Taylor Walker

[cmndstab]

I'm not sure I see him as either, he strikes me as more of a "third tall" type, who starts off next to Tippett but leads in a different direction. I certainly prefer him being deeper in the forward line.

 

[WALL-e]

Just a qn...once both mature, do you guys see Walker at FF and Tippett at CHF, or the other way around? It seems to me a big part of the reason Walker struggled against us was that he was being played too high/wide to expose Leigh Brown, whereas Tippett was given lots of room inside the 50. I thought he looked far more dangerous in our Rd 1 encounter because he seemed to be playing deeper.

I personally see Walker at FP Tippett at FF and McKErnan at CHF.

 

[marvin]

In my opinion Walker has not once been dropped because of his lack of defensive pressure or second efforts. His two demotions have come entirely from a lack of offensive efforts.

Perhaps not effort, so much as output, but apart from that:

Nail. Hammer. Head.

 

[mdc]

I personally see Walker at FP Tippett at FF and McKErnan at CHF.

I'm not sure I see him as either, he strikes me as more of a "third tall" type, who starts off next to Tippett but leads in a different direction. I certainly prefer him being deeper in the forward line.

Interesting. Most people have similar thoughts re: Anthony/Rusling/Cloke on our board.

I'm unconvinced it's possible to have 3 talls in one forward-line any more (lack of space + makes it too easy for opposition defenders to run it out).

 

[King Elvis]

7 pages....seriously??
If it was ANY other player (even another youngster), and they had 4 touches in a game, you guys would be calling for them to be delisted/traded and would celebrate that they've been dropped.
There's a reason you guys aren't on the selection panel - because you have NO idea what goes on behind the scenes. You see what happens on the field and players don't get picked and dropped JUST because of what happened on the field, i.e in the pre-season Danger didn't play because his training wasn't up to scratch (remember that? Danger didn't play during the pre-season....of course you don't remember that because look at him now!!! Because God forbid you guys would actually admit that him not getting picked then has helped him now...)
The problem with Walker is that the media has pumped him up so much that everyone thought he was going to solve all our forward problems in one year, but of course, he hasn't. He's a 19 year old, he still has a lot to learn and once he builds up a little strength (because if you watched him last week, he got out-muscled almost every time he went to mark the ball) he'll be a gun. He'll be back and even better next year and he'll be like Tippett - club's leading goal kicker, in the top 10 leading goalkickers in the competition and all this crap will be forgotten.

Anybody got the stats from the performances of Tippett & Dangerfield in their first 20 games?

I'm pretty sure they both had a few shockers, but most of us recognised that their further development required AFL football.

 

[macca23]

I personally see Walker at FP Tippett at FF and McKErnan at CHF.

I'd be amazed if you're not right there Wall-e.

 

[WALL-e]

I'd be amazed if you're not right there Wall-e.

That's what i've been telling people for years.

Those bastards.

But that would really excite me to see that forward line.

If only there was an ace cumber between tex and tipp.

 

[cmndstab]

Interesting. Most people have similar thoughts re: Anthony/Rusling/Cloke on our board.

I'm unconvinced it's possible to have 3 talls in one forward-line any more (lack of space + makes it too easy for opposition defenders to run it out).

I think you can only do it if the forwards are athletic enough. You certainly don't want two clunkers there.

Anybody got the stats from the performances of Tippett & Dangerfield in their first 20 games?

I'm pretty sure they both had a few shockers, but most of us recognised that their further development required AFL football.

I think Danger's only played 20 games.

As for Tippett, he played 19 games last year. The disposal breakdown was:

6, 4, 6, 9, 8, 10, 7, 7, 4, 5, 12, 4, 13, 7, 10, 3, 6, 10, 4. Total: 135. Average: 7.

Not exactly dominating numbers. In terms of goals he got:

2, 2, 0, 1, 2, 2, 4, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0. Total: 17. Average: less than 1.


Compare that to this year, when his disposal count has been:

9, 11, 11, 13, 19, 12, 11, 7, 7, 5, 11, 10, 8, 13, 15, 4, 13, 14, 12. Total: 205. Average: 11.

And goals:

0, 3, 1, 1, 2, 0, 1, 1, 2, 1, 7, 1, 2, 5, 5, 2, 2, 4, 1. Total: 41. Average: a bit over 2.


Impressive how he's picked up in his second year Also, his last ten goals have seen him average 3 goals a game.

 

[macca23]

That's what i've been telling people for years.

Those bastards.

But that would really excite me to see that forward line.

If only there was an ace cumber between tex and tipp.

I presume you mean crumber, not cucumber, there Wall-e??

 

[Damon_3388]

An interesting stat for you to follow that up with might be how much game time Tippett played in his first year.

The Crows try to ease their youngsters in, not giving them much game time in their first year. Supporters are divided on whether this is a good thing or not but I don't think it's hurt our players so far.

According to the 2009 AFL Prospectus, Kurt Tippett didn't play an AFL game in 2007, and in 2008 averaged 95 minutes per game in 19 appearances, which is roughly 79% gametime, which is 10% more than Walker has received this season. So far this year, Tippett averaging 103 minutes per game at 86% gametime.

Tippett probably received more game last year than Walker is getting this year because as I mentioned earlier, even if he doesn't kick goals, he is a bit more versatile (can play a role in the ruck or up forward) and has more potential to create contests and mismatches with his size alone than the smaller, younger Walker, seeing as there's 3 years, 11cm and 13kg difference between them.

 

[RoosterLad]

I presume you mean crumber, not cucumber, there Wall-e??

Lovely pick up.

 

[Macca19]

In respect of this whole re-action to Taylor Walker's omission, a famous quote comes to mind:

"Never has so much been said, by so many, about so little"

Hit the nail on the head as always.

What an odd thread.

He got dropped because he couldnt buy a kick last week, nor in his previous game before that. He had 77% gametime against Collingwood (approx 80 mins or so) for 3 kicks. The way I see it is you guys are trying to make top 4, youve got a few must win games coming up to achieve that and you need everyone up and firing.

Crazy thread. I think I need a lie down now after reading all this.

 

[Truck Rutten]

I meant games this year And I mean the game prior to him being dropped a month ago and the game last week. His Kangaroos game was good.


This is the only real nasty taste I have in my mouth about this issue - the being dropped after only one poor game in a row. Admittedly last time he was dropped it was after two poor games out of three, but still.

Oh okay...Burton's first game back is one that comes to mind this year. Obviously he's got more credit in the bank than Tex, but it's not like Tex hasn't shown that he can perform at AFL level either.

Agree totally with your second paragraph. If he'd played 2 poor games in a row then I'd be 100% behind dropping him, but I have no doubt that his performance last week was partly attributable to the way he's been managed and the way he was used in that game and I would have stuck by him for another week, but put the acid on the kid to atone for it.

 

[RoosterLad]

You can't even compare Burton and Walker...

 

[Alex99]

We got pantsed by Collingwood and should have beaten Geelong (who played as poorly against us as they did against Carlton)

Its not about giving up it is about building towards a premiership and not focussing on using the same guys year in year out that havent gotten us over the line in September and expecting a miracle every year which never happens.

If our squad develops into one challenging for a flag in the next two-three years what is going to be more valuable exposing those players the pressure of finals or keeping them in the SANFL while we play the same old guys who wont be there in two years.

Reasonable chance ??? We sit a game and 10% outside the top 4 with three games to play. We are in a position where we have to win all three games and rely on the Bulldogs only win one game, I dont see how we are a reasonable chance to make the top four

If we were going to make the top four we would have been good enough to win at least one or both of our last two games and would be sitting in the top four now as weak speak.

I agree with all of this. Well said.

 

[Truck Rutten]

You can't even compare Burton and Walker...

I know, Walker is an incredibly smart footballer.

 

[Stiffy_18]

What an insult to one of our best ever players to play for our club, Chris Ladhams was a spud with a phenomenal kick, he wasnt even Tyson's boot lace. I saw nothing in him except for his leg in the whole time that he was at the Crows. I am sick players supposedly being "super talented" that never show anything, IMO if they were good enough they would have showed something.

Woosh!!!!

Straight over your head!

 

[WALL-e]

I presume you mean crumber, not cucumber, there Wall-e??

It's all good.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Sorry, can I just check what conclusions other posters draw from these figures:-

As for Tippett, he played 19 games last year. The disposal breakdown was:

6, 4, 6, 9, 8, 10, 7, 7, 4, 5, 12, 4, 13, 7, 10, 3, 6, 10, 4. Total: 135. Average: 7.

Not exactly dominating numbers. In terms of goals he got:

2, 2, 0, 1, 2, 2, 4, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0. Total: 17. Average: less than 1.


Compare that to this year, when his disposal count has been:

9, 11, 11, 13, 19, 12, 11, 7, 7, 5, 11, 10, 8, 13, 15, 4, 13, 14, 12. Total: 205. Average: 11.

And goals:

0, 3, 1, 1, 2, 0, 1, 1, 2, 1, 7, 1, 2, 5, 5, 2, 2, 4, 1. Total: 41. Average: a bit over 2.

Impressive how he's picked up in his second year Also, his last ten goals[sic] have seen him average 3 goals a game.

 

[Vader]

Sorry, can I just check what conclusions other posters draw from these figures:-

That Tippett would have been dropped far earlier than he was, if he was reliant upon his forward output alone. Fortunately for him, he's also a more than handy ruckman who had 10+ hitouts on 4 occasions - while all three of our other ruckmen had their best seasons.

 

[ruscy002]

FWIW, I've always thought that starting on the ground for Walker is a more influential factor than just game time. When he's started on the ground, he got the opportunity to pick up the tempo of the game and get his hands on the ball early...worked for Hentschel last night too.

Why did we stop doing this after the Carlton/Hawthorn games, his best games of the season???

 

[Damon_3388]

FWIW, I've always thought that starting on the ground for Walker is a more influential factor than just game time. When he's started on the ground, he got the opportunity to pick up the tempo of the game and get his hands on the ball early...worked for Hentschel last night too.

Why did we stop doing this after the Carlton/Hawthorn games, his best games of the season???

Starting on the ground would be important for a key position forward I'd imagine, to (as you said) get used to the flow of the particular game, get your hands on the footy early, etc. Midfielders don't have the same problem if they start on the bench, because they have more opportunity to get their own ball, and aren't as reliant on the work of others (in terms of delivery I mean) as a KPF is.

 

[cmndstab]

You're probably right rucs. Mind you, then we have to start a different forward on the bench instead... it wouldn't be Tippett and I'd like Knights and Porps on early so it starts to get a bit harder.

Douglas, maybe?

 

[relapse]

Woosh!!!!

Straight over your head!

Yeah it must of cos I could have sworn you said the following

"The difference between Chris Ladhams and Tyson Edwards is worth ethic. Both special talents, one played 50 games the other going strong well past 300. That my friend is the differences."

Because in the words of Carro that whole statement is a BAD CALL.

Ladhams had no special talent besides being a great kick, yeah I agree that he was lazy and didnt have a good work eithc but so are many other footballers, but their talent got them over the line. Ladhams didnt have enough talent to carry his lazy work ethic, maybe if he had a better work ethic he would have had a longer AFL career, but for someone to think that Ladhams raw talent is/was the equal of Tyson Edwards then I am amazed.

So if I misunderstood that then okay.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Yeah it must of cos I could have sworn you said the following

"The difference between Chris Ladhams and Tyson Edwards is worth ethic. Both special talents, one played 50 games the other going strong well past 300. That my friend is the differences."

Because in the words of Carro that whole statement is a BAD CALL.

Ladhams had no special talent besides being a great kick, yeah I agree that he was lazy and didnt have a good work eithc but so are many other footballers, but their talent got them over the line. Ladhams didnt have enough talent to carry his lazy work ethic, maybe if he had a better work ethic he would have had a longer AFL career, but for someone to think that Ladhams raw talent is/was the equal of Tyson Edwards then I am amazed.

So if I misunderstood that then okay.

Wrong on so many levels its actually laughable!

For one, Ladhams was a highly talented player. One that was picked early in the second round as a 17 year old when the club could only pick one per draft. He was also labeled by a few AFC officials as one of the more talented players to walk through the doors at West Lakes. The only thing that seperated Chris Ladhams from 300 AFL games was his attitude and lack of work ethic. Yes he was one sided but so are MANY of the left footers, our current captain and club champion included.

You also don't mention that Edwards was also overlooked in his draft and picked up in the PSD. It took him good part of 5 years to cement his spot in the side. He was highly inconsistent and with 50 games was about on similar level as Chris Ladhams was and Richard Douglas currently is.

But the penny dropped with Tyson and he will be the first one to admit it. He decided it was time to knuckle down and work extremely hard on his game and improve on his weaknesses. That my friend is why he is a club legend, 300+ game players and one of the club's favourite sons.

While Tyson can one day tell his kids and grandkids how good he was, Ladhams can say how good he could have been. Many good football judges have rated Ladhams as a real talent. An attacking, goal kicking midfielder / HF who had match winning ability. You will claim to be an expert now and say how he was crap and point to his 50 odd AFL games and say how that supports your argument. You will bring up some washed up saying that many players were lazy but still had great careers and I will say that none of those are in current day and age where the sport has become a full time profession and the players watch what they eat, drink and have just about every minute of their day planned.

There is a great deal of sacrifice that current footballers need to commit to. Very talented players like Chris Ladhams preferred to go out with mates get pissed, chase minny skirts and tell everyone that wanted to listen how good he was while players like Edwards sacrificed a great deal and did everything right to one day be remembered as club and AFL legend.

I suggest you look at history without rose coloured glasses and without the benefit of hindsight. Next thing you will be telling me is that Lawrence Angwin was a talentless dud