Pitt

[Tommo]

With a good preseason from everyone, he could play early in the season without being totally ready for that level. One thing that has allowed the eagles to improve is that the younger players aren't getting as much attention, or having to bear the load like they were last year. This allows them to come out of their shells, for want of a better analogy.
I think that was harves idea at the start of the year. Ideally his deficiencies wouldn't be exposed as the opposition is too busy worrying about other players. This allows him to develop much quicker than in the WAFL while still contributing.
All going well next pre season I see him being thrown in the deep end again. Its harves style and I like it.

 

[strobe00]

All this tells me is that he is no Clayton Hinkley, ie won't be a complete dud we (should) delist in four years time. That doesn't mean he will be any better than Suban, for instance, who also has a range of decent attributes, but is still squarely a C grader after three years.

But surely a lot of people would have been calling Mundy a C grader a few years ago before he took a big step up. No one would be calling him a C grader now.

I think Suban played a really good game on the weekend. I dunno about this whole A, B, C thing. It's pretty meaningless to me, as it's so frigging subjective.

I think Suban will play an important part in the team. I'd rather keep the guys for long enough to see if they have/haven't got it, then get rid of them rather than to make an early decision and then have to develop another kid to the same point.

Hinkley has shown just about all that he's going to. Neither Suban or Pitt have had enough time to show that yet.

 

[Lach72]

Suban's trouble has been staying on the park, through largely unavoidable injury.

He gets a head of steam up, then breaks a leg or something, then has to start again.

We just need a decent bloody run at it.

 

[theGav56]

This is like the Rich V Hill thing all over again. Pointless.

Massive ZzZzZzZ's

If you are interested in understanding the thinking process of our recruiters, and how they perceive the list and list requirements, then it is a good debate.

• Taking Hill over Rich told me that we value pace and upside higher than a sure bet.
  
• Taking Pitt over Darling told me that they were pretty sure that Faulks and Anthony will have futures in the side and that our KPP stocks are not too bad. And that highly skilled players are what our gameplan is going to require.

Pretty good debating points I reckon.

 

[Clay Davis]

But surely a lot of people would have been calling Mundy a C grader a few years ago before he took a big step up. No one would be calling him a C grader now.

I think Suban played a really good game on the weekend. I dunno about this whole A, B, C thing. It's pretty meaningless to me, as it's so frigging subjective.

I think Suban will play an important part in the team. I'd rather keep the guys for long enough to see if they have/haven't got it, then get rid of them rather than to make an early decision and then have to develop another kid to the same point.

Hinkley has shown just about all that he's going to. Neither Suban or Pitt have had enough time to show that yet.

Mundy was drafted in 2003, debuted in 2005 and became an A grader in 2010. He also had a completely uninterrupted run with injury from debut to reaching that status. That's a fair run of luck of full fitness that meant he never had to battle with getting back up to speed.

If Pitt reaches that level in 2016-2017, great. But that would take an equivalent amount of luck with injury to reach that level. Look at how Suban has stalled because of his injuries.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

prior to his broken leg, i though suban had been one of our best players, and was going a long way to becoming an a-grader. this was his third year wasnt it? still plenty of time to becoming the player many of us believe he can... frustrating though to see injury after injury

 

[strobe00]

Mundy was drafted in 2003, debuted in 2005 and became an A grader in 2010. He also had a completely uninterrupted run with injury from debut to reaching that status. That's a fair run of luck of full fitness that meant he never had to battle with getting back up to speed.

If Pitt reaches that level in 2016-2017, great. But that would take an equivalent amount of luck with injury to reach that level. Look at how Suban has stalled because of his injuries.

I understand your points, but what do you suggest we do about it? You can't do a hell of a lot about guys getting injured. I think Mundy cruised for a few years and for some reason or another actually stepped up.

I think it might've been him actually putting in a full pre-season, and being asked to take on more responsibility. Can't honestly remember. But it worked. And I think Freo are getting better at developing guys more quickly (contentious issue based on 2011 I know, but surely better than 2006/7). Don't think it'll take until 2016/207 for Pitt to show his stuff.

Either way, I think we keep a hold of these guys, develop them, rehab them after any injuries and give them the chance to show what they have. Worrying that they'll be stalled by injury, or will never be more than a C grader doesn't really accomplish anything. Time will tell, and there are bigger spuds on our list that we can cut first.

 

[prattsta]

It will take at least a couple of years of AFL game time before he goes from turnover merchant to solid contributor, but that means carrying him in the side even when he is performing poorly. If we want to challenge next year I don't think we can do that.

We should've carried him longer this season. The new substitute rule provided us with the perfect opportunity to do so as well.

Of all the players Fremantle used as substitutes in 2011, he had the most potential to have an impact. Poor kicking efficiency or not, his I50 count was ridiculous when compared with his total number of disposals. He just needed to adapt to the time/space/pressure difference at AFL level.

How much impact to his overall fitness would playing as the substitute more often than not really of had? More importantly, as a first year player, would it even have mattered? Knowing he'll play as the sub, just make him run more during the week.

 

[blue shark]

I think next year with less injuries, Pitt, Mitchie, Mellington, Faulks, Anthony, Crighton, Morabito, will all be in the mix.If we can fast track their Rehab, skills, fitness, add muscle, all can contribute over the year.
None of the above are total spuds.
Could Walters play in the back half? turn him into our Davis, has a lethal boot on him, low and penetrating.
Keep most of our players on the park, fast track our youth, get a forward line, and this year will be a distant memory.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

I think next year with less injuries, Pitt, Mitchie, Mellington, Faulks, Anthony, Crighton, Morabito, will all be in the mix.If we can fast track their Rehab, skills, fitness, add muscle, all can contribute over the year.
None of the above are total spuds.
Could Walters play in the back half? turn him into our Davis, has a lethal boot on him, low and penetrating.
Keep most of our players on the park, fast track our youth, get a forward line, and this year will be a distant memory.

problem is that walters is so slow. davis is quick

 

[Bradesmaen]

Mundy was drafted in 2003, debuted in 2005 and became an A grader in 2010. He also had a completely uninterrupted run with injury from debut to reaching that status. That's a fair run of luck of full fitness that meant he never had to battle with getting back up to speed.

If Pitt reaches that level in 2016-2017, great. But that would take an equivalent amount of luck with injury to reach that level. Look at how Suban has stalled because of his injuries.

The difference is, Mundy's skills were already ace by 2006/7. He was just played as a Michael Johnson type defender. He did not get a tank til 2010 after playing some midfield in 09. Pitt has a better starting base than Mundy as he played his junior career as a midfielder, not a backman.

 

[blue shark]

Roger Hayden wasnt Davis quick either, but could read the play, the players who have the ability to find space, evade, have time and dont panic, are better than a guy who is quick in a straight line. (Hinkely)

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

Roger Hayden wasnt Davis quick either, but could read the play, the players who have the ability to find space, evade, have time and dont panic, are better than a guy who is quick in a straight line. (Hinkely)

fair point, but roger was a rare player, im not sure walters has his footy brain. would be happy to be proven wrong on that, but cant see walters becoming a small defender

 

[valkorum]

fair point, but roger was a rare player, im not sure walters has his footy brain. would be happy to be proven wrong on that, but cant see walters becoming a small defender

I dont think Walters has the tank to play off half back - requires a lot more stamina than playing in the forward 50 only.

 

[blue shark]

Alot of clubs are turning small forwards into backmen, who can hit a target, set up play, to beat the forward press, turn overs are deadly.
Walters needs to get to the elite level of fitness required at this level.
I think he is a clever player, but lazy.

 

[prattsta]

fair point, but roger was a rare player, im not sure walters has his footy brain. would be happy to be proven wrong on that, but cant see walters becoming a small defender

Off topic, but I don't think you would want Walters down back anyway. He can be so damaging in the forward half - if he gets it together - it'd be an absolute waste.

I still think Crichton has potential as a small defender. He doesn't have amazing pace - he's quick enough though - but unlike guys like Hinkley and de Boer, he can actually hit a target more often than not.

 

[Bender571]

Taking Pitt over Darling told me that they were pretty sure that Faulks and Anthony will have futures in the side and that our KPP stocks are not too bad. And that highly skilled players are what our gameplan is going to require.

I also wonder whether the club had made a deal with Mitch Clarke that we'd pick him up this year?

It's just a feeling I get from the situation

 

[Dr Ralph Dagg]

Pitt has had an interesting first year.

Pro's are that he can find the footy and can work magic inside a phone box. Seems very like Priddis or Mitchell that way.

Downside is his disposal in match conditions is Schammer-like and he is too light to make any sort of contest.

Could be worse but it may be two-three years before he is really AFL average.

 

[strobe00]

Off topic, but I don't think you would want Walters down back anyway. He can be so damaging in the forward half - if he gets it together - it'd be an absolute waste.

I still think Crichton has potential as a small defender. He doesn't have amazing pace - he's quick enough though - but unlike guys like Hinkley and de Boer, he can actually hit a target more often than not.

De Boer is a decent field kick. He's not a long kick, but knows his limitations and generally disposes of the ball OK by foot. Very good handballer though. Pretty suitable skill set for an inside mid.

Terrible shot for goal though... but a bit better this year.

 

[Kram]

Yep, de Boer's field kicking has really improved.

 

[Righteo]

De Boer is a decent field kick. He's not a long kick, but knows his limitations and generally disposes of the ball OK by foot. Very good handballer though. Pretty suitable skill set for an inside mid.

Terrible shot for goal though... but a bit better this year.

Very true on all points, has what it takes to be a capable inside midfielder, I was very surprised at how much his kicking improved this year.

 

[prattsta]

De Boer is a decent field kick. He's not a long kick, but knows his limitations and generally disposes of the ball OK by foot. Very good handballer though. Pretty suitable skill set for an inside mid.

Terrible shot for goal though... but a bit better this year.

None of which makes him suitable as a small defender, which was my point.

 

[strobe00]

None of which makes him suitable as a small defender, which was my point.

Didn't think his kicking was terrible enough to disqualify him from being a small defender. But agree that it'd be a waste of his skill set to put him there.

However completely agree that Hinkley's decision making and kicking would disqualify him from a role in the back line.

From what I remember, Crichton's decision making and kicking was actually pretty average this year. Comfortably better than Hinkley, true.

Jesse may be able to perform the role... all of the physical and attitude factors are there, but he'll need to improve his kicking to do it and continue to work on his decision making under pressure.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Walters? Back line? Are you guys serious?

 

[willoblue]

I dont think Walters has the tank to play off half back - requires a lot more stamina than playing in the forward 50 only.

in modern footy, forwards run as much as anybody