Strategy Tom Langdon trade bait.

[Pdid]

Fyi in 5 yrs langdon will not just be a hb flanker. Most likely hbf, winger and mid. Just like scharenberg or williams or ramsay.

Its called options and versatility. Good clubs like hawthorn have those things

 

[ottoman]

This is the stupidest thread ive read on this forum.

Not even close. Stop exaggerating. Wouldn't even make the top 10. We have had some classic stupid threads.

 

[Scodog10]

I wouldn't be looking to trade him myself (Witts and Frost are the most expendable IMO), however I am at least glad to read that many are cottoning on to the severe lack of improvement in his game.

Jason Cloke mach II is on the cards at the rate Langdon is going except Cloke left the system knowing he got every ounce of talent out of himself and unfortunately no way would I be able to say the same of Tom currently. Hopefully 2016 is the kick up the backside he needs to improve on his stellar opening season.

 

[Hong Kong Pie]

Not worth a bag of chicken twisties.

Cheese flavour?

 

[Pie eyed]

Not even close. Stop exaggerating. Wouldn't even make the top 10. We have had some classic stupid threads.

This would be a stupid thread even in the Bay.
It should be titled "Just more pointless trolling shit"

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I can't wait to bump this thread in 2 years when Langdon is one of our top defenders at the club - I'll gladly take the infraction.

You can give yourself the infraction.
You have the power!

 

[THATSGOLD]

Be honest THATSGOLD was I the inspiration for this thread?

Yes. You are.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

This is the stupidest thread ive read on this forum. Pick 60 something developing into a very good player. Years of work and experience and massive inprovement and upside. And you think he should be tradebait?? Probably one of the shining lights in terms of draftees in the last few yrs. And he should be trade bait??

Sharenberg/oxley/ramsay ahead even tho theyre either injured or in the vfl ???

Complete nonsense. You wouldnt survive managing u10s diamond creek div 4 with your logic

The ones charged with making the decisions....

 

[THATSGOLD]

Langdon is in our best 6 defenders and will be back in the team when he's fit.

Who you dropping for Langdon? Howe Reid Brown Williams Sinclair Maynard?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Back to the selection committee thinking of trading Langdon

 

[Hagla]

I wouldn't be looking to trade him myself (Witts and Frost are the most expendable IMO), however I am at least glad to read that many are cottoning on to the severe lack of improvement in his game.

Jason Cloke mach II is on the cards at the rate Langdon is going except Cloke left the system knowing he got every ounce of talent out of himself and unfortunately no way would I be able to say the same of Tom currently. Hopefully 2016 is the kick up the backside he needs to improve on his stellar opening season.

Not sure if serious... He came into this year as a third year player, was trialled as a third tall which didn't suit him. Went back to his traditional role, showed some good signs again and then got injured. He was actually looking pretty good before he got injured in his last game. He's shown way more than most third year players, I think people just forget he hasn't even played 50 games yet. I can't believe how harshly people judge him and it's pretty hard to show improvement from the grandstands...

 

[Stifler's mom]

Definitely happy to trade if we can improve the balance of our list.

Those saying he is " too promising" to be traded are missing the point.
No one is suggesting he be delisted or given away. Plenty of better players than him have been traded to help fill a list need.
I can see a side with an ageing backline cough up a useful pick or an upgrade for him.
If, and it is an if, we have our first choice backline available, Langdon doesn't play IMO.

 

[TW Sherrin]

Not sure if serious... He came into this year as a third year player, was trialled as a third tall which didn't suit him. Went back to his traditional role, showed some good signs again and then got injured. He was actually looking pretty good before he got injured in his last game. He's shown way more than most third year players, I think people just forget he hasn't even played 50 games yet. I can't believe how harshly people judge him and it's pretty hard to show improvement from the grandstands...

It's all in the eye of the beholder. I reckon he had good game and the rest were poor. His lack of speed ( foot / decision making) is alarming. His kicks take longer to arrive than a taxi in peak hour.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I think the rise of Marsh and Maynard will see Langdon out of this team especially with Howe Reid and Brown looking great down back. There's no real need for him, he's a plodder at best with a weak foot. Howe has the foot skills and Marsh has brought size and pace.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Definitely happy to trade if we can improve the balance of our list.

Those saying he is " too promising" to be traded are missing the point.
No one is suggesting he be delisted or given away. Plenty of better players than him have been traded to help fill a list need.
I can see a side with an ageing backline cough up a useful pick or an upgrade for him.
If, and it is an if, we have our first choice backline available, Langdon doesn't play IMO.

Exactly it's like having money in the reserves when you could be using that money on a forward in the senior team.

 

[Quicky]

Once you've gone in with 3 true ruckmen and a backup ruck/forward you really can't rule anything out can you?



Yeah unfortunately for Langdon, Howe will prevent him from ever seeing senior time as a defender ever again. He may need to reinvent himself if he wants back in. Howe is a better decision maker, better disposer, better spoiler, faster, stronger etc. etc. There's literally no reason for Langdon to get a game as a defender ever again.

I mean, if we were injury free, in 2017 we have:

Nathan Brown
Ben Reid
Jon Marsh
Jeremy Howe
Matthew Scharenberg
Jackson Ramsay
Marley Williams
Jack Frost
Lachlan Keefe
Tom Langdon
Ben Sinclair
Brayden Maynard

All as defensive options. We literally have 2 defences all with senior experience. We have plenty of depth in the backline. As a matter of fact, I'd argue the defence that played against Freo would be my first choice defence.

Brown, Reid, Howe, Marsh, Williams, Sinclair. That's it. You've got coverage for pretty much every forward line type in the comp except a small one, but if Buckley knew how to select a side properly we could easily cover a smaller forward line too. You'd be replacing Marsh and Brown with Ramsay and/or Maynard or JUST Ramsay and throw Reid forward.

The backline is an area we actually have covered pretty well. Our forward line depth though is of pretty serious concern.

I posted this to Shpeshs initial post that started this discussion in the team thread:

I disagree. I think the best defensive structure is 2 KPD, 2 Medium, 2 Small and a bench player that changes depending on the opposition. I think Langdon is well in the mix for that second medium defensive spot.

My preference is something like this:

KPD - Reid, Brown (Frost, Keeffe)
Medium - Howe, Langdon (Marsh, Goldsack, Scharenberg)
Small - Williams, Ramsay (Maynard, Sinclair)

I don't consider Oxley a defender, but an outside mid. He can't defend.

I think the trend is lending itself more towards mobile medium tall rebounding types so Langdon is still very much in the equation.

I think we are missing a third rebounding medium, which I hope is Scharenberg but I think we should plan to have another without him. Marsh and Goldsack don't add rebound. Langdon does, plus is a good deep intercept mark.

I also think we are missing someone durable for that second small defensive role, with Ramsay injured. But I don't seem to rate Maynard as highly as some.

 

[Kappa]

If someone offers us a good deal we'd be stupid not to seriously consider it.

Long term Langdon is just another Goldsack/Toovey/Macaffer. Servicable but not great

 

[Quicky]

If someone offers us a good deal we'd be stupid not to seriously consider it.

Long term Langdon is just another Goldsack/Toovey/Macaffer. Servicable but not great

I doubt anyone would coming off the year he has had. Which means he is more valuable to us. I still think he has it in him to be a very good player for us.

 

[Kappa]

I doubt anyone would coming off the year he has had. Which means he is more valuable to us. I still think he has it in him to be a very good player for us.

Personally, as Langdon is already 22 I see very little development left in him.

I think the major reason he went so late in the draft is he has a low ceiling but the plus side was that he's a safe bet and can play straight away.

I think his slow and laconic decision making and slow loopy kicking style won't ever be things that are fixed, plus his general lack of pace and agility is something that'll always be with him. He really needs to get back his elite intercept/contested marking he had in his 1st year otherwise he doesn't add much to the team

 

[Quicky]

Personally, as Langdon is already 22 I see very little development left in him.

I think the major reason he went so late in the draft is he has a low ceiling but the plus side was that he's a safe bet and can play straight away.

I think his slow and laconic decision making and slow loopy kicking style won't ever be things that are fixed, plus his general lack of pace and agility is something that'll always be with him. He really needs to get back his elite intercept/contested marking he had in his 1st year otherwise he doesn't add much to the team

The quickness of his decision making is the limiting thing for me. I don't buy into the theory he is slow and lacks agility.

I also have a suspicion something was up at the start of the year. He just didn't seem his lively aggressive self. That's reading a bit into body language I realise, but something was off. I wonder how often poor form is related to what is happening in players lives? It's something we will rarely be able to account for in our judgements of players.

 

[Gone Critical]

All players are tradable given the right deal but realistically Langdon won't be on the trade table. Since he started he has been pretty well a lock in our back 6 and people here are judging him way too harshly. Common problem when a player steps into the 22 immediately without a junior reputation. Unless they continue on a significant upward projection no allowance is made for development.

This reminds me a lot of how people looked at Fasolo coming into 2016, missing his potential. Langdon way exceeded expectations in his 1st 2 seasons. There are suggestions here he was not good in 2015. He played 22 games , averaged 20 possessions almost and was named by the AFL players association in the team for the best under 22yo players in the AFL.

Scharenberg, Ramsay, Marsh and Maynard have some potential but are still a long way behind Langdon. He is part of our best 22 and would be playing there if he wasn't injured as he has for almost all his career at Collingwood. Because he is injured doesn't mean he isn't best 22 when fit.

 

[Ulahoopski]

Whenever you see a Trump-like thread on here you can bet on one of two posters being responsible and you'd be a bookies worst nightmare evry single time.

 

[mike123]

I'd trade Oxley ahead of Langdon. He was hailed in his first year, a bit off the pace in his second year, and injured for most of his (current) third year. Lets see how he goes in his fourth year before offering him up. Plus, he still has some credits in the bank for calling Daisy a bogan from Drouin.

I'd trade them both.

 

[Old Spice]

Is the idea to drive our list profile to pre-pubescent levels? If so, then yes.

Look I think Langdon lacks urgency but he's very young and needs more exposure. Plus why would we sell now when he'd be better than any pick we'd get in return but 3 years older? If he was coupled up with another excess player to bring us into the first round you'd have a think.

 

[comradegrumpy]

Given a senior list of 40, having 12 players fighting for a spot in the back 6 isn't necessarily excessive. This year, we've used almost every backman we had available, and while a couple of the outs were due to form, mostly it was injury driven. We even had to pull Howe out of the forward line to play down back (which has worked pretty darn well, but that's hardly the point). List management isn't just a question of "do we want this player moving forwards?", but also a question of "what/who are we going to replace them with?" I'm neither sure that Langdon is surplus to requirements, nor that we can replace him with someone we need more.