Bumped Jordan Murdoch

[Bobby_]

Where is this guy at?
After having one of his best games of his career last weekend against Carlton, I was looking forward to seeing that same kind of urgency and run in tonight's game. While the disposal count was low, I was more hopeful he would provide us with some good defensive efforts (plenty of tackles) but 3 for the game is really not good enough for a guy who has been in the system for a while now.

Is Jordan one of those players who will begin to elevate his game as he begins to embark on 75, 100 games?
Or has he reached his ceiling and only when the players around him play well, does he look an exciting talent capable of so much more?

 

[Cursed Cat]

Jordan Murdoch should line up for his 50th game against the Bombers next week.

Over those games I think we've got a reasonable picture of what attributes Murdoch does and does not have.
He's quick (I actually think he *has* backed his pace a little bit more since his return to the side in rd3), he does provide two-way run and accountability (and you're right Bobby_ , he should *always* be providing more defensive pressure than what I saw from him against the Eagles. Not that he was the Lone Ranger), he has a long left-foot kick, and he has developed some degree of goal sense.
Oh and now is probably a good time to point out that he's been relatively durable, too.

He's not a higher possession accumulator, he's not the type to win his own ball with regularity, and at this stage of his career he seems to lack certain leadership qualities which precludes him from taking more ownership of the team. He often kicks indiscriminately.
He should also be taking the occasional grab with his athleticism and build, fwiw.

So; pros and cons, like most players.

The best I hope for is that the Gap between his better games and crapper games significantly diminishes over a reasonable period of time.
I think the 75-100 game mark your nominated is realistic; you'd hope that by 70-75 games you had a keeper on your hands and all that investment wasn't misplaced.

The Carlton game was an anomaly, they were woeful; players should be measured by how well they play on big occasions against good opposition, and Murdoch still hasn't proven himself with any great conviction.

To me his career has followed a Varcoe-like trajectory, without all the W's and couple of premiership medals; a quick, outside-ish player selected routinely on potential more so than output, got through by applying solid forward pressure and kicking the odd goal but never really put up big stats. Varcoe hit his peak 2010-'11, by which time he'd played 56 games leading into 2010 and 76 games leading into 2011.
By that measure - which some might find a bit arbitrary - Murdoch shouldn't be too far away from that period in a player's career where they are able to contribute consistently at the higher-end of their potential.

 

[kicksome]

Where is this guy at?
After having one of his best games of his career last weekend against Carlton,

I could've kicked 4 goals against carlolton last week i reckon

 

[catman2006]

Kid is still learning but need to narrow the gap of consistency between playing so well against Carlton and playing poor

 

[cynical]

throw him in at stoppages we don't really have much to lose, at worst he might improve his inside game

as a pure outside player he lacks footy smarts

 

[catempire]

In a team that has a weak midfield he struggles. He needs to get on the end of strong inside work because he doesn't have the footy smarts to find his own ball.

I think he'd kill it at a Sydney or Freo. He's a weapon when he is being fed the ball.

For now he is going to ride the bumps with the fortunes of our midfield (see last week v yesterday). The good thing is, he will be of prime age by the time we restock our inside mids.

 

[Willo_]

A player who IMO is at his best when he is playing on pure instinct he is never going to be a star every single week

If he can close the gap between his best and his worst we will be a much better side for it

 

[Moneypenny]

I think he's learning as he goes. It'll be a slower process than most want or hope for, but he's already won a few games for us of his own accord. Maybe at 75 games he'll learn how to run out of a pack with the footy in a contest at will, and at 85 learn how to battle through on a tough day. When learning how you fit into a team and the limits of your abilities it's hard to manage and monitor everyone else's performances too, but he'll get there. It's a tough balancing act, for sure. But I don't think we can say for certain he's going nowhere. Patience!

 

[Cosmic Energy]

The Carlton game was an anomaly, they were woeful; players should be measured by how well they play on big occasions against good opposition, and Murdoch still hasn't proven himself with any great conviction.

To me his career has followed a Varcoe-like trajectory, without all the W's and couple of premiership medals; a quick, outside-ish player selected routinely on potential more so than output, got through by applying solid forward pressure and kicking the odd goal but never really put up big stats. Varcoe hit his peak 2010-'11, by which time he'd played 56 games leading into 2010 and 76 games leading into 2011.
By that measure - which some might find a bit arbitrary - Murdoch shouldn't be too far away from that period in a player's career where they are able to contribute consistently at the higher-end of their potential.

Varcoe went 22 - 31 - 31 in goals from 2009 - 2011. Murdoch kicked his 22 last year, and is averaging around a goal a game this year boosted by the Carlton game. We do need those goals from the smaller guys, not sure I see Murdoch getting in to the 30s consistently. On top of his running ability Varcoe was one of the better crumbing guys we've had, whereas I see Murdoch playing more that Isaac Smith type of link up role who kicks the odd running goal, around the 20 goals a year mark. Varcoe was perhaps a bit wasted (in our setup anyway) looking for some run from defence in the last couple of years, as have been a few guys with goal kicking talent as our midfield depth drops away. Perhaps TV would have been well-suited to this new set up with Hawkins & Clark.

You'd think we'd hang on to all our early 20s guys with senior experience for a while so Murdoch will get lots of opportunities to develop this year and next at least.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Massive overreaction to one game. He wasn't a superstar after last week and he's not a spud after this week. He's just a young guy finding his way in AFL who's yet to find consistency of performance.

 

[Daniel McL]

Think he will come good once our younger mids keep developing nicely, win some more of their own footy & feed the ball out to him.

What are people's thoughts on this:
- Dropping Kersten
- Moving Murdoch to Kersten's role mostly inside 50 who can pressure well with his pace but also create space for Hawk, etc.
- Not a 3rd tall forward, more like just another forward & we have our two main targets Hawk & Clark.
- So with dropping Kersten & moving Murdoch to his position it frees up a spot for someone to take Murdoch's spot on the wing.
- Bring Blease or Cockatoo in for Kersten & they can play on the wing in Murdoch's current position.

Thoughts?

 

[year of the cat]

In a team that has a weak midfield he struggles. He needs to get on the end of strong inside work because he doesn't have the footy smarts to find his own ball.

I think he'd kill it at a Sydney or Freo. He's a weapon when he is being fed the ball.

For now he is going to ride the bumps with the fortunes of our midfield (see last week v yesterday). The good thing is, he will be of prime age by the time we restock our inside mids.

This. If we can't get the ball to him he's next to useless. Start winning the ball as we did against the Blues and he will come into the game and cause damage. Another reason why Dangerfield/S.Selwood etc are priority number 1,2,3,4,5........

 

[cynical]

Think he will come good once our younger mids keep developing nicely, win some more of their own footy & feed the ball out to him.

What are people's thoughts on this:
- Dropping Kersten
- Moving Murdoch to Kersten's role mostly inside 50 who can pressure well with his pace but also create space for Hawk, etc.
- Not a 3rd tall forward, more like just another forward & we have our two main targets Hawk & Clark.
- So with dropping Kersten & moving Murdoch to his position it frees up a spot for someone to take Murdoch's spot on the wing.
- Bring Blease or Cockatoo in for Kersten & they can play on the wing in Murdoch's current position.

Thoughts?

Murdoch needs to be getting more of the ball not less, we aren't winning a flag any time soon so I'd rather Murdoch be played in the middle getting 15 possessions a game instead of up forward getting 10.

Dropping Kersten also means we might as well delist him at the end of the year.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

Think he will come good once our younger mids keep developing nicely, win some more of their own footy & feed the ball out to him.

What are people's thoughts on this:
- Dropping Kersten
- Moving Murdoch to Kersten's role mostly inside 50 who can pressure well with his pace but also create space for Hawk, etc.
- Not a 3rd tall forward, more like just another forward & we have our two main targets Hawk & Clark.
- So with dropping Kersten & moving Murdoch to his position it frees up a spot for someone to take Murdoch's spot on the wing.
- Bring Blease or Cockatoo in for Kersten & they can play on the wing in Murdoch's current position.

Thoughts?

I'd rather persist with getting games into all of them than cutting young guys after a poor team performance. Harry Taylor was worse than Kersten, played with zero accountability.

Pretty hard for Kersten to get involved in a game where we couldn't get the ball past the half way line and the delivery he did get was dismal. Blicavs should have hit him lace out in the first but he turned it into an assist and I clearly remember another one that should have been on his chest as well that landed at his toes. Not saying he didn't cluck one or two that he should have but the rest of team sure weren't helping him out.

Very hard for outside players to get involved with nobody winning it on the inside and very hard for forwards trying to find form with completely absent midfield.

 

[Jon Douglas]

On the viewings I have seen (most games) he lacks intensity and commitment to go in and get the ball when required. Not a hard nut IMO.

Good going forward and so in a team that wins most games he would look ok but in a losing side like we have ta present he looks pretty ordinary to me.

Yes he is young but look at Gregson - has made one mistake in that very ordinary missed tackle against the Hawks but since then he has put his body on the line. Its all in the head - and we need more Gregsons and less Murdochs IMO.

Of course Murdoch could still turn it around but generally the stuff above your shoulders does not change much. Rooke was probably not as skilled as Murdoch but he had what we need in spades.

I hate to say this but he could be another Tenace for us if he does not start changing his attack on the ball. It does not matter that you are mainly an outside player - there are time you just have to go and sometimes what I see is a half effort and he seems concerned (as I would - but then again I am no AFL listed footy player) about being hit.

 

[fpm84]

On the viewings I have seen (most games) he lacks intensity and commitment to go in and get the ball when required. Not a hard nut IMO.

Good going forward and so in a team that wins most games he would look ok but in a losing side like we have ta present he looks pretty ordinary to me.

Yes he is young but look at Gregson - has made one mistake in that very ordinary missed tackle against the Hawks but since then he has put his body on the line. Its all in the head - and we need more Gregsons and less Murdochs IMO.

Disagree. No football team wants 22 hard nut players and no outside flair. The best teams are balanced. I'd take any of Isaac Smith, Jack Martin, Lewis Jetta, Stephen Hill or Andrew Gaff at Geelong yet the exact same criticism could be levelled at any of those players.

As others have said, Murdoch has a lot of desirable attributes, top of the list of his pace and long kicking. Right now we are terrible at winning the contested ball which means guys like Murdoch and Motlop aren't able to play at their best.

As the team improves over time with Duncan, Caddy and Guthrie, plus maybe Dangerfield and/or Scott Selwood, Cockatoo etc winning ball, the likes of Murdoch will become far more effective than they currently are.

 

[Jon Douglas]

I respectfully disagree fmp84 (in context of the present).

Just because your a hard nut player does not mean you cannot have flair. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive attributes IMO.

But, as you pointed out, we do not have enough hard nut ball winners getting the ball to are outside players to be effective. So what do you need most of all - guys who get the ball - then you need these guys to be good decision makers and then for them to have the skills to be able to do what they have elected to do. Then you need your outside runners.

If we do not have enough - and that means an absolute majority - of hard nut ball winners then there is little use for outside runners like Murdoch.

Right now GFC need more hard nut ball magnets - full stop. if we had say 3-4 more hard nut mids that averaged 25 possies a game, half a dozen tackles and pressure acts - then Murdoch would probably play better and do some good stuff. Well maybe as I am not sold just yet. But without them he needs to develop an inside game that sees him get more ball and therefore be more effective.

I would think GFC sees Cocky as a player that could get his own ball, have numerous tackles AND be a great outside running player - all of what we need in one player (except KP player's criteria which are somewhat different). When we have enough of these type of players (hard to come by if they are any good - Dangerfield is another I can think off that ticks all the boxes) - we will be a formidable side - then again so would any other team if they had enough of these type of players.

I like what the Dogs are doing - they have a very good group of hard nuts getting a fair amount of the ball. They win games without a lot of KP players because winning the ball comes first - and there is daylight to the second requirement.

Murdoch for me then suits a team that has a solid group of inside mids that runs deep. We do not have that - and whether he would be a better player with such a group behind him is somewhat irrelevant because we don't. These guys are the icing on the cake IMO.

Right now we need all the GFC players to stand up and be more contested in their play - whether getting the ball or harassing an opposition player with the ball. And Murdoch could do the second part with his leg speed but he really does not do enough of this - and that tells me his head space is wrong. We have Gregson - one pre-season and 8 senior games and he is doing more of these things that make a team work better than Murdoch. And he is no quicker and he is a lot smaller. Unfortunately that says a lot to me.

I think we moved Varcoe on because he was largely just an outside runner and we could not afford a player just to be an outside runner anymore. They had to attack the ball and the opposition more to get us back into winning big gamers and finals. Why should we, if I am right, accept less from Murdoch ? Sure he is a bit younger but by 50 games you should be able to do those other 1 percentage things that make a difference over a whole game.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Murdoch is going ok - played very well against Carlton

His biggest asset by far is he is a magnificent kick - i like when he boots those 65metre drop punts

Now Geelong had a shocking day on Sunday - and where going to get annihilated no matter where they put the players= so they had nothing to lose - because it was a formality they were going to get beaten badly

One thing that infuriated me was the kicking in from fullback - 3 players shared it - Thurlow Enright and Mackie -none of them are long kicks- Mackie struggles to kick the thing 50 metres - it was reminiscent of the 94 GFnightmare - with Oreilly and Hinkley unable to clear the lines ( the ball coming immediately back into the danger zone) from kick ins from fullback

Murdoch can kick 65-70 metre drop punts - he would have been far more effective kicking the ball in - than those piddly nothing kicks - by the 3 kickers on Sunday

 

[vinum coupe]

70 metres?

 

[vinum coupe]

It's interesting how we all see players.

I do actually think Murdoch is a hard nut.
And I don't think he's a magnificent kick.

Ask him to kick 30 and he is really nice. Any longer and anything could happen.

I remember seeing him kick about 40 in the VFL and it was a flat punted shank that just made the points.
5 minutes later he kicked what looked to be an identical fiat punt and it went 20m further.

That's what is so great about flat punts. They carry.
But Murdoch is really struggling with long drop punts.

 

[Lana]

It's interesting how we all see players.

I do actually think Murdoch is a hard nut.
And I don't think he's a magnificent kick.

Ask him to kick 30 and he is really nice. Any longer and anything could happen.

I remember seeing him kick about 40 in the VFL and it was a flat punted shank that just made the points.
5 minutes later he kicked what looked to be an identical fiat punt and it went 20m further.

That's what is so great about flat punts. They carry.
But Murdoch is really struggling with long drop punts.

It's not that he is an accurate kick but that he can kick it long, he one of those players who gets the ball runs 15 meters then kicks it 55. Which if done at the right time can get go over most of the other teams defensive structures.

I can't agree that he's a hard nut, he doesn't win a lot of his own ball. He as outside as they come.

 

[Bobby_]

I can't agree that he's a hard nut, he doesn't win a lot of his own ball. He as outside as they come.

Just because he's an outside player doesn't mean he's soft though (not a hard nut). That is just where he plays his best football using his preferred physical attributes on the wings & flanks.
He, like Motlop, are not the best contested ball winners as they haven't played that position until only recently, due to the teams poor midfield which is devoid of pace and sheer brilliance.

 

[Lana]

Just because he's an outside player doesn't mean he's soft though (not a hard nut). That is just where he plays his best football using his preferred physical attributes on the wings & flanks.
He, like Motlop, are not the best contested ball winners as they haven't played that position until only recently, due to the teams poor midfield which is devoid of pace and sheer brilliance.

Never said he was soft, just because he isn't hard doesn't mean he is soft. Its a spectrum rather than a dichotomy.

 

[Jon Douglas]

But we have 50 senior games now to judge Murdoch's body of work. yes he has done some nice stuff but never consistently. As I have said soon Gregson will over take him on the highlight reels in less than 10 senior games and far fewer pre-seasons.

Ask yourself why we moved Varcoe on ? He was not a bad player and so far has produced a lot more than Murdoch has. Yes he has had more opportunities to do so but they are similar in that they are not hard at it players. They tend to shirk hard contact. Watch the replays.

We love Selwood because he is so hard - never gives in and puts his body on the line all the time. Now not all players can have Selwood's attitude but they should be trying to emulate when it is their time to go.

Right now we need hard nuts more than we ever have in the last decade and poor old Selwood plus a few others are holding up the dam wall while others are not really doing enough. And Murdoch with 50 games is one of those players. Look at Lang tackle - he is just so much better than Murdoch is at tackling - but has a smaller body and is no quicker than Murdoch - yet he throws himself into the tackle.

Its about your mental attitude.

I am not sold on Caddy either but he has the right attitude - at least he goes hard. You cannot have players that do not go 100 % at the ball when it is their time to go. The game has changed. It's crazy out there these days. But that is the game they are playing now. Those who do not go 100 % become a weak link.

Look at the Doggies. Have they really got more talent across the park than us ? What they have got is a heap 100 % hard at players that make it hard to beat them in the contest. And it is the winner of the ground ball contests that usually wins the game - the big games like we used to.

I think people have different perspectives and see different things about players - but I have not seen Murdoch throw himself into contest with reckless abandon that just has to be done sometimes. If we saw Selwood act like Murdoch when the ball was near him we would be in shock. We need to build a team that is hard to play against - and that means being hard at the ball and still being able to run on the outside.

The two big things in today's footy is contested ball and run and carry (creating overlaps, breaking the lines/press with quick hands or leg speed). So it is no longer you are one or the other - you need to be able to do both. Get the pill when it is your turn and then when it is your turn run with the ball (except for KPP).

Murdoch can run yes but he cannot get enough of his own ball. And he is not that great a kick either. He is a long kick but he does mongrel the ball sometimes as well. No point kicking 60 m straight into the hands of the opposition ! For me he is an unproven player - someone when I walked out on the footy field with I would not know if he was seriously 100 % effort and commitment to do what he can to do all he can to help win the game for the team.

If you have not got the skills to do this fair enough - maybe he has not - or he still needs time to develop those skills. But if he is not mentally 100 % committed by now every time he walks out with a GFC jumper on I think his days as effective player for us are numbered. Results is what ultimately counts and you need to be a skilled and 100 % committed player these days to be a consistently effective player that helps the team get the result.

 

[Lana]

My bad.
Saying you don't believe he's a hard nut because he doesn't win a lot of his own ball kind of sounded like you were eluding to that he's soft.

Selwood a hard nut, Caddy's becoming a hard nut, kelly, Chapman are hard nuts. Murdoch isn't one, Motlop isn't one, which is fine, they don't all have to be hardnuts but when it is there turn to go in they need to go. Which for the most part they do which satisfies me.