News Lower Delisted

[Kickett Punches Read]

I just don't see the issue. He was a solid battler, are we missing the likes of Dodd and co.?

The issue is that our supposed depth is being whitled away to nothing. You can't just lose all of McPhee, broughton and lower and expect it not to hurt. Unless we get no injuries next year, this will cost us.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

Why does this seem to be handled badly ?
We may have tried to trade him with no takers for that type of player. We simply don't know that Bond didn't try.

FCS we now have the best list we have ever had yet people suggest everything is being handled badly.
IMO Bond and Lloyd are going beautifully.

But a good list contains depth, in reality, losing McPhee, broughton, lower and Roberton we have probably lost say two top 22 players and two top 28 players, all we have gained to replace that is one debatable top 22 player in danyle Pearce. I don't see how you can say our list now is better than what it was 6 months ago

 

[freocuz]

The issue is that our supposed depth is being whitled away to nothing. You can't just lose all of McPhee, broughton and lower and expect it not to hurt. Unless we get no injuries next year, this will cost us.

So you are suggesting it's better to have a number of older players in the WAFL as backup in case of injuries, rather than having a number of younger players with more talent developing and being chucked in at the deep end if necessary?

If the youngsters all turn out to be spuds, then I'll agree with you. If they don't, then I believe we aren't losing depth.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

So you are suggesting it's better to have a number of older players in the WAFL as backup in case of injuries, rather than having a number of younger players with more talent developing and being chucked in at the deep end if necessary?

If the youngsters all turn out to be spuds, then I'll agree with you. If they don't, then I believe we aren't losing depth.

I believe you need a mixture of both. You need hard bodies and committed players, we have now lost our two hardest and most committed players. This will hurt us, I have absolutely no doubt about that

 

[Nickos66]

So you are suggesting it's better to have a number of older players in the WAFL as backup in case of injuries, rather than having a number of younger players with more talent developing and being chucked in at the deep end if necessary?

If the youngsters all turn out to be spuds, then I'll agree with you. If they don't, then I believe we aren't losing depth.

You've more or less answered your own question here, the 'older' guys, who are all mid 20's fill an immediate need and we KNOW are capable of stepping up immediately to fill a void. whereas the youngsters, whilst 'talented' because we look for the best traits in our skinny teenagers by nature 'could be anything'. Well we just had something, and that 'anything' isn't capable right now of filling that void, nor may it be in the future.

 

[E Shed]

But a good list contains depth, in reality, losing McPhee, broughton, lower and Roberton we have probably lost say two top 22 players and two top 28 players, all we have gained to replace that is one debatable top 22 player in danyle Pearce. I don't see how you can say our list now is better than what it was 6 months ago

2 words - Josh Simpson.

 

[Seppo]

3 words - Pre Season Draft.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

But a good list contains depth, in reality, losing McPhee, broughton, lower and Roberton we have probably lost say two top 22 players and two top 28 players, all we have gained to replace that is one debatable top 22 player in danyle Pearce. I don't see how you can say our list now is better than what it was 6 months ago

I disagree with you on the rankings of those players.
Only Mcphee is / was best 22 . Broughton was not best 22 in the opinion of Ross Lyon and probably would have been used sparingly as a depth player. ( From Chris Bond's POV that was unacceptable because of the backended contract he had ).

As for Lower and Roberton , they are not top 28 quality. They would both be around 33 to 35 th.
Essentially any list manager would want his 33 rd and upwards ranked player to be a development player.
Nick Lower was not a development player.
Roberton is debatable but his talent does not appear to be ahead of the other youngsters we have recently acquired and besides, it's academic because he was returning to Victoria under any circumstances.

Personally I believe we have lost nothing that we urgently need and have injected exciting talent.

Clearly you have an agenda with Bond and Lloyd. I do not share your view on those managers.
You also have a poor opinion of Danyle Pearce; I am baffled by that as I am confident he will scorch it up in our team.

I still contend our list is better than it has ever been, ever.

 

[valkorum]

3 words - Ross the Boss

 

[paul8241]

You've more or less answered your own question here, the 'older' guys, who are all mid 20's fill an immediate need and we KNOW are capable of stepping up immediately to fill a void. whereas the youngsters, whilst 'talented' because we look for the best traits in our skinny teenagers by nature 'could be anything'. Well we just had something, and that 'anything' isn't capable right now of filling that void, nor may it be in the future.

I think the thing that KPR, myself and a few others are concerned about is that we may now have to reward potential with games, rather than performance.

Last year was the first time I can recall that our WAFL form warranted selection but didn't automatically result in promotion. Most of the younger guys are not yet dominating WAFL, so have not yet reach the level deserving of that opportunity. If they can do it this year, then Lower and Broughtons loss will be easier to accept.

 

[rgauci]

Lots of clubs lost depth (I'm listing only retirements, or players that have been picked up by other clubs, anyone delisted and not picked up is not worth listing):

Collingwood: Dawes, Wellingham, Tarrant, Young (gains: Q.Lynch, Young, Russell)
Adelaide: Tippett, Knights, Doughty (Graham)
Hawks: Young, Gilham, Murphy, Bateman (Lake)
Fremantle: McPhee, Lower, Broughton, Roberton, Grover (D.Pearce)
Geelong: Byrnes, Scarlett, Gillies, Wojcinski, Bruce, Hogan (Rivers, McIntosh, Caddy)
North: Edwards, Pederson, McIntosh (Gysbert)
Sydney: TDL, Spangher, Heath (Tippett)
West Coast: Lynch, Stevens, Stevenson, Swift (Wellingham, Cripps, Morton)

Looking over that list, Collingwood, Adelaide and Geelong will be hardest hit. Not surprisingly they attempted to gain the most back (except Adelaide for obvious reasons). The best in terms of net loss vs gain are Sydney and West Coast, though West Coast did it at the cost of draft picks. Only 2 teams made list changes which resulted in an improvement of picks, Fremantle and Collingwood.

Overall our depth will be no different to most other clubs in the AFL. Sydney probably the true exception but they also have a plethora of players approaching retirement.

 

[paul8241]

I disagree with you on the rankings of those players.
Only Mcphee is / was best 22 . Broughton was not best 22 in the opinion of Ross Lyon and probably would have been used sparingly as a depth player. ( From Chris Bond's POV that was unacceptable because of the backended contract he had ).

<b>As for Lower and Roberton , they are not top 28 quality. They would both be around 33 to 35 th.
Essentially any list manager would want his 33 rd and upwards ranked player to be a development player.
Nick Lower was not a development player.</b>
Roberton is debatable but his talent does not appear to be ahead of the other youngsters we have recently acquired and besides, it's academic because he was returning to Victoria under any circumstances.

Personally I believe we have lost nothing that we urgently need and have injected exciting talent.

Clearly you have an agenda with Bond and Lloyd. I do not share your view on those managers.
You also have a poor opinion of Danyle Pearce; I am baffled by that as I am confident he will scorch it up in our team.

I still contend our list is better than it has ever been, ever.

Completely disagree. Did you base this ranking on age and potential of the list? Or on existing form, playing position, opposition matchups? A list should not be ranked on imagined ability or potential. Whilst I may agree that young kids need opportunities, competition for spots is far more important.

 

[paul8241]

Damn this iPhone, editing and proof reading posts is a bitch.

 

[Freo Shark]

I disagree with you on the rankings of those players.
Only Mcphee is / was best 22 . Broughton was not best 22 in the opinion of Ross Lyon and probably would have been used sparingly as a depth player. ( From Chris Bond's POV that was unacceptable because of the backended contract he had ).

As for Lower and Roberton , they are not top 28 quality. They would both be around 33 to 35 th.
Essentially any list manager would want his 33 rd and upwards ranked player to be a development player.
Nick Lower was not a development player.
Roberton is debatable but his talent does not appear to be ahead of the other youngsters we have recently acquired and besides, it's academic because he was returning to Victoria under any circumstances.

Personally I believe we have lost nothing that we urgently need and have injected exciting talent.

Clearly you have an agenda with Bond and Lloyd. I do not share your view on those managers.
You also have a poor opinion of Danyle Pearce; I am baffled by that as I am confident he will scorch it up in our team.

I still contend our list is better than it has ever been, ever.

Dont entirely agree with your Lower comment and also you seem to contradict yourself re Bond. Enough has been said re Boughts.

Lower went from a top 22\25 player in 2011 to a unfortunate 2012 mixed with suspension then injuries which fouled his games and momentum to show his wares. I dont believe his 33-35 is fair and is still top 30 i.e in the mix re matchups and injuries. He may well have slid further in 2013 but thats where he is now imho.

 

[Nickos66]

I think the thing that KPR, myself and a few others are concerned about is that we may now have to reward potential with games, rather than performance.

Last year was the first time I can recall that our WAFL form warranted selection but didn't automatically result in promotion. Most of the younger guys are not yet dominating WAFL, so have not yet reach the level deserving of that opportunity. If they can do it this year, then Lower and Broughtons loss will be easier to accept.

This is true, and shouldn't be the case. You should never reward potential with games unless you're injury plagued. The guys OR kids that display the best traits get the call up. Nobody gets free passes.

Re: the next bit, the issue is and may be that they never dominate in the WAFL. And then what happens?

 

[paul8241]

This is true, and shouldn't be the case. You should never reward potential with games unless you're injury plagued. The guys OR kids that display the best traits get the call up. Nobody gets free passes.

Re: the next bit, the issue is and may be that they never dominate in the WAFL. And then what happens?

We have often given players a taste of the top level so they can get an appreciation of the work. If they can't work their way back themselves, their career is done. Pitt and Suban have this year to get some runs on the board, will need to start with some good form in the magoos.

 

[pavsbootlace]

2 words - Josh Simpson.

2 words. Jack. Anthony.

 

[ImperialPurple]

we have now lost our two hardest and most committed players.

Matt de Boer might want to disagree with you on that point.

 

[Yodo]

We will see him again in round 2 against the Bulldogs. It will be interesting to see how effective Lower can be in another team. He was always a strong inside player.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

Completely disagree. Did you base this ranking on age and potential of the list? Or on existing form, playing position, opposition matchups? A list should not be ranked on imagined ability or potential. Whilst I may agree that young kids need opportunities, competition for spots is far more important.

I gather you're disagreeing with the ranking of Nick & Dylan.

Looking at the players we have drafted this year and Danyle Pearce we are undoubtedly targetting Speed & skill.

Nick Lower and Dylan Roberton are totally inconsistent with this strategy.
This year we are hoping to see, rightly, the emergence of Crosier, Sheridan, Michie and Lachie Neale. On what they displayed last year in limited opportunities we have every reason to expect they are going to be best 22 in the near future.

These players are better on our list than the two players we have lost.
Adam Mcphee is the only real loss but even then it is assuming he continued on from last year's form.

We have well credentialled people building our list and I totally agree with their strategy.

 

[greatgatsby]

I gather you're disagreeing with the ranking of Nick & Dylan.

Looking at the players we have drafted this year and Danyle Pearce we are undoubtedly targetting Speed & skill.

Nick Lower and Dylan Roberton are totally inconsistent with this strategy.
This year we are hoping to see, rightly, the emergence of Crosier, Sheridan, Michie and Lachie Neale. On what they displayed last year in limited opportunities we have every reason to expect they are going to be best 22 in the near future.

These players are better on our list than the two players we have lost.
Adam Mcphee is the only real loss but even then it is assuming he continued on from last year's form.

We have well credentialled people building our list and I totally agree with their strategy.

So do I.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

We will see him again in round 2 against the Bulldogs. It will be interesting to see how effective Lower can be in another team. He was always a strong inside player.

One thing I would bet on is, if Stephen Hill, Danyle Pearce , Morabito or even Josh Simpson get the ball , Nick Lower won't catch them. All those players I've named there are 80 metre players, while Nick Lower is 40 metres off the boot.

late edit : Come to think of it , there isn't many players in the Freo side he could catch.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

So do I.

So do I , what ?

 

[greatgatsby]

So do I , what ?

I was agreeing with your last sentence. My way of saying that I had nothing further to add to your reasoned argument. Would you like me to add something?

 

[paul8241]

I gather you're disagreeing with the ranking of Nick & Dylan.

Looking at the players we have drafted this year and Danyle Pearce we are undoubtedly targetting Speed & skill.

Nick Lower and Dylan Roberton are totally inconsistent with this strategy.
This year we are hoping to see, rightly, the emergence of Crosier, Sheridan, Michie and Lachie Neale. On what they displayed last year in limited opportunities we have every reason to expect they are going to be best 22 in the near future.

These players are better on our list than the two players we have lost.
Adam Mcphee is the only real loss but even then it is assuming he continued on from last year's form.

We have well credentialled people building our list and I totally agree with their strategy.

I still find it difficult to agree with your idea of the rankings. Lower was first or second in line depth inside midfielder, Dylan was next in line depth half back flanker. That puts them in the 22 - 30, depending on positional needs. I could have found players in the lineup that I'd substitute out for lower on talent alone, but he did not play the same role. Your rankings factor in the potential of the young players, so sure they may have slipped further out by year end, but when they left they weren't. That said, I would have had Nick in the 22 at the bottom of every pack feeding out to mundy and hill.