List Mgmt. Player Ages Thread

[JasRulz63]

If we lose round 1 & round 2 draft picks for the next 2-3 seasons, how does this affect our next father/son pick for end of this year? Another Daniher ...

Adelaide lost their rights to father/son picks as well as their round 1 and 2 draft picks.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

did lol

?

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Do you know how many 1st round draft picks since 2007 Geelong have in their side? One. Harry Taylor

Hooker has outperformed Pears every year from 2010 onwards. Hooker is by far the better player.

Talent wise? No. On output? Most definitely.

Funny, I could say the same about Pears.

Geelong's success built of previous first rounders, F/S selections and smart recruiting to avoid bottoming out. Also, Billy Smedts, Josh Caddy, Jackson Thurlow are all first round selections, and Hawkins would have been if not for F/S.

Pears is a better athlete, better skilled wise, better decision maker and better one on one. Hooker has him covered in height and intercept marking. Leads me to suggest Pears probably has the edge, particularly as a third tall behind Carlisle and Hurley that can play tall or small and provide rebound.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

I was going to respond to that post but I thought, based on suggested drafting of Toy and anyone that shares a name with a connection to the club; dropping half of our best 22 in favour of completely unknown first and second year players; and weakening our backline, rucks stocks and, in the immediate future during which we should challenge for a flag, our forwardline, it wasn't a serious post. I suppose that it is a lot of effort to go to if you're not serious which leads me to ask WTF?

In the modern AFL, where 18 teams = a diluted draft pool, Essendon's current ladder position meaning we don't have access to the top picks and the previous 3 years compromised drafts, the only drafting advantage a club can get is through the F/S rule. Utilising the James Hird Academy, we can at least be hopeful that our F/S prospects are of draftable quality. Hence their positions on my proposed list.

The half our 'best 22' you speak of aren't quality enough to ensure a premiership. In fact, they all reek of the bottom 6 players St Kilda carried in 3 grand final losses. Hence my removing them for more talented, younthful and athletic options.

The only positional stocks you've mentioned that are actually weakened are the ruck stocks. But the reality is that TBC would be a back up to Ryder, which is a) detrimental to his career and development, and b) irrelevant to our game day ruck stocks (unless injury occurs).

Our genuine flag window opens up from 2014. My drafting perhaps pushes it back a year, but extends it at the back end to ensure a genuine dynasty and avoids bottoming out quickly.

Josh Toy is no doubt a risk, but if you get him for nothing you lose nothing. It is important to remember there is a reason he was pre-selected by Gold Coast as a 17 year old - he was in the top 3 youngsters in his draft year.

Your move

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Can people please understand there is no point trading for picks when we are about to enter a potential premiership window ffs;

It's no longer about premiership windows but ensuring your list is both competitive in the now and with a spread of ages so it remains competitive into future. Clubs can no longer afford to bottom out - look at St Kilda. They will be down for 10 years now.

 

[eth-dog]

Geelong's success built of previous first rounders, F/S selections and smart recruiting to avoid bottoming out. Also, Billy Smedts, Josh Caddy, Jackson Thurlow are all first round selections, and Hawkins would have been if not for F/S.

Pears is a better athlete, better skilled wise, better decision maker and better one on one. Hooker has him covered in height and intercept marking. Leads me to suggest Pears probably has the edge, particularly as a third tall behind Carlisle and Hurley that can play tall or small and provide rebound.

Geelong didn't bottom out due to the fact that they have taken some gems 3rd round or later in players like Podsiadly, Blicavs, Stokes, Motlop, T Hunt, Lonergan and Enright. Smedts and Thurlow are injured, and Caddy can't get a spot in the side.

Maybe, yes, no and no. The fact you think Pers is better one-on-one show's how little of a clue you have

 

[FlyingV]

If higgins didn't have the injury history he does i'd be all over him.

Unfortunately he does, so anything above free is overs for him.

Say the WB were to offer their 2nd rounder for gumby, would you accept? more importantly will the club?

Would you accept it Jacky?
I think I would, we've done well with our second rounders, I'd certainly fish for a late first but can't see us bettering an early second. I feel the club would have a congruent outlook considering it wasn't long ago this guy was worth absolutely nothing.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Geelong didn't bottom out due to the fact that they have taken some gems 3rd round or later in players like Podsiadly, Blicavs, Stokes, Motlop, T Hunt, Lonergan and Enright. Smedts and Thurlow are injured, and Caddy can't get a spot in the side.

Maybe, yes, no and no. The fact you think Pers is better one-on-one show's how little of a clue you have

Hooker hasn't been involved in a 1 v 1 contest since he was drafted. Where you've seen his 1v1 skill I wouldn't know. Therefore I would suggest Pears is the better 1v1 player - particlarly as the 3rd tall that can play tall and small (perfect Fletcher replacement).

Agreed on the two injured - but they are in the cats best 22. Caddy, now over his injury, is back in the side.

And I agree with Geelong's third round drafting - very good recruiting by them as I said earlier.

 

[eth-dog]

Hooker hasn't been involved in a 1 v 1 contest since he was drafted. Where you've seen his 1v1 skill I wouldn't know. Therefore I would suggest Pears is the better 1v1 player - particlarly as the 3rd tall that can play tall and small (perfect Fletcher replacement).

Agreed on the two injured - but they are in the cats best 22. Caddy, now over his injury, is back in the side.

And I agree with Geelong's third round drafting - very good recruiting by them as I said earlier.

Oh my god. You really haven't watched football since 09, have you?

 

[Rancid Trogs]

If people are going to argue that Pears has played some outstanding footy, at least learn that he played as a KPP in 2009(?), so the "Pears is a better 3rd tall" argument is virtually invalid IMO.

He played KPD then because there was no one else. He is perfectly suited to the 3rd tall role as he can play on talls and smalls (much like Fletcher, although not the player Fletcher is). He gives the backline great flexibility and stability as he allows us to avoid the horses for courses selection dramas.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Oh my god. You really haven't watched football since 09, have you?

I'm starting to think you might not have though??

 

[eth-dog]

I'm starting to think you might not have though??

I've been to/watched every Essendon game (even if only on replay) since about 05 kid.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

I've been to/watched every Essendon game (even if only on replay) since about 05 kid.

That's quite impressive. Well done.

I do wonder however, in how many of those games you've watched, have you paid attention to Pears and Hooker with an understanding of defensive play attached?

 

[carnthedons]

Hooker hasn't been involved in a 1 v 1 contest since he was drafted. Where you've seen his 1v1 skill I wouldn't know. Therefore I would suggest Pears is the better 1v1 player - particlarly as the 3rd tall that can play tall and small (perfect Fletcher replacement).

Agreed on the two injured - but they are in the cats best 22. Caddy, now over his injury, is back in the side.

And I agree with Geelong's third round drafting - very good recruiting by them as I said earlier.

Ok, if I take the Hooker hasn't been in a 1v1 contest to one side, how is Pears good with that? Recent memory of him playing on tall(ish) players includes Cameron violating him and Jack Darling doing that as well to a lesser extent.

I'm wondering if Troglodyte was too long for your username so just got shortened to Trogs

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Ok, if I take the Hooker hasn't been in a 1v1 contest to one side, how is Pears good with that? Recent memory of him playing on tall(ish) players includes Cameron violating him and Jack Darling doing that as well to a lesser extent.

I'm wondering if Troglodyte was too long for your username so just got shortened to Trogs

1) Cameron did get a hold of Pears - but to be fair, not his ideal match up. Carlisle was out that day and I maintain Pears is a 3rd tall. Also, I imagine that Cameron will violate many a key defender in the next decade.

I don't recall Darling getting a hold too badly of him but will take your word for it. My ideal WCE scenario is that Carlisle takes Kennedy, Hurley takes Darling and Pears takes the resting ruckman or Josh Hill / Mark Le Cras.

2) Indeed Troglodyte was too long and thus became Trogs.

 

[eth-dog]

That's quite impressive. Well done.

I do wonder however, in how many of those games you've watched, have you paid attention to Pears and Hooker with an understanding of defensive play attached?

Well considering I was a defender when I played football, I think I'd understand the fact that Hooker is a far better defender than Pears is more than you obviously do.

Again, Hooker's conceded 11 goals in 13 games this season. Pears has conceded 8 gaols in 4 games. Explain to me how exactly Pears is a beter one-on-one defender?

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Well considering I was a defender when I played football, I think I'd understand the fact that Hooker is a far better defender than Pears is more than you obviously do.

Again, Hooker's conceded 11 goals in 13 games this season. Pears has conceded 8 gaols in 4 games. Explain to me how exactly Pears is a beter one-on-one defender?

There is more to a defender than how many goals he concedes. Goals-conceded is an out dated stat than only reflects patterns in a game rather than how successfully a player is defending. The reality is, teams are going to score goals. A player here or there will get off the chain. Unfortuantely Pears has conceded more than Hooker this year (I mighty add that 4 were to J.Cameron in one game. Cameron is an out and out jet. That leaves Pears with 4 goals from 3 games. And I might add games in and out of the side without AFL match fitness or continuity).

I would also argue Hooker plays on the least damaging tall forward so he can drop off and intercept mark. His 'non-dangerous' opponent then doesn't score goals and Hookers 'goals-conceded' looks great. However, how many goals does Hooker cause for opponents with poorly time and clumsy assistance attempts, decision making errors and skill errors. These goals go to players other defenders are matched up on and don't negatively impact Hooker's 'goals-conceded'.

Pears gives other team mates assistance, not worrying about possibly conceding goals himself. This selfless play is the key to a solid back six. He is also capable of playing tall and small, and is considered a better 1v1 defender than Hurley by Matthew Lloyd. Reasonable referee I would have thought. He is also a better decision maker, has better disposal skills and is athletically superior to 'flat footed Hooker'.

In summation, it's not about how many goals a player concedes, it's about how many goals the team concedes. Pears is a more flexible, skillful, team oriented and balanced member of our back six, thus improving our defense significantly more than Hooker.

 

[Jade]

So i'll throw one out there:

Pick 1 from GWS for Bellchambers and Pears.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

So i'll throw one out there:

Pick 1 from GWS for Bellchambers and Pears.

Bellchambers, Hooker and Crameri if needed to get the job done.

 

[Jade]

Bellchambers, Hooker and Crameri if needed to get the job done.

Hooker has been fantastic this year - an absolute keeper.

I'd be interested in seeing what other clubs would offer for Crameri.

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Hooker has been fantastic this year - an absolute keeper.

I'd be interested in seeing what other clubs would offer for Crameri.

Pears better than Hooker long run as the 3rd tall (when Hurley and Carlisle both settle back as the best defensive duo in the league).

 

[eth-dog]

There is more to a defender than how many goals he concedes. Goals-conceded is an out dated stat than only reflects patterns in a game rather than how successfully a player is defending. The reality is, teams are going to score goals. A player here or there will get off the chain. Unfortuantely Pears has conceded more than Hooker this year (I mighty add that 4 were to J.Cameron in one game. Cameron is an out and out jet. That leaves Pears with 4 goals from 3 games. And I might add games in and out of the side without AFL match fitness or continuity).

I would also argue Hooker plays on the least damaging tall forward so he can drop off and intercept mark. His 'non-dangerous' opponent then doesn't score goals and Hookers 'goals-conceded' looks great. However, how many goals does Hooker cause for opponents with poorly time and clumsy assistance attempts, decision making errors and skill errors. These goals go to players other defenders are matched up on and don't negatively impact Hooker's 'goals-conceded'.

Pears gives other team mates assistance, not worrying about possibly conceding goals himself. This selfless play is the key to a solid back six. He is also capable of playing tall and small, and is considered a better 1v1 defender than Hurley by Matthew Lloyd. Reasonable referee I would have thought. He is also a better decision maker, has better disposal skills and is athletically superior to 'flat footed Hooker'.

In summation, it's not about how many goals a player concedes, it's about how many goals the team concedes. Pears is a more flexible, skillful, team oriented and balanced member of our back six, thus improving our defense significantly more than Hooker.

Pears has played against 4 sides, all of which are in the bottom half of the competition. He lost to his direct opponent twice this season. Hooker, despite playing more than triple the games, has lost to his direct opponent once at most, and even that's unclear if he lost or not (Mayne against Freo).

He plays on the second tall forward every week, and sometimes swings onto the first tall when Carlisle goes forward. He's conceded one goal from a poor decision all year. One. Clearly you haven't watched any football this year if you think he still concedes goals from poor decision-making. It was a problem in the past, it isn't any longer. Did you also know we're one of the top sides in goals from turnovers? He's the best intercept mark in the competition. Maybe- just maybe- he's a reason why we've improved so much in that regard.

This argument is really strange. Hooker, by stats, is the best player in the AFL at giving other defenders assistance. And Hurley's strength as a defender is his closing speed, hence why he was so successful against Waite and Darling when he was moved into defence this year. Really strange argument. And no, he isn't a better decision maker, yes he's a beter disposer of the ball, and there is no ****ing way he's athletically superior to Hooks. Hooks is stronger, just as fast, has a better reach and has better hands. You also neglected to mention that Hooker is by far a better reader of play behind the ball

And we've got the 3rd best Points Against this season. Pears is no where near the more flexible, team oriented and balanced player in our back 6. The fact that you think that is a testament to the fact you haven't watched all year

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

So i'll throw one out there:

Pick 1 from GWS for Bellchambers and Pears.

You're famous.

Mark Robinson ‏@Robbo_heraldsun 9h
This was offered: pears and bellchambers For pick 1, give pick 1 to dogs for griffen... Dogs pick Boyd ... Dogs wouldn't deal me thinks

 

[Jade]

You're famous.

I feel dirty.

And why the **** would we secure the number one pick and give it up for Griffin?? Would love him - but at THAT high a price?

 

[Rancid Trogs]

Pears has played against 4 sides, all of which are in the bottom half of the competition. He lost to his direct opponent twice this season. Hooker, despite playing more than triple the games, has lost to his direct opponent once at most, and even that's unclear if he lost or not (Mayne against Freo).

He plays on the second tall forward every week, and sometimes swings onto the first tall when Carlisle goes forward. He's conceded one goal from a poor decision all year. One. Clearly you haven't watched any football this year if you think he still concedes goals from poor decision-making. It was a problem in the past, it isn't any longer. Did you also know we're one of the top sides in goals from turnovers? He's the best intercept mark in the competition. Maybe- just maybe- he's a reason why we've improved so much in that regard.

This argument is really strange. Hooker, by stats, is the best player in the AFL at giving other defenders assistance. And Hurley's strength as a defender is his closing speed, hence why he was so successful against Waite and Darling when he was moved into defence this year. Really strange argument. And no, he isn't a better decision maker, yes he's a beter disposer of the ball, and there is no ******* way he's athletically superior to Hooks. Hooks is stronger, just as fast, has a better reach and has better hands. You also neglected to mention that Hooker is by far a better reader of play behind the ball

And we've got the 3rd best Points Against this season. Pears is no where near the more flexible, team oriented and balanced player in our back 6. The fact that you think that is a testament to the fact you haven't watched all year

Orright mate. We can agree to disagree.