Matthew Kreuzer vs Paddy Ryder

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

If you could pick either Kreuzer or Ryder to be on your sides list, who would it be? I'm leaning towards Ryder, but in my opinion it is very, very close.

 

[theboxmike]

Ryder....but only because Ryder and Hille work so well together. One athletic and one big ruckmen.

 

[Slattery_20]

Not a lot in it.
Paddy has the capacity to amaze. But also has invisible games. Bit better around goals maybe, touch quicker & a bit better on the defensive side. Don't know what he needs to get the best out of himself more consistently but if he ever does, he could be one of the best players out there bar none. Will he, won't he... that is the question

Kreuzer's a bit more of an endurance athlete, gets to the right places does the right things but doesn't ever go BANG. Looks like he'll be a solid 10-12 year player.

I'd lean slightly towards Ryder, but - given he's been around 2 or 3 years longer - that's probably a pretty good point in favour of Kreuzer.

btw Paddy will win this purely because Kreuzer's out injured & the goldfish can't remember back to round 10 or whatever.

 

[The Big League]

In terms of pure talent Ryder is miles ahead. His best is also far better than Kreuzers best (from the limited amount we have been able to see). However in terms of consistency I think Kreuzer has him beat and will end up with the better career.

 

[invinciBlues]

Obviously, I'd have Kruze. His ruck and follow up is exceptional, and will be an outstanding player in the years to come.

Having said that, Ryder is the better KP, so I guess its what your team needs. But I feel every team could use a ruckman like Kreuzer, except maybe Freo.

Also, Ryder is the only player on essendons list that I would have at Carlton.

 

[hawkstars]

Picked Kruezer but geez Ryder is a gun

 

[HyperAgressiveDonk]

Also, Ryder is the only player on essendons list that I would have at Carlton.

Big call. Really?

No Watson or Hurley?

 

[E Shed]

Kreuzer has more heart for mine. Ryder goes missing too much.

 

[invinciBlues]

Big call. Really?

No Watson or Hurley?

Seriously. Hurley I'm not convinced on, still early days for him though. Watson only looks half decent due to the rest of their midfielders being so utterly crap.

Why would anyone want a guy who can't/wont kick the ball is beyond me.

Ryder is the only one I can see becoming elite and thats what sets him apart from the rest of essendon's list in my eyes.

 

[Silvagnis]

Not a lot in it.
Paddy has the capacity to amaze. But also has invisible games. Bit better around goals maybe, touch quicker & a bit better on the defensive side.

Kreuzer's a bit more of an endurance athlete, gets to the right places does the right things but doesn't ever go BANG.

Kreuzer doesn't go bang and isn't as good on the defensive side?

Matty has won the ball in the ruck and then backed up to stream forward to pot goals from fifty on the run.

And snapped them on his wrong foot after running forward.

I guess your definition of going bang is flashing into a game with a bit of x factor or a big mark, yet be conspicuous in his absence for most of the game. Ryder would be a superstar if he had Kreuzer's intensity and endurance which he uses to back up with the second and third efforts.

 

[fddf]

Also, Ryder is the only player on essendons list that I would have at Carlton.

Quoted so he can't delete it.

Ryder is and will remain the better out of these two. I'd have Tippett over both of them though.

 

[Slattery_20]

Kreuzer doesn't go bang and isn't as good on the defensive side?

Matty has won the ball in the ruck and then backed up to stream forward to pot goals from fifty on the run.

And snapped them on his wrong foot after running forward.

I guess your definition of going bang is flashing into a game with a bit of x factor or a big mark, yet be conspicuous in his absence for most of the game. Ryder would be a superstar if he had Kreuzer's intensity and endurance which he uses to back up with the second and third efforts.

Yes, Ryder is more likely to clunk a mark. As far as I'm concerned that's a positive.
More likely to kick a goal = Ryder.
More likely to run harder around the ground = Kreuzer. Just.
Paddy runs reasonably hard, he's just not (consistently) the physical presence you want out of a big ruckman, but neither's Kreuzer.

I'd be interested to see HO % to advantage if anyone's got it.

 

[Rustin Cohle]

Kreuzer, easily. I'd also take Mitch Clark before Ryder.

 

[Sin City]

Kreuzer. Probably our 3rd-4th best player already which is amazing for a 3rd year ruck. Gee we've missed him.

 

[B-Rock]

Kruezer. By a long way.

 

[Bulldog1954]

Kreuzer easily

 

[Bic]

I'd take Kreuzer over Ryder in a heartbeat, but Paddy is an extremely good player, just needs to improve his work rate in my opinion...

 

[Jeremias]

More likely to kick a goal = Ryder.

Based on what exactly?

You are basing this on nothing more than incredible bias.

There's barely anything in it, but Kreuzer averages more goals per game than Ryder does.

Yet that translates to Ryder being more likely to kick a goal?

Spare me.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Kreuzer. Ryder's overrated IMO.

Why would anyone want a guy who can't/wont kick the ball is beyond me.

Your club gave up a first rounder for Brock McLean. Jobe Watson is the exact same type of player, but twice as good. Carlton would kill for him.

 

[Slattery_20]

Based on what exactly?

You are basing this on nothing more than incredible bias.

There's barely anything in it, but Kreuzer averages more goals per game than Ryder does.

Yet that translates to Ryder being more likely to kick a goal?

Spare me.

It depends on whether you include the 3 years he played as a CHB when he barely kicked any. Kicked more last year playing on the ball; and more again this year playing ruck/forward as you'd expect.
Yes, I would prefer Ryder drifting forward. I don't think that is incredible bias, slight bias maybe.

 

[WN123]

Based on what exactly?

You are basing this on nothing more than incredible bias.

There's barely anything in it, but Kreuzer averages more goals per game than Ryder does.

Yet that translates to Ryder being more likely to kick a goal?

Spare me.

That might have something to do with the fact the Ryder spent his first three and a bit years as a centre half back. Take a look at this years figures champ.

 

[Marc Shmurf 3]

once again we have the case of the Essendon Bumbers over-rating their list. Ryder is nothing more than an over-rated part timer.

 

[jonoman89]

Pretty lineball decision for mine. Ryder is more of an atheltic freak, but Kreuzer is a footballer's footballer. His intensity and 2nd efforts are superb. So Kruezer....just.

 

[TigerTime88]

Kruezer by alot for me. Will be a gun where as Ryder is a good player when he decides to rock up.

If I were Carlton list manager and the bombers wanted to trade Kruezer for Ryder plus a there first round pick I would tell them where to go, such is my belief Kruezer monsters Ryder in ability and potential going forward.

 

[TigerTime88]

Kruezer by alot for me. Will be a gun where as Ryder is a good player when he decides to rock up.

If I were Carlton list manager and the bombers wanted to trade Kruezer for Ryder plus a there first round pick I would tell them where to go, such is my belief Kruezer monsters Ryder in ability and potential going forward.