Hogan-petracca or crispy-weitering or bont/stringer?

[Cadillac]

He's really only had two or three great games. His first year was pretty good, but he didn't follow it up last year.

He came top 10 in the Brownlow last year at 19 years old mate. Have you actually watched him play?

 

[King Wavo]

He came top 10 in the Brownlow last year at 19 years old mate. Have you actually watched him play?

Just my opinion, he didn't seem to affect games. Potentially though he could be great.

 

[Simon_Says]

Is Petracca the best kid you've seen since Judd?

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

If I were to order them:
Hogan
Bontempelli
Weitering
Cripps
Petracca
Stringer

So to answer the question they're all pretty good

 

[Andy_Mac]

Of the three you have to take Bont/Stringer on exposed form.

That said today we saw a glimpse of 2 superstars in the making. Petracca is a freak of nature. Give him another preseason and he'll be scary.

It's funny how the world has forgotten Angus Brayshaw...

 

[ttomred17]

Just my opinion, he didn't seem to affect games. Potentially though he could be great.

Entitled to your opinion mate, but Bont was brilliant last year in several games, acknowledging he was quiet in some others, and no pre season this year can easily influence nuetrals opinions, but he should make AA and poll extremley well in the brownlow which is good stuff from a 3rd year player.

 

[the dog's kennel]

obviously bont/stringer are better right now.

but as a prospector, i'd take hogan/petracca.

 

[Sylvia Saint]

You could mount a pretty strong case for both Stringer and Bont being among the Top 20 players in the league already, so my vote goes to them.

 

[Jesslc]

Paddy - Billings??

Lol billings got dropped recently and paddy always gets dropped.

 

[Jesslc]

So more impressive as a kid than: Franklin (04), Pendles (05), Selwood (06), Danger (07), Hannebury (08), Fyfe (09), Heppell (10), Wingard (11), Hogan (12), Bont or Cripps (13), Henney (14) or Weitering (15)???

None of these are accurate years..

 

[Jesslc]

I love how the Dogs players already get disregarded.

For the other groupings it's all about what they could, and are likely, to become in the future, but are no guarantee.

Stringer is already and All-Australian. Bontempelli is already the 5th best player in the league according to AFL Player Ratings, and if you want to disregard those statistics, is objectively a top 10 midfielder in the game looking at performances already played since the beginning of last year.

That being said Hogan and Petracca already look like superstars and I'll take them ahead of the Dogs pair.

Afl player ratings is the least accurate list that exists... Is Gary Ablett the 132nd best player in the league? Its a 'whose missed the least games list'

 

[Pugz89]

Cameron - Shiel for me thanks

LOL. Sums up GWS perfectly and the entitlement mentality. Choose from these 3 options.. Nah, i don't like either of them. I'll just add my own.

 

[Pugz89]

Sick of the Bont love. He's good, but goes missing way too much. Early this year there were a string of games where he was unsighted. He's all potential now.

For me you can't go past Hogan/Petracca. I think you'll be looking at two rising star winners there at the end of this year.

Missing half the season will do that. Far be it for a 20yr old to start the season on the quiet side only after starting to run after the christmas break. Consistently clocking up 30 disposals now each week and hitting the scoreboard.

 

[Engimal v2]

Whatever combo gives me Hogan. By far the best player of the lot.

 

[Substance]

Afl player ratings is the least accurate list that exists... Is Gary Ablett the 132nd best player in the league? Its a 'whose missed the least games list'

It takes in nothing but performance and positive/negative impact on passages of play. Do some reading. It gives a 2 year rolling window to a maximum of 40 games. So if you have played less than 40 games in the last 2 years, then only the ratings from the amount of games you did play are counted. Do honestly think a ratings system should be any different?

The ratings don't care who you think is the "best" player. It doesn't care about possession numbers. It tells you who most positively impacts games for their team, and I'd rather judge players based on that, than anything else.

It astounds me how people think they're fit to comment on the validity of the ratings without bothering to understand the depth of analysis that goes into them.

 

[Kermit]

None of these are accurate years..

Think they are the years they were drafted- is def he case for Selwood, Bonti/Cripps, Franklin, Weitering etc

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

Sick of the Bont love. He's good, but goes missing way too much. Early this year there were a string of games where he was unsighted. He's all potential now.

For me you can't go past Hogan/Petracca. I think you'll be looking at two rising star winners there at the end of this year.

Bont is not just potential. He is now, his last 6 weeks have been dominant

Waite/Harvey


#bettertobegoodthanyoung

True but you could argue its #bettertobegoodandyoung

 

[Substance]

You'll be banned long before you can use it to your advantage mate.

 

[Scary_Foot_9]

I wouldn't take Hogan-Petracca over Hogan-Viney, he's a beast.

 

[mike91]

Armfield and Casboult

 

[SterlingArcher]

It takes in nothing but performance and SUBJECTIVE positive/negative impact on passages of play. Do some reading. It gives a 2 year rolling window to a maximum of 40 games. So if you have played less than 40 games in the last 2 years, then only the ratings from the amount of games you did play are counted. Do honestly think a ratings system should be any different?

The ratings don't care who you think is the "best" player. It doesn't care about possession numbers. It tells you who most SUBJECTIVELY positively impacts games for their team, and I'd rather judge players based on that, than anything else.

It astounds me how people think they're fit to comment on the validity of the ratings without bothering to understand the depth of analysis that goes into them.

EFA.

End of the day, it's still subjective on what impacts the most. Someone is watching and applying these "impact" stats.

Unless of course you think Brent Harvey, Shane Edwards & Ryan Griffen would be the Dogs 2nd most influential player behind the Bont

 

[TwentyNine]

In order of preference, HP, BS, CW.

 

[Substance]

EFA.

End of the day, it's still subjective on what impacts the most. Someone is watching and applying these "impact" stats.

Unless of course you think Brent Harvey, Shane Edwards & Ryan Griffen would be the Dogs 2nd most influential player behind the Bont

This is from end of round 10:

There are 4 bulldogs in the top 40. Where are Brent Harvey, Shane Edwards & Ryan Griffen?

Subjective opinions of educated experts > subjective opinion of general population of BF.

 

[Rob]

If I had the choice of any 1 i'd take Weitering.

For both i'd take Bont/Stringer.

 

[cleveland]

Hogan over Bont for me, and when Petracca hits top gear i would take him over any other player in the comp quite honestly.

Well you have no idea....No one has done what Bont has since Judd in his first 3 years