Toast John McCarthy

[Ed D]

Was Liam Jurrah a loss as well ???? Never on our list, but surely we should have had him tied up.

There was a mention of this in another thread. Basically he never applied for the National Draft and then got a late acceptance the the Rookie Draft where Melbourne used pick 1 on him. So under the circumstances, we couldn't get him, but if we really wanted him we could have got him to apply for the National Draft (assuming we wanted him on the senior list).

 

[MarkT2]

Rocca had to go. We had no room for Sav and Anthony in the one team. What we did wrong with Sav is get nothing for him.

No point arguing every point - we won the flag in the end so I can take it all as it comes (or went). However we let Sav go and picked up Cummings so any argument about list structure is flawed. Not getting anything for Sav was the icing.

Michael & Williams were post 2000. Scauble was another off the top who won a Swans B&F. Can't recall the timing with Sanderson who won a Geelong B&F but he was probably a Shaw decision.

 

[mdc]

No point arguing every point - we won the flag in the end so I can take it all as it comes (or went). However we let Sav go and picked up Cummings so any argument about list structure is flawed. Not getting anything for Sav was the icing.

Cummings had kicked 95 goals in 1999, and another 47 from 13 games in 2000. We gambled that we'd be able to get him fit, which obviously backfired, but when healthy turn-of-the-decade Scott Cummings was a much, much better player than Sav Rocca.

Fair enough about not getting anything for him, although at the time I don't think anyone would have guessed that the Roos would have selected him as high as they did. IIRC, Sav himself was very unsure of whether he'd get another chance.

 

[Ed D]

Didn't Sav have knee problems at the time as well? You would assume that the club would have tried to trade him before delisting him, but I still thought he was doing a reasonable job.

 

[Gone Critical]

More the other way around. Due to some off field shenanigans, Scotland was called into MM's office and told that he would never again play for Collingwood. So he had no real choice but to walk.

Williams IMO was a disaster. He was the second best player at the club at the time.

Was Liam Jurrah a loss as well ???? Never on our list, but surely we should have had him tied up.

Sorry but cant have that. That trade worked for Sydney in they got Williams who won 2 B&Fs an AA and a flag with them. We got pick 8 and 38 and swapped them for Jimmy Clement and Brodie Holland. Holland was a servicble pick up but Clement was a gem

Where is the disaster?

 

[sr36]

Sorry but cant have that. That trade worked for Sydney in they got Williams who won 2 B&Fs an AA and a flag with them. We got pick 8 and 38 and swapped them for Jimmy Clement and Brodie Holland. Holland was a servicble pick up but Clement was a gem

Where is the disaster?

Yep it was a big win for the pies and the swans and a big loss for freo.

 

[MarkT2]

Cummings had kicked 95 goals in 1999, and another 47 from 13 games in 2000. We gambled that we'd be able to get him fit, which obviously backfired, but when healthy turn-of-the-decade Scott Cummings was a much, much better player than Sav Rocca.

Sav kicked 100 goals in his first 25 games of senior football for Collingwood.

 

[MarkT2]

Sorry but cant have that. That trade worked for Sydney in they got Williams who won 2 B&Fs an AA and a flag with them. We got pick 8 and 38 and swapped them for Jimmy Clement and Brodie Holland. Holland was a servicble pick up but Clement was a gem

Where is the disaster?

I have herd this spin for a decade now. We gave up a gun who won 2 B&Fs at Sydney and played in a premiership. If we wanted Clement and Holland then we could have traded players and/or picks regardles of the Sydney deal.

That's the difference between premiership list builing and the also rans.

 

[mdc]

Sav kicked 100 goals in his first 25 games of senior football for Collingwood.

No he didn't (it was 30 games), but in any case it's pretty irrelevant considering he was several years removed from that sort of form by 2000. His last 2 years with the Pies he only managed 24 games and 60 goals (mediocre return for a strict full-forward who did nothing else pre-2000).

I have herd this spin for a decade now. We gave up a gun who won 2 B&Fs at Sydney and played in a premiership. If we wanted Clement and Holland then we could have traded players and/or picks regardles of the Sydney deal.

That's the difference between premiership list builing and the also rans.

Such bizarre thinking. It's not "spin" to be pleased that you've done well out of a trade, even if another party also did well.

We upgraded significantly. Sydney upgraded significantly. Freo got shafted. Could we have gotten Clement + Holland without giving away the disgruntled Paul Williams? Maybe. But it probably would have taken Burns or Presti or someone equally valuable.

It's so hard to make significant net gain trades in football that being upset about such a trade is lunacy.

 

[Quicky]

Back to the OP...

It's arguments like this that makes me wish I was one of the video highlights makers. I'd love to make a highlights package of the different skill sets that McCarthy showed in this game. His field kicking, contested work, overhead marking, quick hands it was all there in this game if you were looking. It was of course interspersed by some mistakes but I expect that given McCarthys understandable rustiness. That he showed AFL level attributes is what has me excited.

 

[mattys123]

I'll argue with anyone who says McCarthy will never "make it".

He has 2 obstacles in his way from my view;

1. Fitness; Ever since he has been at the club, he has never had a full season "injury free" to show what he is capable of, if he can get lucky and produce that in 2011, he will develop very quickly.

2. Lack of exposure/experience; Since being selected in the 2007 draft, he has managed only 10 games, but at 21 years old, he still has time on his side. But he needs to get senior games under his belt, and preferably against weaker opposition to increase his confidence.

He has the ability, he just needs luck and some exposure at the top level, and the world could be his oyster.

A fit, and slightly improved version of J-MAC would make our list a lot stronger, without a doubt.

 

[kevind]

Sorry but cant have that. That trade worked for Sydney in they got Williams who won 2 B&Fs an AA and a flag with them. We got pick 8 and 38 and swapped them for Jimmy Clement and Brodie Holland. Holland was a servicble pick up but Clement was a gem

Where is the disaster?[/quote]

The 2002 GF.

Williams could have made the difference. Clement was one of the best 3rd tall defenders we have ever had. But he was never going to have a great impact on the game as he was not going to shut down either Brown or Lynch. Williams was that extra class midfielder/crumbing forward we lacked. As for Brodie Holland, I never thought much of him as a player or as a person for that matter.

It is fair to say ,IMO, we could have picked up Clement without too much of a loss. The Freo coach of the time never rated Clement as he considered him too soft. So I believe we payed way over the odds in losing our second best player in Williams.

I know we can all look clever with hindsight, but I never liked the deal at the time and I still don't. Couple that with the disaster of trading the no. 3 pick in 1999 and you have some good reasons we never won in 2002.

Thank God, that our decision making has improved dramatically over the later part of this decade and has become a benchmark for the competition.

 

[Swooop]

I'll argue with anyone who says McCarthy will never "make it".

He has the ability, he just needs luck and some exposure at the top level, and the world could be his oyster.

A fit, and slightly improved version of J-MAC would make our list a lot stronger, without a doubt.

Yep, I agree with all this.

I saw him play a VFL game last year, and he completely dominated, was head and shoulders above the rest. Did as he pleased, like Judd on a good day, albeit in the reserves!

I'll be amazed if he doesn't make it...as matty said though, pending injury and opportunity.

If he can't make it, it'll just show there's a huge difference between VFL and AFL. Pods didn't make it seem too big though, but maybe different between marking forward and mid.

Hope he plays again Saturday.

 

[DaVe86]

I wrote about him in my preview this week.

I think he looked great the other night and his footskills were very good.

However, I can't go past the fact that he has no idea in front of goal. He would have to be one of the worst set shots on our list...and he aint much better on the run either.


He won't crack into our midfield...which means if he is in our 22 he has to play forward flank like Beams and Blair have had to settle for.

Unfortunately, considering he is so bad in front of goal...he becomes a bit of a liability. Beams, Blair and Sidebottom have great goal sense, so they fit well up forward.


But he showed promising signs against West Coast. Best he's looked in a while.

 

[MarkT2]

No he didn't (it was 30 games), but in any case it's pretty irrelevant considering he was several years removed from that sort of form by 2000. His last 2 years with the Pies he only managed 24 games and 60 goals (mediocre return for a strict full-forward who did nothing else pre-2000).

Sav out for Cummings in was poor list management decision making reflective of why didn't win a flag after bottoming out. It really is that simple.

Such bizarre thinking. It's not "spin" to be pleased that you've done well out of a trade, even if another party also did well.

The spin is linking 2 deals. We did a poor deal for Williams. He was an out and out gun. I'd have preferred MM convinced him he was loved and should stay which is the first failing but putting that aside he was worth a first round pick plus some. The Clement deal was a good one but didn't need the Swans deal. We already had draft picks and players to trade. The Holland deal was ok but really had no impact on anything results wise.

Could we have gotten Clement + Holland without giving away the disgruntled Paul Williams? Maybe. But it probably would have taken Burns or Presti or someone equally valuable.

Don;t really care about Holland to be frank but of course we could have gotten them. Freo got shafted but you think we'd have been forced to give up a Burns or Presti? Remotely simialr draft picks would have done it but history says maybe even less and a fringe player may have been tossed into the mix. Bottom line is the Freo deal adn the Sydney deal were two seperate deals and are only linked for convenuiance and spin.

It's so hard to make significant net gain trades in football that being upset about such a trade is lunacy.

I am (was) upset we didn't do a good enough job of list management to win flags. As good as Clement was he wasn't enough in combination with the rest of the list decisions to get us a flag and that is in spite of haveing as a good a group of draft picks as anyone.

Add Paul Williams to 2002 and we win IMO. Add a ruckman to 2002 and we win IMO. Add Pavlich to 2002 and we win IMO. It can be a fine line and we fell short. Thankfully we got it right often enough this time around. As I've said many times, thank Christ for Hine. I wasn't convinced early on but he has been fantastic overall.

 

[Wooljay]

Couple days late, but how does everyone think he faired in the GF on Friday night? He didn't stand out as much as I felt he did against WCE, but how good was that goal from the pocket with the delivery from Caff? I still definitely feel he deserves at least a few games at AFL level this season.

 

[mattys123]

J-MAC is still an interesting case for me.

The other night he struggled, yet with that one moment of brilliance, he showed all hope isn't lost.

I hope he gets a run of 3-4 games in a row at some point in the seniors, just so he can get some confidence and show what he has got.

 

[daics_35]

He deffs has some skill, I actually thought he was decent on Friday but at the end of the year we have to cut at least four players and I dont think he is better then four players on the senior list.

 

[The New Breid]

He shows glimpses of brilliance most times we see him. He's also proven to be far too classy for VFL.

I really hope he gets an extended run without injuries to see if he's capable of settling into senior footy.

 

[Number 10]

He shows glimpses of brilliance most times we see him. He's also proven to be far too classy for VFL.

I really hope he gets an extended run without injuries to see if he's capable of settling into senior footy.

I''m not having a go at him, but could he be trade bait for the end of the year? A team in the bottom 8 isn't VFL, but it isn't the standard of the Pies. Not sure what we'd get for him but we should try get something.

I just don't see him cracking our 22 ever when Beams, Sidebottom, Pendles, Wellingham, Thomas, Blair are all similar age and far superior and no doubt there will be a few gems bob up (Jye Bolton) in a few years.

 

[sr36]

I reckon that he is an absolutely fantastic prospect. He seems to have it all - except for physical durability. If he can keep healthy it won't matter whose ahead of him in the pecking order, he'll leap frog many and become one of the top ten runners in the team - which is all you need to be to get a game with modern rotations.

 

[pauly_moss]

Leap frog who????

Swan, Pendlebury, Thomas, Didak, Shaw, Sidebottom, Beams, Toovey, Blair, Ball, Wellingham, Davis, Krakouer, Johnson, Buckley, Dick

Thats 16 smaller players that I think are currently ahead of him.

There are young players that will go past him, McCarthy will only get games if injuries occur

 

[mdc]

Leap frog who????

Swan, Pendlebury, Thomas, Didak, Shaw, Sidebottom, Beams, Toovey, Blair, Ball, Wellingham, Davis, Krakouer, Johnson, Buckley, Dick

Thats 16 smaller players that I think are currently ahead of him.

Davis, Johnson, Krakouer and Ball will all likely be gone within 3 years, and he's a better talent than Buckley, Toovey and Blair (though the latter 2 are obviously miles in front on performance). Dick is in the same potential-but-injured boat, which leaves just 8 ahead of him regardless of what he does.

Rusling got 6 years despite being a lesser talent imo (and it was the right decision to keep him that long), so I imagine McCarthy will get plenty of time as well. Unless the younger players actually show that they will definitely go past him, he stays on the list. So far, they haven't.

 

[Scodog10]

Davis, Johnson, Krakouer and Ball will all likely be gone within 3 years.

Wow that's a tough call. I can't see the guy playing too far into his 30's but he's only 26! To put that into context O'bree was 31 when we moved him on and Ball definitely has him covered. I'd be very surprised if we don't get 5 more season's, including this one, out of him. Barring injury of course.

 

[pauly_moss]

At least Dick has already teared games apart including a 5 goal haul, Blair has already had a 28 possesion game, Toovey has more talent in his left nut then J-Mac. McCarthy has played AFL games and has done nothing compared to those 3 he is well behind them on talent. Ball will not be gone in 3 years, as I doubt will Krak (same age as Didak and Maxwell) and if he is 24 and just breaking into the side then that is way to long away Johnson and Davis will have retired agree but then you are assuming that none off.....

Fasalo, Bolton, Rounds, Ugle, Seedsman, Thomas, Sinclair, Farmer or Young.... add to this any other player that we pick up over the years will not go ahead off him.

I think Buckley is a better player then McCarthy at the moment how ever that is fair to say that can be debated so thats just a matter of opinion there.

But peolpe must face the fact on McCarthy he is a fringe player that would struggle to get a consistant game at most top 8 clubs, for a bottom 8 side to pick him up it wouldnt improve their list to head to a top 8 side.

Now he could do a Swan and blossum and that would be awesome but I really dont see it.