Strategy Tom Langdon trade bait.

[Horaceg]

I believe he will be at Collingwood next year and for a few more after that. Will be interesting if Sharenberg gets up to expectations it may have Langdon looking for more opportunity at a later date. I think he can get better, he is approaching the 50 game mark and some solid games behind him.

 

[iGNITER]

I don't think he is best 22 either way.
Would be up for trading him if we could get something worthwhile such as a small crumbling forward.

 

[Gone Critical]

What could he fetch? We have a few like him in the squad and he seems to have gone backwards. I'd be looking to grab a small forward at the end of the season to balance us out and be certain 22 starter.

Players fighting for a back 6 position.

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

I would look at the list of 12 and make a few comments. Let's take out the 4 KPF types as a seperate group. They will be vying for 2 spots amongst themselves. Leaves 8 players for 5 spots. 2 BP, 2 HBF, 1 bench.

Let's look at the 8

Ramsay and Scharenberg coming off ACLs have 13 senior games between them. We don't yet know when they will be available. Ramsay could be not ready at season start and Scharenberg , with his history would only need a setback to also not be available. They need to be allowed slow 2017s, if they come on quickly great but often ACL sufferers need the next season for confidence and recovery especially two with so little experience.

Maynard and Marsh are coming along but still only have 27 games between them and we need time to develop in 2017.

Howe, if we are better of injury wise in 2017, may be returned to the role he was recruited for.

Of the others Williams is the experienced one, 62 games, it's not a lot is it. Sinclair is seasoned now. Langdon is next best in experience. It remains a very inexperienced and fragile group and we don't need to be trading away one of the better performed and experienced members.

Looking at that group, and I would add Goldsack to it, all we need is a couple of injuries and say Ramsay and Scharenberg being mainly VFL in 2017 as they come back form ACLs and we will need all that list to man the 22.

 

[Gone Critical]

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

He is ahead of Sinclair and Maynard on that list for a start

 

[Gone Critical]

I believe he will be at Collingwood next year and for a few more after that. Will be interesting if Sharenberg gets up to expectations it may have Langdon looking for more opportunity at a later date. I think he can get better, he is approaching the 50 game mark and some solid games behind him.

Scharenberg is a fair way behind Langdon as it stands. Whether he reaches Langdons level is uncertain but from watching both of them and with Shaz's extensive injury history I would expect Langdon to have the better career.

 

[Gone Critical]

I don't think he is best 22 either way.
Would be up for trading him if we could get something worthwhile such as a small crumbling forward.

Yet when fit he has been virtually always best 22 at Collingwood from round 1 of his 1st season to now injury aside. What has happened while he has been injured to make him no longer best 22.

 

[Gone Critical]

One thing I do like about Langdon which is the opposite to most on here is his unhurried laconic play. He has time and that's a great asset in a player . He is young and inexperienced and is learning to use it but he has it. I know at times he can be a bit heart in mouth as he sizes up his options. We in the stands are thinking kick it before you are caught. Funny thing is he never seems to be caught with ball in hand.

As time goes he will make better decisions but I like that he is learning and has the ability to use time. It is a trait of good players. The best exponents of time like Pendles, Hodge, Enright, Mitchell, Burgoyne, Murphy are the players that set teams up. He obviously won't be at those levels but maybe a bit of Malcevski or the like will see him one of our better playmakers at the club.

The Shaws have it also. Rhyce had time but we lost patience with allowing him to develop and learn to use it. Posters here bagged his early decision making furiously. Sydney reaped the rewards.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

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.

I likes

 

[Saintly Viewed]

One thing I do like about Langdon which is the opposite to most on here is his unhurried laconic play. He has time and that's a great asset in a player . He is young and inexperienced and is learning to use it but he has it. I know at times he can be a bit heart in mouth as he sizes up his options. We in the stands are thinking kick it before you are court. Funny thing is he never seems to be caught with ball in hand.

As time goes he will make better decisions but I like that he is learning and has the ability to use time. It is a trait of good players. The best exponents of time like Pendles, Hodge, Enright, Mitchell, Burgoyne, Murphy are the players that set teams up. He obviously won't be at those levels but maybe a bit of Malcevski or the like will see him one of our better playmakers at the club.

The Shaws have it also. Rhyce had time but we lost patience with allowing him to develop and learn to use it. Posters here bagged his early decision making furiously. Sydney reaped the rewards.

A really strong point.
His unhurried demeanour I like, just moves in us time zone, and if you're not getting caught, that's a great advantage.

 

[Scodog10]

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...

100% serious for all the reasons mentioned. Unfortunately your post read as if you just disagree because you rate him then threw up a bunch of excuses to support your claim.

FWIW it isn't entirely his fault. Were he at a club with at least a halfway decent development structure he'd be a much better footballer currently. That only partly excuses him though...

 

[NT.Thunder]

I've really struggled to see the dislike for Langdon. The kids still in his third year and has plenty of upside.

The other thing I struggle with is those that don't rate him or claim he's not best 22 in a team currently sitting 14th having an injury interrupted season and expecting to get good currency through a trade.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Would be happy to lose him if it meant we were recruiting for a need. Don't think there would be any hurt factor at all if he was to leave. Perennial 19-32 option on a list, and we have too many defenders. Would much rather lose him then lose Maynard, Marsh, Scharenberg or Ramsay. And we definitely have too many defenders.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

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.

Agree with the above, I'm not saying cut him adrift for the sake of cutting him adrift, just that in my eyes he's the most expendable and the least likely to hurt us of all our backline options.

 

[doodles98]

One thing I do like about Langdon which is the opposite to most on here is his unhurried laconic play. He has time and that's a great asset in a player . He is young and inexperienced and is learning to use it but he has it. I know at times he can be a bit heart in mouth as he sizes up his options. We in the stands are thinking kick it before you are court. Funny thing is he never seems to be caught with ball in hand.

As time goes he will make better decisions but I like that he is learning and has the ability to use time. It is a trait of good players. The best exponents of time like Pendles, Hodge, Enright, Mitchell, Burgoyne, Murphy are the players that set teams up. He obviously won't be at those levels but maybe a bit of Malcevski or the like will see him one of our better playmakers at the club.

The Shaws have it also. Rhyce had time but we lost patience with allowing him to develop and learn to use it. Posters here bagged his early decision making furiously. Sydney reaped the rewards.

You make good points in all you say and I agree. However, the counter argument is that decision making is a skill that some players just never develop. See Simon Buckley for example. Also, his decision making is impacted by his kicking issue which is very very significant for his game and future and I think the real problem with him.. especially in that half back role. All the players you mention above, you will note, are also elite kicks.

Langdon has a very serious kicking issue (long hang time and high elevation) which may never be able to be ironed out satisfactorily. His kicking limitation allows interception of his kicks if he goes for any pass over 40m. This, in my view is why he prefers to chip sideways and backwards so often and takes so long to get the ball moving. This in turn completely stifles our ball movement from the back half and allows the opposition to set up behind play. Langdon is a slow-play player.. he can't move the ball quickly and in that half back role it is a huge issue. Yes he knows how to get the ball but his inability to move it quickly and constructively sometimes just makes him getting a lot of the ball a liability.
IMV we are betting on some pretty exponential development if we think Langdon can iron out these faults from here. Add to that, we have lots of list options for his spot. Add to that, he has youth and reputation and will have good trade currency.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Would be happy to lose him if it meant we were recruiting for a need. Don't think there would be any hurt factor at all if he was to leave. Perennial 19-32 option on a list, and we have too many defenders. Would much rather lose him then lose Maynard, Marsh, Scharenberg or Ramsay. And we definitely have too many defenders.

I think currently, this is a pretty loose term when used in the same sentence as 'Collingwood'. We have too many players classified as defenders would probably be more appropriate.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I think currently, this is a pretty loose term when used in the same sentence as 'Collingwood'. We have too many players classified as defenders would probably be more appropriate.

No o don't think so. Oxley you may have a case for, but I would classify evry other player on the list I named before as defensively better and also a better asset off the half back flank than Langdon. If that doesn't mean your definition of "defender" I don't know what would.

 

[NT.Thunder]

No o don't think so. Oxley you may have a case for, but I would classify evry other player on the list I named before as defensively better and also a better asset off the half back flank than Langdon. If that doesn't mean your definition of "defender" I don't know what would.

It may be more defensive structure that has let us down this year and more so in the early part of the season. Maynard and Marsh have been up and down, Scharenberg for me the jury is still out on noting his limited game time and Ramsey I must admit really goes unnoticed for me. (not saying he's bad, I just don't pick up on him when he's out there like others). We've been poor one on one defending.

 

[TW Sherrin]

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.

I thought he and Marley we well under done at the start of the year and didn't look ready for senior footy.

 

[Maggie5]

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...

Spot on, I think he still has huge upside. No reason why he can't even play in other positions. Wasn't there some talk sometime ago about him being capable of going through the centre?
At the rate some posters are discarding players we will need to trade for another 6-10 players.

 

[BPikkers]

What could he fetch? We have a few like him in the squad and he seems to have gone backwards. I'd be looking to grab a small forward at the end of the season to balance us out and be certain 22 starter.

Players fighting for a back 6 position.

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

I think he is a good player and played a role that a lot of the guys you have listed above don't. He has youth on his side and reads the game really well. His marking is quite good, particularly his intercept marking. Of those listed, maybe Howe and possibly Maynard develop as a similar player. Williams, Ramsay, Sinclair are similar players.

 

[Lockyer24]

Brown Reid Marsh Maynard Shaz Howe my back six next year.

Ramma first off the rank.

Marley up field further. Better ball winner than defender.

Rest depth.

 

[iGNITER]

Yet when fit he has been virtually always best 22 at Collingwood from round 1 of his 1st season to now injury aside. What has happened while he has been injured to make him no longer best 22.

Its my opinion. Thats why I said "I dont think"

My ideal back 6 would be:

B - Ramsay Brown Marsh
HB - Maynard Reid Williams

With Howe rotating through forward and defence.
Scharenberg on the pine.

 

[THATSGOLD]

He is ahead of Sinclair and Maynard on that list for a start

Sinclair is a small and playing both Williams and Sinclair in the backline is required for most teams. Works well. Langdon is too slow to play on a Eddie Betts, Walters type so you can't take Sinclair out for Langdon for that reason alone. Maynard is more a like for like but you can't have both.
Make your case for Maynard to be dropped.

 

[THATSGOLD]

The best backline we could possibly field


Williams Brown Marsh
Sinclair Reid Howe

It has pace which we have needed for years.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Don't understand why people think Howe will remain in defense when we have other players back from injury and available for selection.

Because since becoming a defender we've kept teams to lower scores won more games and looked like a half a team again. He's intercepts marks, makes the kicking in the backline look elite which has been lacking for years and gives us some balance down back with Reid and Brown having some sort of pressure taken off them. Howe also provides experience down back which is a valuable asset to any defense that wants to succeed.