What would you rather have?

[Hammerfire]

None by Caroline wilson I bet

 

[Darth_Tiger]

i dont think this is as big a deal as people are making out. yes i would have liked one more on the main list with our 2nd psd pick, however how many rookies of ours have ever made it. vardy is gone, tivs was our best success so far. both moore and foley were our first picks in the rookie draft that we picked them in. there was a very high chance any others we would have picked up yesterday would have never played a senior game. i would much prefer knobel who at 24 could develop into our number 1 ruckman very quickly. those bagging him for his lack of possessions are only judging him on his last 2 games. quite unfair imo, before that he was getting equal or more possession that ottens did when he played in the ruck.

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

I would rather the "PRIZE" thanks

 

[Weaver]

The Lions didn't get 6 rookies, they got one.
Brisbane and Sydney reserve some NSW and Qld youngsters prior to the draft for their reserves sides.
If you check the draft you'll see Brisbane passed in rounds 2&3. The players in the subsequent rounds are their "reserved" players.

Not true. They are rookie-list players. Guys like Joel MacDonald and Daniel Merrett who have been promoted to the senior list.

 

[Weaver]

those bagging him for his lack of possessions are only judging him on his last 2 games. quite unfair imo, before that he was getting equal or more possession that ottens did when he played in the ruck.

I am judging him by his 54 game, 6-year career in which -

• 2 times he has taken more than 5 marks in match.
• 3 times has he had more than 5 kicks in a match, and never 10.
• 17 times he has not had a kick in a match
• 12 times he has not taken a mark
• 12 times he has only taken 1 mark
• 3 times he has more than 10 disposals in a game.
• Never had a game where he kicked multiple goals.
• 25 times had less than 5 disposals.
• The Saints prefer to use Jason Blake.

 

[Fishfinger]

Not true. They are rookie-list players.

Thanks Weaver. You might be able to explain better how it works.
Seeing the Lions passed in rounds 2, 3 & 4 and took the 5 locals in rounds 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 do they get concessions for taking these players that no other clubs except Sydney get?
Apologies if I mistakenly said they are not rookie-list players. I'm still not convinced they are not merely "token" picks and that only one "real" rookie was selected, but then I don't fully understand how the system works.

 

[silence ofthe Robert]

i dont think this is as big a deal as people are making out. yes i would have liked one more on the main list with our 2nd psd pick, however how many rookies of ours have ever made it. vardy is gone, tivs was our best success so far. both moore and foley were our first picks in the rookie draft that we picked them in. there was a very high chance any others we would have picked up yesterday would have never played a senior game. i would much prefer knobel who at 24 could develop into our number 1 ruckman very quickly. those bagging him for his lack of possessions are only judging him on his last 2 games. quite unfair imo, before that he was getting equal or more possession that ottens did when he played in the ruck.[/QUOTE]

Just a correction Ottens averaged 12.83 possesions in 2004 to Knobel's 6.13 and had 424 hitouts in 18 games as opposed to Knobels 460 hitouts in 24 games. Also 2004 was a bad year for Ottens who averaged 15.25 possession in 2003, and 14.76 in 2001 (when he also kicked 46 goals).

 

[Weaver]

Seeing the Lions passed in rounds 2, 3 & 4 and took the 5 locals in rounds 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 do they get concessions for taking these players that no other clubs except Sydney get?

The Lions and Swans are able to pre-list rookies from their states. For no good reason at all the AFL lists these at the end of the rookie draft from the bottom-up. This happens before the rookie-draft proper.

The the rookie draft happens and the Swans and Lions get to choose rookies in the same way as the rest of us.

Apologies if I mistakenly said they are not rookie-list players. I'm still not convinced they are not merely "token" picks and that only one "real" rookie was selected, but then I don't fully understand how the system works.

I wouldn't have described them as token at all. Both the Swans guys (Earl Shaw and Ed Clarke) were pretty highly regarded and the Lions are beneffiting from a rapidly improving QLD junior system.

So far the Lions have used this quirk on Robert Copeland, Joel MacDonald, Daniel Merrett and Trent Knobel. There will be others, that is just off the top of my head.

 

[Hammerfire]

I am judging him by his 54 game, 6-year career in which -

• 2 times he has taken more than 5 marks in match.
• 3 times has he had more than 5 kicks in a match, and never 10.
• 17 times he has not had a kick in a match
• 12 times he has not taken a mark
• 12 times he has only taken 1 mark
• 3 times he has more than 10 disposals in a game.
• Never had a game where he kicked multiple goals.
• 25 times had less than 5 disposals.
• The Saints prefer to use Jason Blake.

2004 Stats: Trent Knobel
Averaged 19.2 hitouts per game
Averaged 6.1 possesions per game
Averaged 3.8 handballs per game
Averaged 2.3 kicks per game
Averaged 2.3 marks per game

Considering he only played 30 games in his first 5 years as a player, and that ruckmen generally take at least 3-4 years before they start to hit their straps, i think it's more important to focus on his 2004 stats, as he really did step up a notch this year.

These stats are OK for a ruckmen, but it is expected that he will improve over the next couple of years as talls generally leave their run late.

Whether this happens, time will tell.

 

[silence ofthe Robert]

Guys if you thought Ottens went missing, Knobel is going to take it to a brand new level.

 

[Fishfinger]

The Lions and Swans are able to pre-list rookies from their states. For no good reason at all the AFL lists these at the end of the rookie draft from the bottom-up. This happens before the rookie-draft proper.

Are these pre-list rookies just the same as players in the rookie draft proper or are there concessions and different regulations for them? (ie paid by the club or AFL subsidised, rules of availability, etc)
I didn't know about this system until a few days ago and I'm interested to know how it works.

 

[Bentleigh]

As for adding you think we should get both in this thread, that's not the case in the "Trent Knobel you little beauty" thread where you clearly agreed with SOTR's opinion that he is a dud and added that you would have preferred a handful of kids.

Rather than having to choose the recyled ruckman or the rookies i would have liked the club to invest in both, its not unreasonable. Overspending on kids for our rebuilding is not a waste of money, myself and im sure many fellow Tiger supporters would have encouraged 'over-spending' if it ment having more potential good players in our ranks.

..

 

[Bentleigh]

i dont think this is as big a deal as people are making out. yes i would have liked one more on the main list with our 2nd psd pick, however how many rookies of ours have ever made it.

I honestly think Kirby, Grundy, Jesse Smith (I could rattle off a couple more) would have had just as much chance of making it than most of those that went in the real draft.

 

[Bentleigh]

I am judging him by his 54 game, 6-year career in which -

• 2 times he has taken more than 5 marks in match.
• 3 times has he had more than 5 kicks in a match, and never 10.
• 17 times he has not had a kick in a match
• 12 times he has not taken a mark
• 12 times he has only taken 1 mark
• 3 times he has more than 10 disposals in a game.
• Never had a game where he kicked multiple goals.
• 25 times had less than 5 disposals.
• The Saints prefer to use Jason Blake.

Very depressing stuff.

Guys if you thought Ottens went missing, Knobel is going to take it to a brand new level.

Going by the above stats -


]2004 Stats: Trent Knobel
Averaged 19.2 hitouts per game
Averaged 6.1 possesions per game
Averaged 3.8 handballs per game
Averaged 2.3 kicks per game
Averaged 2.3 marks per game

He did have a decent 2004.

He's job wil be to get those 20 hit outs a game. IF he can do that well thats 90% of what we want from him.

 

[Darth_Tiger]

I am judging him by his 54 game, 6-year career in which -

• 2 times he has taken more than 5 marks in match.
• 3 times has he had more than 5 kicks in a match, and never 10.
• 17 times he has not had a kick in a match
• 12 times he has not taken a mark
• 12 times he has only taken 1 mark
• 3 times he has more than 10 disposals in a game.
• Never had a game where he kicked multiple goals.
• 25 times had less than 5 disposals.
• The Saints prefer to use Jason Blake.

damn you weaver for bringing statistics into it. you can prove anything with statistics - 87% of all people know that!

anyway just trying to point out he is not as bad as some are making out - his stats this year are not THAT bad. time will tell, athough i bow to your superior knowledge in this instance and i guess i got a little carried away in my statements.

 

[Weaver]

Considering he only played 30 games in his first 5 years as a player, and that ruckmen generally take at least 3-4 years before they start to hit their straps, i think it's more important to focus on his 2004 stats, as he really did step up a notch this year.

Not saying he is a dud. Am saying that he is a pure tap ruckman. As far as tap ruckmen go he is OK.

I'd also point out that he had a pretty easy ride this year and so his stats are actually a little inflated.

Rd 1 - No Steven King faced Chambers / Playfair and beat them
Rd 2 - Beaten by Mathew Allan and David Hille
Rd 3 - Ottens 36 hitouts - Knobel / Kotschitke 23
Rd 4 - Clarke / Hudson 42 hitouts - Knobel 19.
Rd 5 - beat Porter / Hale
Rd 6 - No Clark Keating / Beau McDonald. He and Kosch. combined to beat Charman.
Rd 7 - Sandilands 39 hitous - Knobel 17
Rd 8 - No Josh Fraser. Blake (19) and Knobel (12) took on Guy Richards in his 8th game.
Rd 9 - No Michael Gardiner. Cox (29) vs Koschitke (17) and Kobel (17)
Rd 10 - No Barnaby French. Ricky Mott plays 1 of his 2 games.
Rd 11 - Goodes not rucking. Doyle and Ball (39) vs Knobel (23) and Kosch (14)
Rd 12 - Darcy and Street (31) vs Knobel (14) and Kosch (10).
Rd 13 - Everitt (30) vs Knobel (14) and Blake (9).
Rd 14 - No Primus. Lade and Brogan (36) vs Blake (6) and Knobel (5).
Rd 15 - Beat Jeff White (24) vs Knobel (27) and Blake (10).
Rd 16 - Ottens (40) thumped Knobel (24)
Rd 17 - Hille and Allan (29) vs Knobel (18) and Blake (11)
Rd 18 - King (32) vs Knobel (21) and Blake (15)
Rd 20 - McKernan (22) vs Blake (13) and Knobel (13)
Rd 21 - Keating (26) vs Knobel (26) and Blake (18)
Rd 22 - Sandilands and Longmuir (37) vs Blake (12) and Knobel (11)
F1 - No MacDonald, Keating or Charman. Knobel (42) thumped McLaren (14)
F2 - Doyle and Ball (41) vs Knobel (28) and Kosch (8)
F3 - No Primus. Lade and Brogan (33) and Knobel (22) and Kocsh(13)

So maybe 3 times this season Knobel went up against a 1st choice ruck combination and got a draw or win.

Didn't play against Primus, McDonald or Gardiner. Only played King once. Missed French and Fraser when he played those teams. Was a season where Goodes did not ruck. Missed Stafford in the 2nd Richmond game.

 

[Hammerfire]

I see where your coming from Weaver.

But remember when splitting the tap outs between Knobel and Blake, you are also splitting time in the ruck against a single opposition ruckmen.

I doubt that he will stagnate though, would be expecting marginal to a bit improvement by him.

 

[Infamy]

Well taking those stats into consideration, as he only ever played a pure ruck role, he only played about half a game each week. Given Grant Thomas' opinion of ruckmen, he really didn't get much chance to perform.

 

[Weaver]

I see where your coming from Weaver.

But remember when splitting the tap outs between Knobel and Blake, you are also splitting time in the ruck against a single opposition ruckmen.

But that is true of most of his opponents too.

I am not trying to knee-cap the guy. Just it was an unusual year for the number of elite ruckmen who didn't play, or played restricted. Also quite a few clubs (Adelaide - Clarke, Carlton - French) didn't choose to neglect the ruck and have tried to get better. This was a year when a guy like Knobel found things in his favour.

Hopefully he goes nuts for us, but I personally wouldn't have him in our best 22 because he doesn't do much other than get hitouts, and even then he rarely wins the ruck contests.

Simmonds on the other hand I think will be the first guy I pick in my fantasy footy teams. In the last year he was number 1 ruck (before Sandilands) he was getting 17 hiouts and 16 disposals a match. He is a better player than that now and I think Knobel is going to find it very hard to steal minutes from a guy who I think will finish top-5 in our B+F.

 

[silence ofthe Robert]

I note that Ben Marsh got 6.14 disposals and about 2 and a half marks per game and spent most of his time on the Bench. Knobel is likely to be more invisible than Marsh was. At least he was cheap though.

 

[TheFoxhat]

Rather have a bloke that you at least know is ready to play...Than 3 that you have to teach for at least 2-3 years to get up to speed

 

[Bentleigh]

Rather have a bloke that you at least know is ready to play...Than 3 that you have to teach for at least 2-3 years to get up to speed

Isnt that the purpose of the youth policy? Having kids come good in 3 or 4 years...

 

[Bentleigh]

I note that Ben Marsh got 6.14 disposals and about 2 and a half marks per game and spent most of his time on the Bench. Knobel is likely to be more invisible than Marsh was. At least he was cheap though.

Doubt that.

Knoble will add a big presence to the side. He will be a feck load better than Marsh.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Isnt that the purpose of the youth policy? Having kids come good in 3 or 4 years...

Yeah but how many rookie listed players actually come good?
Not many

 

[Bentleigh]

Yeah but how many rookie listed players actually come good?
Not many

I dont by that. Kirby and Grundy were touted as top 20 picks. The likes of Jesse SMith, Shaw, Bain etc. were also piped for big things.

Just becasue these players where not picked up where expected does that mean they are suddenly worse players?

Its like scoring a 'free top 30 pick' to get a Grundy.