Nick Maxwell

[Optimax]

It's more than just this one game.

Surely you can concede he is nearly always beaten by his direct opponent?

O'Keefe, playfair, and Everitt of sydney all disagree.

The only comprehensive beaten he has gotten since the first month of the season was against Mitch Hahn, who is a severly under rated player

 

[Kirk Hinrich #12]

It's more than just this one game.

Surely you can concede he is nearly always beaten by his direct opponent?

Can you let us all know what players have beaten him each week?

 

[chop_me]

It's more than just this one game.

Surely you can concede he is nearly always beaten by his direct opponent?

whenever an opposition player scores a bag... his goal tally is automatically classified as "against Maxwell"

 

[Pie eyed]

I watched the game on Fox today and find it hard to believe some of you can claim any objectivity whatsoever...a complete beat up from some and total fabrication by others.
Sometimes I am ashamed to be a Collingwood supporter, but never because of Collingwood...only other "supporters".

 

[Optimax]

whenever an opposition player scores a bag... his goal tally is automatically classified as "against Maxwell"

agreed, if a defender is beaten must of been maxwell er i mean hackswell.

 

[Godfrey Jones]

Maxwell cost us the 02 Grand Final.

 

[Kirby]

Maxwell cost us the 02 Grand Final.

and the 77 drawn GF.....

 

[Palmer Stoat]

I watched the replay and Maxwell's apparent bathing was the most overreactive bs thing I've ever heard. You were perhaps all swayed by Shaw's commentary.

I thought he was shite, and that was while I was at the ground watching the game.

One goal was on Goldsack while he was moved on him (perhaps while Maxwell was zoning off him but still all our defenders do that).

True.

One goal was for a free kick he got for diving the other was probably just there for holding the arm because the ball was more than 5 metres out of play (the umpires usually allow the defender to grapple or even knock away the arm the forward holds out to keep the defender away).

It was a blatant free kick. No amount of after-the-fact fancy footwork changes that.

One shot on goal where Maxwell slipped.

Maxwell always loses his feet. That's one of his main deficiencies, so you can't act as if this were just bad luck. It happens too often. He stands too far off his opponent in play and thus has to make desperate last-moment lunges at the ball in marking contests. Invariably he loses his feet.

One goal Burton had a big part in was against Maxwell when Medhurst had a turnover while Maxwell was the only defender against 3 Adelaide players.
One goal he was playing on Harry O'Brien.

Fair enough.

He had a couple of early dropped sitters against him big woop.

Big woop? Remarkably blasé about a defender conceding marks, aren't you?

His 2nd half was good.

It was OK.

If this was Brown or O'Brien playing against him we'd all be feeling sorry for him and thought he did well.

That's hardly comparing apples with apples. Brown is a 15-gamer. Brown has played on -- and done well on -- Pavlich, J Brown, and Richardson this year, so he has both more extenuating circumstances because of his inexperience and more credits in the bank because he's beaten or broken even with high-calibre opponents. Can you say either thing about Maxwell?

As for O'Brien, he too consistently plays on the opponents that we're not game to put Maxwell on. Why do you think that is? The answer is obvious, and it only seems fair that this be taken into account when rating their games.

You often hear this 'Maxwell gets a tougher run from his critics than do O'Brien or Brown', but put their performances in context and it's not difficult to see why. I also find it baffling that the defenders of Maxwell accuse his critics of kneejerk criticism, when they're just as prone to kneejerk defence of him.

Sure it wasn't the best first half, but it was hardly crucial, Collingwood weren't being beaten by Adelaide because of Burton, it was because Adelaide's gameplan was outplaying us and gave Burton the best opportunities possible.

This is just nonsense. You can't separate the success of a gameplan from its constituent parts in that manner. Burton is an Adelaide player who was a vital part of the Adelaide gameplan. He kicked four goals and was the dominant player on the ground. He certainly was 'crucial'. To say otherwise just shows how far you're willing to bend the facts in an attempt to defend a player you think has been unfairly attacked.

Wakelin had a similar first half on Tippet.

Wakelin did have a poor half on Tippett. But again, Wakelin has more credits in the bank than Maxwell. This is a simple point, surely?

I will add that, in my opinion, MM did the wrong thing in putting Maxwell on Burton. Maxwell should never be on the opposition's best forward. I'm not sure what the coaching staff were thinking of when they came up with that brilliant move. As soon as O'Brien was moved on to Burton, you could see it was a superior matchup: O'Brien was capable of running with him, doesn't lose his feet every five minutes and will take front position.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

O'Keefe, playfair, and Everitt of sydney all disagree.

The only comprehensive beaten he has gotten since the first month of the season was against Mitch Hahn, who is a severly under rated player

Playfair and Everitt? Nathan Brown played on Playfair, and I don't recall Maxwell being on Everritt either. AFAIK, he played the entire night on ROK -- who holds the dubious title of the only A-grade player in the comp that Maxwell can beat.

 

[Optimax]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

every defender is marked the same, whether they are ten gamers of 100 gamers.

You cant say oh but he has played 200 great games let him cut some slack, and then go oh but browy only started this year lets cut him some slack and then get to maxwell and say he is always rubbish he must hold his opponent to 2 touchs and get 35 himself.


Im sure wakelin copped just as big a bake as maxwell did for the first half, he was indeed as bad. All defenders get marked on the same criteria its just some supporters judge certain individuals with a toughers stance than others

 

[Optimax]

Playfair and Everitt? Nathan Brown played on Playfair, and I don't recall Maxwell being on Everritt either. AFAIK, he played the entire night on ROK -- who holds the dubious title of the only A-grade player in the comp that Maxwell can beat.

Maxwell alternated through out the night, like every other week.

At times it was heath of O'keefe and brown on Hall, and Maxwell played on all three i mentioned.

And i will say again apart from a Mitch hahn maxwell hasnt been belted by an opponent one out since the early rounds, and is his defence then he got cleaned up by goldsack once, hahn outmarked goldsack in contest and in another akers kick was perfect on the head of hahn and no defender could stop it

 

[Palmer Stoat]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

every defender is marked the same, whether they are ten gamers of 100 gamers.

You cant say oh but he has played 200 great games let him cut some slack, and then go oh but browy only started this year lets cut him some slack and then get to maxwell and say he is always rubbish he must hold his opponent to 2 touchs and get 35 himself.


Im sure wakelin copped just as big a bake as maxwell did for the first half, he was indeed as bad. All defenders get marked on the same criteria its just some supporters judge certain individuals with a toughers stance than others

That's crap, Optimax. Would you rate Nathan Brown as harshly in his first game if he'd conceded four goals to Pavlich as you would a 200-gamer like Wakelin? Of course not. Put their performances into context.

Also take account of the quality of their opponents.

 

[Optimax]

That's crap, Optimax. Would you rate Nathan Brown as harshly in his first game if he'd conceded four goals to Pavlich as you would a 200-gamer like Wakelin? Of course not. Put their performances into context.

Also take account of the quality of their opponents.

First game no, but if brown went out this wek and onceded 6 goals to thompson, bloody oath i would judge him harshly.

We know what he can do and such he should be judged to his ability not to by his game total. He is a kid but he has some big scalps and consistency against all players bar fev so he should be judged on that.

The quality of opponent is a nothing comment, any average forward can look like a superstar with a good midfield see Lynch of west coast and any good forward can be beaten easily with a crud midfield rocca tarrant cloke just for us.

Maxwell does his job, applies pressure, helps out his defensive partners and just on the weekend got centre clearences.

And to make his position slightly safer there is no one who can take his spot cox isnt a defender, goldsack is sadly down on his form last year (an playing), JA is a playing a forward role and we would be stupid to tamper with it

 

[Michael Tuck]

Nick Maxwell is not up to AFL standard and the fact he was considered as the next captain is quite amazing.
Watched him in the flesh a few timers this year, a lot of his efforts made me cringe. He simply can not use the footy. And for a bloke that plays loose, you would think that would be a prerequisite. Skills are not up to scratch.
The new "Jason Cloke point" that some one on this thread made is quite a good one. Any one can be third man up and punch the ball in a general direction but when he's doing this, I’m pretty sure there's an opposition player running around with no opponent!
Being courageous will only get you so far these days...and as I pointed out before, whilst he’s being courageous, his opponent is some where by himself, probably having a hand in the next goal!

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Maxwell alternated through out the night, like every other week.

At times it was heath of O'keefe and brown on Hall, and Maxwell played on all three i mentioned.

Brown on Hall? There may have been one or two contests where Wakelin was caught out of position and Brown contested against Hall, but Wakelin played on Hall all night as far as I could see. There will always be momentary switches like this during the night, but as I recall it Playfair was opposed to Brown, ROK to Maxwell, and Wakelin to Hall. Any switches were nothing more than players getting lost in play for a moment or two.

And i will say again apart from a Mitch hahn maxwell hasnt been belted by an opponent one out since the early rounds, and is his defence then he got cleaned up by goldsack once, hahn outmarked goldsack in contest and in another akers kick was perfect on the head of hahn and no defender could stop it

I haven't dated and timecoded every time Maxwell has been beaten by his opponent -- despite appearances to the contrary, I really don't have a vendetta against him -- so I'm not gonna argue with you. But I will add that Maxwell shouldn't be regularly belted because -- Adelaide match notwithstanding -- he gets the fourth- or fifth-best defender every week. There's a reason that Maxwell plays on Mitch Hahn and not Robert Murphy, Kane Pettifer and not Nathan Brown, Sean McManus and not Jeff Farmer. I'll let you draw your own conclusions. I'll also add that not being 'belted' is only a lukewarm recommendation given the calibre of opponent he gets.


Anyway, I give up. If after 80-odd games and six or so seasons, people still can't see that Maxwell isn't up to it, so be it.

 

[Optimax]

I haven't dated and timecoded every time Maxwell has been beaten by his opponent -- despite appearances to the contrary, I really don't have a vendetta against him -- so I'm not gonna argue with you. But I will add that Maxwell shouldn't be regularly belted because -- Adelaide match notwithstanding -- he gets the fourth- or fifth-best defender every week. There's a reason that Maxwell plays on Mitch Hahn and not Robert Murphy, Kane Pettifer and not Nathan Brown, Sean McManus and not Jeff Farmer. I'll let you draw your own conclusions. I'll also add that not being 'belted' is only a lukewarm recommendation given the calibre of opponent he gets.


Anyway, I give up. If after 80-odd games and six or so seasons, people still can't see that Maxwell isn't up to it, so be it.

he is played on these opponents as its his job t get across and chop out other defenders whilts minding hid man, and going off the players you named he beat all of them this year so what excatly is the problem? he has been badly beaten once Hahn who deserves alot more recognition and that is it.

If MAxwell isnt up to it who should be his replacement? ive looked over the list and apart from Anthony who is forward at the moment (and doing it well) and there is no player that jumps out and says i must have maxwells spot
Goldsack is getting a lesser forward than maxwell right now, and more midfield-esque shut down jobs
Dawes- is a FF CHF who at a pinch can play defence just
Cox is a taller heath shaw rebound player who doesnt win One-ones with the regularity of heaths shaw

Casey leigh and thoolen are miles off and i see Xasey-leigh more as a tall heath shaw with better defensive ability and thoolen as a ruckman

 

[evo37]

Morning fellow pie fans.
First time poster long time reader.
Maxwell gives 110% every week, yes he may not be the most skillful player in our side but his guts and straight running head over ball stuff he will always be one of Mick's first picked every week.
He should never of been mention as a posible captain i agree with that.

Lets start talking positives and get that top 4 spot we need
Go pies

 

[Optimax]

Nick Maxwell is not up to AFL standard and the fact he was considered as the next captain is quite amazing.
Watched him in the flesh a few timers this year, a lot of his efforts made me cringe. He simply can not use the footy. And for a bloke that plays loose, you would think that would be a prerequisite. Skills are not up to scratch.
The new "Jason Cloke point" that some one on this thread made is quite a good one. Any one can be third man up and punch the ball in a general direction but when he's doing this, I’m pretty sure there's an opposition player running around with no opponent!
Being courageous will only get you so far these days...and as I pointed out before, whilst he’s being courageous, his opponent is some where by himself, probably having a hand in the next goal!

Re watch his finals series last year, came into them sorrily out of form and wasnt beaten in a match whilst doing the team things and throwing himself around liek campell brown minus the sholder charging the goal post.

he hasnt been all that bad this year, he is a solid player never a captain but a solid player who leads the way with selfless acts. He is the type of player that wont win accolades but do his role for the team

 

[Palmer Stoat]

First game no, but if brown went out this wek and onceded 6 goals to thompson, bloody oath i would judge him harshly.

The question is not whether you'd judge him harshly, but whether you'd take into account his youth and inexperience when making that judgement. Nathan Brown, 19 years old and in his 16th game, shouldn't get judged to the same standard as Nick Maxwell, 25 years old and in his 86th game. Anyone who argues otherwise has taken leave of their senses.

We know what he can do and such he should be judged to his ability not to by his game total. He is a kid but he has some big scalps and consistency against all players bar fev so he should be judged on that.

Knowing what Brown is capable of and making allowances for his inexperience aren't mutually exclusive. But I note that you concede he's claimed some 'big scalps'.

The quality of opponent is a nothing comment, any average forward can look like a superstar with a good midfield see Lynch of west coast and any good forward can be beaten easily with a crud midfield rocca tarrant cloke just for us.

What a load of shite. Honestly. Absolute cobblers. The quality of your opponent has a shitload to do with it. And you're living in fantasy land if you pretend otherwise.

Maxwell does his job, applies pressure, helps out his defensive partners and just on the weekend got centre clearences.

Yeah, he got a centre clearance because he was moved there after getting beaten in his original matchup.

And to make his position slightly safer there is no one who can take his spot cox isnt a defender, goldsack is sadly down on his form last year (an playing), JA is a playing a forward role and we would be stupid to tamper with it

Maxwell's position is safe. Never denied it. He's rusted on. I fully expect him to break Michael Tuck's games record. I'd play Goldsack in preference to Maxwell.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

he is played on these opponents as its his job t get across and chop out other defenders whilts minding hid man, and going off the players you named he beat all of them this year so what excatly is the problem? he has been badly beaten once Hahn who deserves alot more recognition and that is it.

No, he is played in this fashion because he's not up to beating good opponents one-on-one. What's more, he's not even a good zone-off defender. Bloody hell, Jason Cloke was better at reading the play, sagging off his man, and killing the contest. Maxwell is a specialist at making a late charge at a contest, taking an air-swing, and falling over on his back, limbs flailing, like an upended turtle. He doesn't make third man in on enough of these contests, doesn't kill enough of the contests when he does make them, and isn't damaging on the rebound either because he's a specialist in the panicky kick.

I could cop him not being good one-on-one if he was at least damaging on the rebound, or vice versa. But he's just not.

If MAxwell isnt up to it who should be his replacement? ive looked over the list and apart from Anthony who is forward at the moment (and doing it well) and there is no player that jumps out and says i must have maxwells spot
Goldsack is getting a lesser forward than maxwell right now, and more midfield-esque shut down jobs

Goldsack should get his spot IMO. They should let him settle in defence like they did last year.

Anyway, that's it. I'm sick to death of arguing about Nick Maxwell.

 

[Michael Tuck]

No, he is played in this fashion because he's not up to beating good opponents one-on-one. What's more, he's not even a good zone-off defender. Bloody hell, Jason Cloke was better at reading the play, sagging off his man, and killing the contest. Maxwell is a specialist at making a late charge at a contest, taking an air-swing, and falling over on his back, limbs flailing, like an upended turtle. He doesn't make third man in on enough of these contests, doesn't kill enough of the contests when he does make them, and isn't damaging on the rebound either because he's a specialist in the panicky kick.

I could cop him not being good one-on-one if he was at least damaging on the rebound, or vice versa. But he's just not.



Goldsack should get his spot IMO. They should let him settle in defence like they did last year.

Anyway, that's it. I'm sick to death of arguing about Nick Maxwell.

Good point, he's not good enough, simple as that. I'm sure Noble Park will pay him some coin next year!

 

[smiddaz123]

If MAxwell isnt up to it who should be his replacement? ive looked over the list and apart from Anthony who is forward at the moment (and doing it well) and there is no player that jumps out and says i must have maxwells spot
Goldsack is getting a lesser forward than maxwell right now, and more midfield-esque shut down jobs

Drop Ben Johnson back to shut down small forwards (he toweled up Aker, and imo he isn't a good midfielder).

Goldsack - Wakelin - O'Brien
H Shaw - Brown - Clarke

I see nothing wrong with this set up.

All of those players >>>>>>>>>> Maxwell.

If need be, play Ben Johnson as a small defender. He towelled up Aker and I don't like him as a midfielder much anyway.

 

[Optimax]

Drop Ben Johnson back to shut down small forwards (he toweled up Aker, and imo he isn't a good midfielder).

Goldsack - Wakelin - O'Brien
H Shaw - Brown - Clarke

I see nothing wrong with this set up.

All of those players >>>>>>>>>> Maxwell.

If need be, play Ben Johnson as a small defender. He towelled up Aker and I don't like him as a midfielder much anyway.

he towelled up aker the midfielder not aker the forward pocket, he played a very tight tagging role which he did well but he isnt a back pocket.

the last time johsnon was played back pocket lindsay thomas got north the win earlier this year. He got pulled back to the goal sqaure and one on one was beaten, like he was every time we left him across half back.

Goldsack is in the side playing the johnson role you mentioned, and doing it ok bu isnt getting his possesions anymore.

that set up looks good on paper, but that takes clarke away from the midfield where he plays his best football, means we have o'brien playing a more defensive role so cuts off his creativity and drags heath shaw deeper into the backline without a tag.

Maxwell if replaced will be replaced by a tall teh only player i can see doing it is anthony and there is a fairly obvisous reason that hasnt happened yet.

 

[Optimax]

Anyway, that's it. I'm sick to death of arguing about Nick Maxwell.

Good point, he's not good enough, simple as that. I'm sure Noble Park will pay him some coin next year!

why the hell are you here then?

 

[Michael Tuck]

why the hell are you here then?

Are these not forums for opinions???

I gave my opinion and that was that. You're obviously one of the not so smart c/wood supporters as you don't seem to get that.

My apologies to the smarter c/wood supporters out there.