, seems to be a bit more flexible with where he can play.

 

[smiddaz123]

When he first came into the league I thought he had the potential to be a roaming player similar to what Adam Goodes plays but I think defence is his best position at the moment. Maybe in 2 -3 years Knights may move him around.

I've always been confused as to why Essendon sees him as a long term defender.

That's the exact player comparison I've always had for him as well.

Adam Goodes would be able to player CHB cuperbly as well if he was developed there, no doubt about that. But he definitely does his best work in a creative role rather than a negating role.

I can see why he'd play as a CHB for the moment since there aren't too many options, but I would have liked to see him at least get a quarter here and there in the ruck and running around the ground.

 

[Smyth94]

That's the exact player comparison I've always had for him as well.

Adam Goodes would be able to player CHB cuperbly as well if he was developed there, no doubt about that. But he definitely does his best work in a creative role rather than a negating role.

I can see why he'd play as a CHB for the moment since there aren't too many options, but I would have liked to see him at least get a quarter here and there in the ruck and running around the ground.

Towards the end of last season he played a couple of quarters here and there in the forward line and did some really nice things and you'd think "gee with his height and mobility he'd be a nightmare matchup" so perhaps down the track there will be plans to shift him elsewhere

 

[Heater39]

Must say I was impressed by Ryders 1st half on Friday. I've always thought he struggled to read the play but he did that very well against the dogs. Both look set for big years and will be interesting to keep track of them both.

I'm still going with Harry though

 

[Smyth94]

Must say I was impressed by Ryders 1st half on Friday. I've always thought he struggled to read the play but he did that very well against the dogs. Both look set for big years and will be interesting to keep track of them both.

I'm still going with Harry though

Funnily enough, reading the play from defence is one of his biggest assets! Although he does sometimes get lost in no mans land.

He's added a few kg to his frame and I'm really interested to see how he goes against the big power forwards. Whilst he did a reasonable job last year he struggled purely because of his lack of body strength which forced him to give his opponent a little bit of space so he could use his superior leap to effect a spoil (rather than body strength) and this tended to work against him against the bigger forwards.

 

[GuzzLG]

ryder averages for 2008 per game
5.4 kicks
4.6 handballs
4.1 marks
2.3 hit outs
2.1 tackles


o'brien
7.8 kicks
5.8 handballs
4.4 marks
0.1 hit outs
1.8 tackles

stats say they are very similar in their development , i would rate o'brien just ahead but he does play in a stronger side , both should be the centre of their clubs future plans over the next ten years . CHB is the cornerstone to success .

Ryder
4.95 1%ers (i.e. spoils) per game

O'Brien
3.25 1%ers per game

Ryder is better defensively. Fact.

 

[DoubleO7]

Ryder
4.95 1%ers (i.e. spoils) per game

O'Brien
3.25 1%ers per game

Ryder is better defensively. Fact.

Complete and utter bullshit

 

[GuzzLG]

Complete and utter bullshit

Huh?

I just made up those stats did I?

 

[GuzzLG]

Ryder
0.91 contested marks per game
49% of possessions are contested possessions

O'Brien
.33 contested marks per game
39% of possessions are contested possessions

So what we have here is Ryder dominating in every defensive statistic. More tackles, more spoils, more contested marks, gets more of his touches in tight situations. While O'Brien is ahead on overall loose man Joel Bowden type stats.

Ryder is clearly the superior defender I'm afraid with about 10x the natural improvement left and 5x the improvement left that will come from eventual improvement in Essendon's currently average defensive set up.

I really question anybody's knowledge if they would prefer O'Brien over Ryder.

 

[Barry Zuckercorn]

I like them equally as much when they play on Fev.

 

[magpie_militia]

Huh?

I just made up those stats did I?

Maybe Ryder gets more opportunity to spoil? Considering that Essendon conceded 600 odd more points than the Pies in 2008.

 

[Smyth94]

Maybe Ryder gets more opportunity to spoil? Considering that Essendon conceded 600 odd more points than the Pies in 2008.

You could argue that...but in the end you still have to effect the spoil, no matter how many times it comes down your way.

 

[Smyth94]

I like them equally as much when they play on Fev.

Actually, Ryder kept Fev goalless in the last quarter in Rnd 3 and didn't play on him in Rnd 13.

 

[smiddaz123]

Actually, Ryder kept Fev goalless in the last quarter in Rnd 3 and didn't play on him in Rnd 13.

Goaless for a single quarter?

Scraping the bottom of the barrel there I think....

If the amount of spoild defined who was the better backman, Daniel Merret would be the best FB in the AFL. He is arguably top 5, but not the best.