Rate our list!!

[santa claws]

haha you said what i wanted to before me

while most are praising white up im sitting here appalled. it stood out like a sore thumb the lack of finesse and smarts. on the weekend but most are singing his praises.
the glass half full syndrome just does not go away.no matter how hard he tries matt white just is not up to the level in critical areas.

what i would like to know is exactly what it is people are looking at or looking for in player types when rateing them.
ffs greg tivendale was a far far better footballer than white i could go thru countless other glass half fulls who are no longer there who had better attributes but are rightly gone. it seems far to many just dont learn. as long as they try hard produce the odd good game they are good enough.

 

[santa claws]

Simmonds (retire), Cousins (retire), Polak, Polo, Hislop, Thomson, King, White, McMahon. Nahas also doesn't have a future but I'm not sure if he has a contract or not. There's 10 names just off the top of my head, all not good enough.

i can add 5 to that list easily and there are others who you would not be surprised if they went anyway.

hmm how many games have we won again. oh thats right just 2 but it seems there are no duds left on the list. the glass half fulls are everywhere and in 5 yrs time we will still be culling them the only difference will be today we will be culling hacks in 5 yrs time we will be culling a better calibre of hack.
a glass half full is a glass half full have to many and you will stay mired in mediocrity.

i dont want to see us this time around grow the list just enough to challenge for 8th or 9th na not this time do the job properly over the next 2 yrs cull the 15 20 glass half fulls as well as the out and out hacks.

 

[NQTIGER]

i can add 5 to that list easily and there are others who you would not be surprised if they went anyway.

hmm how many games have we won again. oh thats right just 2 but it seems there are no duds left on the list. the glass half fulls are everywhere and in 5 yrs time we will still be culling them the only difference will be today we will be culling hacks in 5 yrs time we will be culling a better calibre of hack.
a glass half full is a glass half full have to many and you will stay mired in mediocrity.

i dont want to see us this time around grow the list just enough to challenge for 8th or 9th na not this time do the job properly over the next 2 yrs cull the 15 20 glass half fulls as well as the out and out hacks.

Carefull santa you will get the mods jumping into this argument too......

We have a lot of building still to be done, and whilst the wins were great, i hope we dont start praising meaningless wins towards the end of the season.

We need pick 4 full stop.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

Simmonds (retire), Cousins (retire), Polak, Polo, Hislop, Thomson, King, White, McMahon. Nahas also doesn't have a future but I'm not sure if he has a contract or not. There's 10 names just off the top of my head, all not good enough.

Agree...not sure who still has another year on their contracts, but lets add McGuane because he drives me crazy with his turnovers. Does anyone think any of these 'not up to its' have any currency?

eg. the only ones I feel MAY get a bite are: White/Nahas/McGuane

 

[_RT_]

Simmonds (retire), Cousins (retire), Polak, Polo, Hislop, Thomson, King, White, McMahon. Nahas also doesn't have a future but I'm not sure if he has a contract or not. There's 10 names just off the top of my head, all not good enough.

Simmonds was always going to retire this year, while McMahon only stayed because of his contract(the one Hardwick wanted gone but had to keep), Polak is another that should have been gone last year but was kept around because he is a great bloke and was a feel good story. Hislop & Thomson have shown bugger all even under Hardwick so its safe to assume they are gone. The only thing that will keep Polo around is if he is still contracted for next year. Nahas was elevated onto the senior list last year so would have another year of his contract to go. As for Cousins I would only keep him around if we were sure that his body would be able to handle another year. Given that group all got delisted you would have 6 picks in the draft and being a compromised draft I'd say that is enough. Assuming we finished 16th with the PP and we would get 4, 27, 29, 46, 63 & 80(if my maths is right). I don't think we want to be picking players after that as the odds of a kid taken pick 97+ making it aren't great at all.

That means White & King, who if theywere to play the rest of the season like they have the last month, would be hanging around for another 12 months minimum. After all keeping them as depth players is smarter than picking up a kid in the draft with picks 97 & 114 that we would have to keep for 2 years regardless of their form.

 

[_RT_]

Carefull santa you will get the mods jumping into this argument too......

We have a lot of building still to be done, and whilst the wins were great, i hope we dont start praising meaningless wins towards the end of the season.

We need pick 4 full stop.

Sorry didn't realise that us Mods weren't allowed to have an opinion on the club we follow.

 

[Barnzy]

That means White & King, who if theywere to play the rest of the season like they have the last month, would be hanging around for another 12 months minimum. After all keeping them as depth players is smarter than picking up a kid in the draft with picks 97 & 114 that we would have to keep for 2 years regardless of their form.

No it's not RT. If they're not good enough, move them on. Simple as that. You just don't keep them because you have to replace them with a late pick. Look over the last few drafts, there's been plenty of players taken late or even in the rookie draft I would take hands down over those 2. Especially with the sudden popularity in mature age players like Anthony, Barlow, Broughton, etc.

 

[_RT_]

i can add 5 to that list easily and there are others who you would not be surprised if they went anyway.

hmm how many games have we won again. oh thats right just 2 but it seems there are no duds left on the list. the glass half fulls are everywhere and in 5 yrs time we will still be culling them the only difference will be today we will be culling hacks in 5 yrs time we will be culling a better calibre of hack.
a glass half full is a glass half full have to many and you will stay mired in mediocrity.

i dont want to see us this time around grow the list just enough to challenge for 8th or 9th na not this time do the job properly over the next 2 yrs cull the 15 20 glass half fulls as well as the out and out hacks.

Who are the other 5 SC? In fact why don't you list all of the ones you would cut at seasons end. Actually I see you've said there are 15-20 that need to go, can't wait to see this list. Should make for interesting reading.

 

[TerryTait]

while most are praising white up im sitting here appalled. it stood out like a sore thumb the lack of finesse and smarts. on the weekend but most are singing his praises.
the glass half full syndrome just does not go away.no matter how hard he tries matt white just is not up to the level in critical areas.

what i would like to know is exactly what it is people are looking at or looking for in player types when rateing them.
ffs greg tivendale was a far far better footballer than white i could go thru countless other glass half fulls who are no longer there who had better attributes but are rightly gone. it seems far to many just dont learn. as long as they try hard produce the odd good game they are good enough.

I dont necessarily disagree with you however what you ahve to keep in mind is our gameplan has changed this year. I heard edwards talking about it the other day how everyone knows where to run before the ball is coming to them so it makes life easier for them. The reason I would give king and white another year if they continue their form is because maybe they suit Hardwicks game plan or find it easier to adjust to. I think this clear and simple structure and goals might lead to some player development which has been sorely lacking at our place for a long time.

I mean look at the socceroos they play a different set up and a hugely high line in defence and they are made to look like shocking players. Given the right structure they are a very nice team.

As RT said I dont see the point in getting rid of two players beginning to show something for late picks in the draft who will then take years to develop.

 

[_RT_]

No it's not RT. If they're not good enough, move them on. Simple as that. You just don't keep them because you have to replace them with a late pick. Look over the last few drafts, there's been plenty of players taken late or even in the rookie draft I would take hands over those 2. Especially with the sudden popularity in mature age players like Anthony, Barlow, Broughton, etc.

Go through the last 5 years of drafting and tell me how many players have made it after being taken after pick 60, be they national draft PSD or rookies draft picks. I'd be surprised if there are more than 25.

The point is, say we sign White and King to a 12 month contract, if they fail we've lost nothing, say we pick up 2 kids in the 7th & 8th rounds of the draft, those 2 kids have to stay on the list for 2 years regardless, even if they are worse players than King and White. That also means that some other kid who has shown a little bit of promise lhas to get cut because they are out of contract and we have to cut at least 3 players a year.

 

[Barnzy]

Go through the last 5 years of drafting and tell me how many players have made it after being taken after pick 60, be they national draft PSD or rookies draft picks. I'd be surprised if there are more than 25.

The point is, say we sign White and King to a 12 month contract, if they fail we've lost nothing, say we pick up 2 kids in the 7th & 8th rounds of the draft, those 2 kids have to stay on the list for 2 years regardless, even if they are worse players than King and White. That also means that some other kid who has shown a little bit of promise lhas to get cut because they are out of contract and we have to cut at least 3 players a year.

What if the players that replace them turn into good players? Why settle for something that we know isn't good enough? Such a loser mentality that is. Accepting mediocrity. Sums up the RFC.

 

[TerryTait]

What if the players that replace them turn into good players? Why settle for something that we know isn't good enough? Such a loser mentality that is. Accepting mediocrity. Sums up the RFC.

No your constant calls for blood letting sums up the RFC, its time for you and others to drop your biases and see if some players you thought arent up to it can play a key part in the future of the club.

 

[Azzleberry]

Simmonds (retire), Cousins (retire), Polak, Polo, Hislop, Thomson, King, White, McMahon. Nahas also doesn't have a future but I'm not sure if he has a contract or not. There's 10 names just off the top of my head, all not good enough.

Agree with Barnzy, however, I don't think we will turn 10 players over this year. Probably only 7-8. Need to keep some familiarity within the team and frienship groups.
I do not think any of the players above will be part of our Premiership side.
However, would delist them all (although Polak a rookie, so no spot opened up on the list) except for Nahas, White and Cousins. These guys deserve another year. Cuz can teach the younger brigade both on field and off field, whilst Nahas needs to add more size and continually improve and White continues to improve. Has a lot of potential and that acceleration is scary good.
I think we could also see if other clubs want to trade for these players. I mean Schultz. Pattison and JON all got picked up after we delisted them last year..
Polo, Hislop and Thompson might be able to upgrade some picks with them. Especially Polo. Even if it means we give Polo and our 4th rounder to a team for there 3rd rounder, still increases the chance of us getting the player we want!

 

[Rayzorwire]

The point is, say we sign White and King to a 12 month contract, if they fail we've lost nothing, say we pick up 2 kids in the 7th & 8th rounds of the draft, those 2 kids have to stay on the list for 2 years regardless, even if they are worse players than King and White. That also means that some other kid who has shown a little bit of promise lhas to get cut because they are out of contract and we have to cut at least 3 players a year.

Well said RT, plus there's the depth factor...even with our relatively injury free run this year we don't have a lot left on the shelf in terms of AFL capable, mature players.

There's more than enough room for a couple of hard working depth players at every club.

 

[Brown Bottle]

It's not a great idea making decisions about all of these "list cloggers" when there are still 10 weeks of the season to go. Anyone who has watched us over the last 6 weeks couldn't fail to be impressed by the markedly improved attitude, and the emerging game plan (for want of a better term). Like most here I couldn't really care less about the W-L record this year, but I'll take as many Ws as the boys are capable of delivering and love every moment.

What I've really enjoyed is watching some blokes who I've long considered to be below AFL standard play with some pride and passion, but more importantly make some significant contributions for sustained periods of matches. I'm still not convinced about King, White and McGuane but I'd give them the remainder of the season to show us what they're capable of. I never thought I'd say it, but I reckon they've been pretty good lately.

The only players who we can categorically exclude from being a part of "our next premiership team" are the ones who will retire this year or next IMO. (I'm talking about the ones who are playing, btw...not Jordy, Hislop, etc. who probably have run out of chances.)

If you'd told me at the start of the season that we would hold the record for the most tackles laid in a game by the end of 2010 I wouldn't have been able to contain the laughter. If you'd offered me 1M:1 I wouldn't have even invested $1. We've been soft for far too long, but we don't look soft any more. Full credit to Dimma. Full credit to the playing group who are taking the field each week. Put aside your personal biases about certain players and watch the game. We're good to watch, and it's not just our potential A-graders who have come to play.

I still have no interest in rating our list relative to any other club. I don't know any of the other clubs' lists well enough. All I know is that for the first time in a long time I'm consistently enjoying watching us play, and it makes me smile.

 

[_RT_]

What if the players that replace them turn into good players? Why settle for something that we know isn't good enough? Such a loser mentality that is. Accepting mediocrity. Sums up the RFC.

Like I said go through the last 5 years of drafting and tell me the amount of national, Pre season & rookie picks taken after pick 60 that have gone on to be good players.

Here is a little test for you and others if they want. Below are a few players who had been been on AFL lists for 4 seasons:

Player A: 4 season for 30 games 351 disposals @ 11.7 per game 96 marks @ 3.2 per game 27 goals @ 0.9 per game 64 tackles @ 2.1 per game

Player B: 4 seasons for 54 games 683 disposals @ 12.6 per game 204 marks @ 3.7 per game 21 goals @ 0.4 goals per game 172 tackles @ 3.2 per game

Player C: 4 seasons for 46 games 784 disposals @ 17 per game 231 marks @ 5.0 per game 9 goals @ 0.2 per game 127 tackles @ 2.8 per game

Player D: 4 seasons for 49 games 626 disposals @ 12.7 per game 126 marks @ 2.6 per game 26 goals @ 0.53 per game 146 tackles @ 2.97 per game.

Player E: 4 seasons for 51 games 919 disposals @ 18 per game 288 marks @ 5.64 per game 24 goals @ 0.5 per game 87 tackles @ 1.7 per game

Of those 5 players which 3 would you have kept based on their first 4 seasons in the AFL?

 

[Barnzy]

Like I said go through the last 5 years of drafting and tell me the amount of national, Pre season & rookie picks taken after pick 60 that have gone on to be good players.

I could even go through the last few rookie drafts and pick out a number of players I'd take over King and White. These players are out there (Broughton, Anthony, Barlow, etc) or even Webberly and Nason who whether or not will make it have shown more in their 1st year in the system than King and White in their 4th and 5th. We just have to look.

As I said, why accept something that isn't good enough? As for your stats game well that's irrelevant, I don't care about stats. I can see with my own 2 eyes that these 2 aren't up to the level. Both are battlers and triers and that's where it ends. They have the odd good game in their whole career and suddenly people are talking them up.

 

[Bazzar]

I could even go through the last few rookie drafts and pick out a number of players I'd take over King and White.

So tiresome your constant criticism of these two players. It goes on and on and on. Every now and a gain I look over at PRE and you’re the same there, on and on and on about them. I think we all get it now you hate them. They have both been in really good form the last month and you just cannot handle that. So do us a favour and give it up. It really makes you look silly.

 

[Barnzy]

So tiresome your constant criticism of these two players. It goes on and on and on. Every now and a gain I look over at PRE and you’re the same there, on and on and on about them. I think we all get it now you hate them. They have both been in really good form the last month and you just cannot handle that. So do us a favour and give it up. It really makes you look silly.

Sorry if you like to support and applaud such mediocrity. I don't. Was also a reply to RT's post so get off your high horse.

 

[Bazzar]

Sorry if you like to support and applaud such mediocrity. I don't. Was also a reply to RT's post so get off your high horse.

Sorry, didn’t realise BF etiquette meant you weren’t allowed to “butt in” to another post. Well I should just go back to the hundred other posts where you slag them off and use one of them.

 

[_RT_]

I could even go through the last few rookie drafts and pick out a number of players I'd take over King and White. These players are out there (Broughton, Anthony, Barlow, etc) or even Webberly and Nason who whether or not will make it have shown more in their 1st year in the system than King and White in their 4th and 5th. We just have to look.

What happens though if the players we do pick instead of keeping them are duds and we're stuck with them for another 12 months while we have to get rid of someone like Taylor or Dea 2 kids who have shown something in limited appearances this year?

As I said, why accept something that isn't good enough? As for your stats game well that's irrelevant, I don't care about stats. I can see with my own 2 eyes that these 2 aren't up to the level. Both are battlers and triers and that's where it ends. They have the odd good game in their whole career and suddenly people are talking them up.

I'm sorry I didn't realise that we had to have a team of 30 champions and superstars to win a premiership. Every side has their battlers and triers that play a role which allows the matchwinners to go about their jobs of winning matches.

So why can't guys like White & King be the grunts that allow guys like Deledio Cotchin & Martin do what they do best? Oh thats right I forgot you just don't like them and want a side full of superstars and champions.

 

[Barnzy]

What happens though if the players we do pick instead of keeping them are duds and we're stuck with them for another 12 months while we have to get rid of someone like Taylor or Dea 2 kids who have shown something in limited appearances this year?


I'm sorry I didn't realise that we had to have a team of 30 champions and superstars to win a premiership. Every side has their battlers and triers that play a role which allows the matchwinners to go about their jobs of winning matches.

So why can't guys like White & King be the grunts that allow guys like Deledio Cotchin & Martin do what they do best? Oh thats right I forgot you just don't like them and want a side full of superstars and champions.

It's not about wanting a side full of a superstars and champions, it's about wanting the club to move players on who aren't good enough and continue to trial more kids. It's the only way we're going to improve the list, not by keeping them. Should be delist our good players? Is that what you want? Baffling.

Let's keep all our other average players/duds, apparently they can be good depth! Let's ignore the fact we're sitting on the bottom of the ladder and our list needs a lot of work. Everything is fine. I thought people would've learnt from the past when the club kept average players far too long. Obviously not. Anyways, I'm over this debate.

 

[_RT_]

It's not about wanting a side full of a superstars and champions, it's about wanting the club to move players on who aren't good enough and continue to trial more kids. It's the only way we're going to improve the list, not by keeping them. Should be delist our good players? Is that what you want? Baffling.

Who says they aren't good enough. Those stats I put up this morning include White and King as well as 3 very highly rated AFL players. Looking back at those figures you could have made a case to say that those other 3 players wouldn't turn out to be the stars they are today after 4 years in the system. All 3 struggled to get game time for the respective clubs, repeatedly being dropped and then brought back in after showing a bit of form in the ressies. If your logic of they are battlers who will play a few good games here and there was applied to those 3 they would have been delisted after 4 years.

Let's keep all our other average players/duds, apparently they can be good depth! Let's ignore the fact we're sitting on the bottom of the ladder and our list needs a lot of work. Everything is fine. I thought people would've learnt from the past when the club kept average players far too long. Obviously not. Anyways, I'm over this debate.

What damage would be done by keeping White and King for another 12 months? We wouldn't get to select a kid in the 80-100 range of the draft, which is more like 90-110 range when you add in the GC/GWS concessions.

As it stands right now delisting Simmonds Cousins McMahon Polo Hilsop & Thomson would give us 6 picks in the draft being picks 4, 27, 29, 46, 63 & 80(assuming the club does as you wish and tanks). Delist King & White as well and our next 2 picks would be in the 90's at best.

Like I asked before go through the last 5 years of drafting (I'll even allow you to do it for the years 2003-2008 if you like to make it easier) and find me 25 players taken after pick 60 that have made it, not that you would take ahead of King & White but have actually made it and I'll change my mind and say they should be delisted. But given you haven't yet/won't I'm guessing there aren't that many late round picks that have actually made it.

 

[coke_zero]

As it stands right now delisting Simmonds Cousins McMahon Polo Hilsop & Thomson would give us 6 picks in the draft being picks 4, 27, 29, 46, 63 & 80(assuming the club does as you wish and tanks). Delist King & White as well and our next 2 picks would be in the 90's at best.

sorry, but the whole point of a rebuild is to weed out the players that won't take us anywhere. out of these 2 i can only see White in our team next year. But some days he plays horrible. While others he might be alright but not great.

 

[santa claws]

all i can say is failure by this club to turn over players who are severely lacking in areas of the game has cost us enormously. after five yrs of wallace we find ourselves on the bottom of the ladder still. one of the principal reasons hanging onto a myriad of players just like white and king who are clearly below standard.

you can also ask what possible harm can be done in delisting these blokes. in 26yo kings case how many small defenders do we have.
in whites case how many mids.
look at the list of names below there are some there who we have taken who are just as good as white what have we to lose.at worst we are likely to find a player on par with white that is someone we will ultimately have to delist or off load for a pick like we did raines who was also a late pick. so just what have we to lose in not delisting we cost ourselves the opportunity to find at least a core list player.
i know lets just sit on our hands and do nothing just like we always have and look where it has got us.

sheesh white is in his 5th yr hes a small hes poorly skilled makes to many poor decisions and for a mid does not find enough of the ball.its a constant rate him against his peers and tell me we should keep him.

since wallace to now we have used just 9 or 10 nd picks past pick 50 or 4th rounders onwards. herein lies one big part of our problems right now.but in fairness to those in charge not a lot of players are taken after pick say pick 60 in the nd each yr.

to me a way of finding an improvement on white would be simple it may or may not work but we do what we did this yr with taylor webberley nason all three have good skills and have footy smarts.they all have attributes white does not. all taken 4th rnd onwards.

those picks 50 onwards are
04 limbach and graham
05 nil
06 connors peterson collins.
07 putt
08 hislop
09 taylor webberley nason.

throw in psd picks that we have used on kids which really makes it just an extension of the nd

white gourdis grimes

then throw in the rookies there is ample opportunity to pick up a player late. its got to be better than hanging onto known below standard under performers. especially if there are blokes in your system who can do the roles of those going without losing anything or to much.

and isnt it typical of some dragging out the old they all have to be champions line.

personally ive only ever commented on players in regards stengths weakness and performance.
players fall into the following categories for me and im sure barnzy is similar.

development,
below standard, white king.
core list which is the minimum you want in your players.
good/very good
elite.
its based on how pelchen goes about it.