Player Watch Ned McHenry

Remove this Banner Ad

George Kramer said:
Now do you have a list of average players that got given chances, didn’t make it and were delisted or traded?
Click to expand...
But to be clear, the point isn't that everyone with this experience will make it, or that it's the only way to a good career (Roo went to the middle in his second season), but that it's possible to follow this trajectory and end up a really good player.
 
dogs105 said:
But to be clear, the point isn't that everyone with this experience will make it, or that it's the only way to a good career (Roo went to the middle in his second season), but that it's possible to follow this trajectory and end up a really good player.
Click to expand...
Anything is possible, the odds aren’t in his favour though
 
Southerntakeover said:
Congratulations, this is the new pack leader in the 'players who are weirdly coopted in our fan bases weird assertion that it's necessary to have Tom Lynch' stakes.
Click to expand...

Liking McHenry and predicting that he'll eventually thrive as an extra mid coming off HF does not equal asserting that its necessary to have Tom Lynch.

Already acknowledged that the comparison was hasty & simplistic. Was made of the basis of both coming off HF, with high fitness base and work-rate. Clearly very different style of player beyond that.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

skittlebrew said:
It's laughable you even mention Ned and Lynch in the same sentence, absolutely chalk and cheese in ability and skillset.

I would happily put money on the table but what metric could you possibly use to indicate success? This is the same club that gave Mackay 200 games.
Click to expand...

Acknowledged on the 1st point & clarified basis for comparison in last reply. Will admit to knocking over a few last night & being more hasty and less articulate than usual. That said, my conviction on Ned making it, and the role I see him working in doesnt change.

Given AFC history, games definitely doesnt work. Do need something quantifiable - I guess the onus is on me now to come up with a comparison player in terms of comparable output and bring back some stats. Will think on that for a bit.
 
Grenville said:
Liking McHenry and predicting that he'll eventually thrive as an extra mid coming off HF does not equal asserting that its necessary to have Tom Lynch.

Already acknowledged that the comparison was hasty & simplistic. Was made of the basis of both coming off HF, with high fitness base and work-rate. Clearly very different style of player beyond that.
Click to expand...

No drama. The difficulty is size. It's pretty difficult to be a lead up marking target at any point of the ground when your opponent has you handily covered for reach, and you don't have anything special speed wise.
 
Southerntakeover said:
No drama. The difficulty is size. It's pretty difficult to be a lead up marking target at any point of the ground when your opponent has you handily covered for reach, and you don't have anything special speed wise.
Click to expand...

I think if McHenry's going to make it, it will be as that high half forward/extra midfielder whom similar to Tom Lynch, thrives off extreme work rate.

Whilst Lynch was 191cm, he was neither a strong contested mark, nor was he quick. He just busted his gut and out ran, out presented his opponent.

Ned similarly has this elite endurance and work rate that he could thrive in this role. He would no doubt play the role differently to Lynch, but that's the role I could see him succeeding in.

Now, do we actually need that role or are we just trying to find a spot for Ned in the team? Well thats the next question really isn't.

What Ned isn't though, is he isn't a close to goal pressure forward.

To me the most concerning thing at present is how many of our 2nd-5th year players are currently stagnating or going backwards. Players we've invested significant draft capital in, players who should be starting to establish themselves as likely 12 year players.
 
Mismatched said:
I think if McHenry's going to make it, it will be as that high half forward/extra midfielder whom similar to Tom Lynch, thrives off extreme work rate.

Whilst Lynch was 191cm, he was neither a strong contested mark, nor was he quick. He just busted his gut and out ran, out presented his opponent.

Ned similarly has this elite endurance and work rate that he could thrive in this role. He would no doubt play the role differently to Lynch, but that's the role I could see him succeeding in.

Now, do we actually need that role or are we just trying to find a spot for Ned in the team? Well thats the next question really isn't.

What Ned isn't though, is he isn't a close to goal pressure forward.

To me the most concerning thing at present is how many of our 2nd-5th year players are currently stagnating or going backwards. Players we've invested significant draft capital in, players who should be starting to establish themselves as likely 12 year players.
Click to expand...
I just put this in the sanfl thread this morning

What is a bit concerning is that we have all these 1st and 2nd rounders playing sanfl yesterday
Milera
Fogarty
McAsey
Thilthorpe
Pedlar
Shoenberg
Hamill
Worrell
(Hately)
 
Mutineer said:
Big game from Jordy for Williamstown VFL yesterday 6 touches and 2 goals, averaging 8 disposals and a goal a game this season from his 3 games.
Click to expand...

I bet Richmond are glad they didn't put him on their list when he trialed there last year
What's happened to him, he should be burning it up in the VFL
 
Mutineer said:
FIGJAM
I'll tell you who is burning up the VFL Matty Roberts averaging 29 disposals across his 3 games.
Click to expand...

Good on Matty, always looked classy and those numbers look impressive in his first year.
He couldn't be as slow as everyone was making him out to be
Might not be long and he will hopefully get a AFL game
Thanks for the info
 
maxlilly said:
Good on Matty, always looked classy and those numbers look impressive in his first year.
He couldn't be as slow as everyone was making him out to be
Might not be long and he will hopefully get a AFL game
Thanks for the info
Click to expand...
The maligning of Matty Roberts last year was absolutely disgraceful. But I’ve said my piece in that - apparently that makes me his Dad- which I’m definitely not!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DaKids said:
The maligning of Matty Roberts last year was absolutely disgraceful. But I’ve said my piece in that - apparently that makes me his Dad- which I’m definitely not!
Click to expand...
He had a very good U18's, it's great to see him kicking on this year because his disposal was always classy
Unfortunately, some people think the louder they are, the more right they become, contrary to the evidence
 
skittlebrew said:
He's stunk it up everywhere else. Are you telling me he's going to magically suceed in the midfield? In the middle he will line up against the competitions elite, they will abolsoultely rip him a new arsehole. You don't need to be nostradamus to work this out.
Click to expand...
Yep he will get swatted away like a fly, he isn't a midfielder.
 
Tricky one

He usually does a few good, creative things each week but not involved in the game enough overall.

If he got a bit more of it... Trouble is that you couldn't question his effort or workrate. So if he's working to maximum capacity yet only seeing the ball a handful of times per game...?
 
I'm a fan of a lot of Ned's base traits (evasive and agile, accurate kick going inside 50, high level pressure player), but I would've liked to have seen him take the next step this year - i.e. getting involved in the game a bit more, sticking as many of his tackles as possible. Hasn't quite done that to the level I would've hoped

Still a long way to go in the season, but at this point, if a more dynamic player came along and we had to choose between taking him or Murphy out of the side - I'd keep Murphy in, at this point in time
 
Danger in Texas said:
I'm a fan of a lot of Ned's base traits (evasive and agile, accurate kick going inside 50, high level pressure player), but I would've liked to have seen him take the next step this year - i.e. getting involved in the game a bit more, sticking as many of his tackles as possible. Hasn't quite done that to the level I would've hoped

Still a long way to go in the season, but at this point, if a more dynamic player came along and we had to choose between taking him or Murphy out of the side - I'd keep Murphy in, at this point in time
Click to expand...

Has been a disappointing start to the year. Hard to tell from the replay but seemed like he and Murphy were swapping through that high HF role? Agree Murphy did more there and not against seeing Ned drop for a few games in the 2s. He'll make it, but needs coaches to help him find the right balance.
 
Grenville said:
Has been a disappointing start to the year. Hard to tell from the replay but seemed like he and Murphy were swapping through that high HF role? Agree Murphy did more there and not against seeing Ned drop for a few games in the 2s. He'll make it, but needs coaches to help him find the right balance.
Click to expand...
Needs to find more of the ball. Wish we would include him more in the midfield rotations.

May be time to give him a good run in the sanfl & bring Rowe back in this week.
 
Drugs Are Bad Mackay? said:
Tricky one

He usually does a few good, creative things each week but not involved in the game enough overall.

If he got a bit more of it... Trouble is that you couldn't question his effort or workrate. So if he's working to maximum capacity yet only seeing the ball a handful of times per game...?
Click to expand...
The thing with McHenry is you know there will be at least one time a match where we throws himself into a contest causing a in the back free completely unnecessarily.

Other than that I do like him as a player albeit with limitations I can't see being developed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rory Walkerfield
Never Again: Murphy, McHenry
Replies
16
Views
401
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top