Hurley vs Martin

[ThePuppetMaster]

Like Vickery... like Hurley more.

Hurley's 'lack of athleticism' is a myth.

 

[Slattery_20]

Remember when Dermie said Dustin Martin had peaked physically? I wonder whether the Tigs fans agreed.
Methinks not.

I don't particularly care whether Hurley's peaked physically. He's improving as a footballer, as a leader, and getting to better spots more often.

 

[Bigeasy]

This is a crazy comparison. Martin and Hurley play different positions so it depends on what the team deficiencies are. Both outstanding propsects and both would walk into any AFL team right now.

Then there is the Vickery debate. In all seriousness, at this stage you cannot compare Vickery to Hurley. Hurley has shown more and is a more rounded and versatile player at this stage of their careers. This is not to say that Vickery has the potential to surpass Hurley down the road but right now, it has to be Hurley.

I think Vickery can only become elite playing in the ruck, I think he has limitations playing a KPP like pace, agility and lack of skill on his left side. If and when Vickery plays in the ruck is when we will see his talent and influence on a game.

 

[DVD Player]

Bradshaw was a good player, but if Hurley only ends up that good I would be very disappointed. He is the most promising player we have had since Matthew Lloyd.

Bradshaw kicked over 500 goals in his career playing as the second man for the majority of it whilst spending the occasional game in defence. If Hurley turned out as good as Bradshaw I would be absolutely stoked.

 

[juss]

I personally think Hurley will be a better player than Vickery.

I think Vickery will be a very good player, I just think Hurley will be better.

Even though it seems more likely that Hurley will be a better player than Vicks, I think what people are trying to say is anything could happen over the next 5 years.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Vickery... fits Richmond's needs more than Hurley would.

I would contend that Hurley if his club so chose, would be both a better ruckman than Vickery, and will be a better forward than Vickery.

Hurley would undoubtedly be a better backman than Vickery.

It appears you have severely overrated your backline in this instance.

It is equally, if not more justifiable to suggest that Hurley will be the better overall player.

In terms of 'ceilings', Hurley would have the highest quantifiable 'ceiling' out of any young player.

Martin might well be that other young player with comparable scope.

Both carry about them an air of invincibility that manifests typically in champion players (and other players like Mitch Robinson). It's difficult to qualify.

Hurley before Martin. A match-winner at either end, over a match-winner out of the middle.

 

[chrstphrwnstn]

I would contend that Hurley if his club so chose, would be both a better ruckman than Vickery, and will be a better forward than Vickery.

Hurley would undoubtedly be a better backman than Vickery.

It appears you have severely overrated your backline in this instance.

It is equally, if not more justifiable to suggest that Hurley will be the better overall player.

In terms of 'ceilings', Hurley would have the highest quantifiable 'ceiling' out of any young player.

Martin might well be that other young player with comparable scope.

Both carry about them an air of invincibility that manifests typically in champion players (and other players like Mitch Robinson). It's difficult to qualify.

Hurley before Martin. A match-winner at either end, over a match-winner out of the middle.

All I'm saying is that no one can predict the outcome between the two. Just because Hurley looks likely to become a superstar of the competition doesn't mean Vickery won't. Not sure what you're getting at with the ruckman comment. A 193cm Hurley would be a more competent ruckman than Vickery would?

Not overrating our backline at all. It is a clear weakness of ours, but so are our ruck stocks. It all starts in the middle and a high-quality ruckman that can feed Cotchin, Martin, Deledio, etc. with first use of the ball eases pressure on our inexperienced defensive 50. His ability to float down forward and kick goals adds to his overall value.

Anyways, like I said, would love to have either as both look likely to become very good players over the next decade.

 

[chrstphrwnstn]

I personally think Hurley will be a better player than Vickery.

I think Vickery will be a very good player, I just think Hurley will be better.

Even though it seems more likely that Hurley will be a better player than Vicks, I think what people are trying to say is anything could happen over the next 5 years.

My sentimonies, exactly.

 

[larson]

Bradshaw kicked over 500 goals in his career playing as the second man for the majority of it whilst spending the occasional game in defence. If Hurley turned out as good as Bradshaw I would be absolutely stoked.

Really? Bradshaw would have never been a top 30 player in the league, by the looks of it Hurley will most likely end up a top 10 player in the league. I really don't think many Essendon supporters would agree with you.

 

[brett15]

There's no way Hurley could ruck better then Vickery, BUT that said, and as much as I love Vickers, I wouldn't have any hesitations swapping him directly for Hurley.

As for the poll, I voted Hurley because we already have Martin

 

[Slattery_20]

I personally think Hurley will be a better player than Vickery.

I think Vickery will be a very good player, I just think Hurley will be better.

Even though it seems more likely that Hurley will be a better player than Vicks, I think what people are trying to say is anything could happen over the next 5 years.

"Anything could happen over 5 years!!!" is a pretty easy game to play, IMHO.
It can be applied to any two guys, any two sides, and you could pull up a similar example or two, no matter how unlikely or irrelevant.

In a case where there's one bloke a fair head in front of the other, I'd like to hear a solid reason or two why Vickery would go in front of Hurley, before even considering the argument.
Just some meat on the argument, that's all.

Is he going to step into the #1 ruck role. Is Jack clearing out & he's going to be the #1 forward. Has he put on 10kg this pre-season and rag-dolling everyone.
That's the sort of step he'd need to take to be compared against Hurley, who is very much the key man, and doing rather well.

Simply saying "it could happen" is a pretty scrawny argument. IMHO.

 

[theflea]

"Anything could happen over 5 years!!!" is a pretty easy game to play, IMHO.
It can be applied to any two guys, any two sides, and you could pull up a similar example or two, no matter how unlikely or irrelevant.

In a case where there's one bloke a fair head in front of the other, I'd like to hear a solid reason or two why Vickery would go in front of Hurley, before even considering the argument.
Just some meat on the argument, that's all.

Is he going to step into the #1 ruck role. Is Jack clearing out & he's going to be the #1 forward. Has he put on 10kg this pre-season and rag-dolling everyone.
That's the sort of step he'd need to take to be compared against Hurley, who is very much the key man, and doing rather well.

Simply saying "it could happen" is a pretty scrawny argument. IMHO.

it may/is a vague argument(also stated by another bombers poster i cant remember who in another thread) but its not left to bf posters as brereton also said martin will be a wadler in the future and also said jack r wont make it.

 

[juss]

"Anything could happen over 5 years!!!" is a pretty easy game to play, IMHO.
It can be applied to any two guys, any two sides, and you could pull up a similar example or two, no matter how unlikely or irrelevant.

In a case where there's one bloke a fair head in front of the other, I'd like to hear a solid reason or two why Vickery would go in front of Hurley, before even considering the argument.
Just some meat on the argument, that's all.

Is he going to step into the #1 ruck role. Is Jack clearing out & he's going to be the #1 forward. Has he put on 10kg this pre-season and rag-dolling everyone.
That's the sort of step he'd need to take to be compared against Hurley, who is very much the key man, and doing rather well.

Simply saying "it could happen" is a pretty scrawny argument. IMHO.

I agree with you, I think Hurley will be the better player.

I'm just acknowledging the fact that sometimes players develop at different rates, and guys well ahead early in their careers don't always finish their careers well ahead.

As with any draft, it can take about five years to see who the better players are, rather than the first 3 years. Hurley is the better to date, and probably will continue to be, but it's far from settled. Both players are potentially elite but not there yet, whether or not either or both of them fulfill that potential remains to be seen.

 

[The Bomb]

"Anything could happen over 5 years!!!" is a pretty easy game to play, IMHO.
It can be applied to any two guys, any two sides, and you could pull up a similar example or two, no matter how unlikely or irrelevant.

In a case where there's one bloke a fair head in front of the other, I'd like to hear a solid reason or two why Vickery would go in front of Hurley, before even considering the argument.
Just some meat on the argument, that's all.

Is he going to step into the #1 ruck role. Is Jack clearing out & he's going to be the #1 forward. Has he put on 10kg this pre-season and rag-dolling everyone.That's the sort of step he'd need to take to be compared against Hurley, who is very much the key man, and doing rather well.

Simply saying "it could happen" is a pretty scrawny argument. IMHO.

Vickery is taller, Vickery kicked more goals in 2011, this is a start

 

[Powered Up]

1 Question for all Richmond supporters.

Would you rather Vickery or Martin?

Because splitting Hurley and Martin is a extremely hard decision, both are guns. Vickery is not even close to Hurley, actually I think he is close to Watts but not Hurley.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

There's no way Hurley could ruck better then Vickery, BUT that said, and as much as I love Vickers, I wouldn't have any hesitations swapping him directly for Hurley.

As for the poll, I voted Hurley because we already have Martin

thank christ, some Tiger sanity

 

[Slattery_20]

I agree with you, I think Hurley will be the better player.

I'm just acknowledging the fact that sometimes players develop at different rates, and guys well ahead early in their careers don't always finish their careers well ahead.

Sometimes.

The way it is put about on here, guys who are big, physically, and have a big impact early; will be overtaken as a matter of course by smaller, less "ready" guys who have less of an impact early, who only need to "develop".
Which is a bit of a load, IMHO.
So much more to it than that.

If you look at the complete player, IMHO
Hurley has Vickery on impact, on marking, on strength, better at finding it on the ground, on kicking, on game sense (where to go), and - arguably - versatility.
Vickery is taller, does go through the ruck, and better athletically (for his height).

Strength will come, game sense will come, marking might come; but IMHO that won't be enough.
If Vickery had more of those other things, then I'd see, or even agree with, your point; right now I can't.


Someone threw up Watts, he has athleticism, kicking, finds it on the ground, and height - IMHO he lacks in game sense, strength, contested marking (all 3 will come with time) & impact. I can easily see him going past Hurley.

And this goes for all players btw: I look at what they do have, what they don't have, and how likely it is they'll improve weaknesses.


Btw, Vickery/Hurley probably has enough worthwhile content now to be moved into a separate thread, if any mod is in the mood... sure as hell ain't on the Martin topic.

 

[theflea]

Sometimes.

The way it is put about on here, guys who are big, physically, and have a big impact early; will be overtaken as a matter of course by smaller, less "ready" guys who have less of an impact early, who only need to "develop".
Which is a bit of a load, IMHO.
So much more to it than that.

If you look at the complete player, IMHO
Hurley has Vickery on impact, on marking, on strength, better at finding it on the ground, on kicking, on game sense (where to go), and - arguably - versatility.
Vickery is taller, does go through the ruck, and better athletically (for his height).

Strength will come, game sense will come, marking might come; but IMHO that won't be enough.
If Vickery had more of those other things, then I'd see, or even agree with, your point; right now I can't.


Someone threw up Watts, he has athleticism, kicking, finds it on the ground, and height - IMHO he lacks in game sense, strength, contested marking (all 3 will come with time) & impact. I can easily see him going past Hurley.

And this goes for all players btw: I look at what they do have, what they don't have, and how likely it is they'll improve weaknesses.


Btw, Vickery/Hurley probably has enough worthwhile content now to be moved into a separate thread, if any mod is in the mood... sure as hell ain't on the Martin topic.

slatts just like arseholes everyone has an opinion rightly or wrongly. when you compare hurley v vickery i agree he has shown more to date. but i thought i will way in on your comparison here and i reckon im fair to both parties. i will give you hurley is better at impact on games(particularly fwd as he will be the main target),kicking(field),ground level balls(vicks is good) and on game sense. i would however disagree on marking(on par) with only less than 1 average difference, plus strength would also be on par.on the versativity aspect are you comparing between a fwd and back v a fwd and ruck.if you are saying hurley, at the moment, is better over the 2 positions then yes i agree at this stage.

but yes you are right this a martim/hurley comparison and enough said about the other. are you supprised at the totals as isnt it normally the fwd gets the prize.

 

[Slattery_20]

slatts just like arseholes everyone has an opinion rightly or wrongly. when you compare hurley v vickery i agree he has shown more to date. but i thought i will way in on your comparison here and i reckon im fair to both parties....<snip>

I'm glad we at least agree on most of it... more illustrating how I'd go about comparing guys, than the absolute specifics.
I would be pretty happy backing Hurls in, in a wrestle.

 

[Bazzar]

I'm glad we at least agree on most of it... more illustrating how I'd go about comparing guys, than the absolute specifics.
I would be pretty happy backing Hurls in, in a wrestle.

Id back Vickery by a mile. And he being a black belt/instructor would easly go in is favour, not to mention his upbringing with is old man being a boxing trainer for the last 15 years. Its amazing the bomber fans here who are all experts on Vickery, especially how he isnt agile, quick, not strong enough in the air, not agile below his knees, and funniest of the lot not as tough as Hurley. Time to take the rose colored glasses off.

 

[Johnny619]

I am just embarrassed for you Richmond supporters...

WOW

 

[TigerBlood87]

Vickery already taught Ryder a lesson. Hurley can get it too

 

[Donakebab]

Time to stop talking about Vickery in a thread that has nothing to do with him.

 

[Slattery_20]

Vickery already taught Ryder a lesson. Hurley can get it too

Do tell...
The only times (2009, & the 2nd game in 2011) they've played on each other, Ryder has comfortably taken the chocolates. Vickery played well against us in the earlier game last year, at the opposite end of the ground to Ryder. Beat Fletcher, which is a good feather in his cap.

 

[theflea]

Do tell...
The only times (2009, & the 2nd game in 2011) they've played on each other, Ryder has comfortably taken the chocolates. Vickery played well against us in the earlier game last year, at the opposite end of the ground to Ryder. Beat Fletcher, which is a good feather in his cap.

he was talking about the wrestle. comeon slatts keep up!