Young Guns

[Laverde2Smack]

Rather than the snide comment, why don't you provide a rebuttal L2S?

McKenna looks a chance to make it as an AFL player. Saying he will be the best running back in the game is delusional.

Saying Laverde and Langford will both be better the Merrett is delusional.

There are many more examples...

 

[Lore]

McKenna looks a chance to make it as an AFL player. Saying he will be the best running back in the game is delusional.

Saying Laverde and Langford will both be better the Merrett is delusional.

There are many more examples...

BrunoV was talking about their attributes and their potential in their respective positions (as opposed to what they are now).

They have the tools to make it, if they have luck with injury and the motivation to work hard, the right opportunities and the right coaching. Potential doesn't automatically mean "delusional". And that's not to say I always agree with him, in this case I'd probably be more conservative about what I post on this forum because some people (usually opposition supporters) feel the need to attack anything outside the status quo. But you can tell he actually watches games (both AFL and VFL, I think) and has enough footy knowledge to interpret what he's seeing... so a worthwhile person to have a discussion with if you're game.

If you don't see particular attributes in those players that you feel are important to those roles, point them out. It's the kind of discussion that off-seasons were made for.

 

[hurlygurdy]

I think the way you judge the overall health of a list is when you look at the quality of the players who have 6 to 10+ years left in their careers and how they are complimented by the players who have 100 games left in their respective careers (excluding any players who are the wrong side of 30). There tends to be an overreaction to average ages which does not factor in the ability of a club to transition a side over time without rendering that side uncompetitive.

The next hundred games is what it will take to continue the turnover of a list with new recruits. I don't see there being a problem with a list as long as there are enough players with 100 quality games left to enable the continual evolution of a list. The days of bottoming out for two to four years should be a thing of the past (though teams who are at the top for extended periods might end up feeling the pinch because they justifiably hold on to veterans for a bit longer). Of course there will always be teams on the bottom of the ladder but it should end up being like Fremantle this year with one year dips which balance back out just as quickly.

As for the quality of our really young talent, I agree that we are as well placed as any club (though GWS will obviously have us covered for depth). While we've probably only got Daniher (who will be the best KPF of the next 8 or so years) and Hartley as long term key positions options we've easily got the next hundred games covered with Hooker, Hurley and Leuenberger still at the peak of their respective powers for the next 3 to 4 years. There is plenty of time to bring in the next generation of key position players.

It's the midfield that is probably most exciting (though it could just as easily be the forward line for the next few years depending on where certain players line up). It's unlike anything that we've assembled in the 20 years of footy that I can remember (probably since the mid-80s when we had a powerhouse midfield at least on paper).

Any side that can count on 10 years of footy from the likes of Heppell, Zach Merrett, Langford, Laverde and Parish has a core of midfielders that will set that club up for 10 years. There will be at least one more player of that quality, and possibly better, (pick 1) added in a month together with what will almost certainly be one more quality midfielder (pick 19).

Fantasia and McKenna have numerous elite attributes. If Fantasia plays 2017 at the same standard as 2016 he'll be in the top handful of small forwards in the game (while I don't expect non-Essendon opinion to agree my view is that he is already there). He could also add genuine pace and run to the middle.

McKenna is a powerhouse who will either settle at half back where he has the speed to be a game breaker or he could even move up to a wing or into the midfield proper. EFC fans ought to be as excited about McKenna as anyone, he's basically the prototype when it comes to his physical attributes and the rate of improvement displayed over two years suggests that he will have no trouble translating it into quality AFL football for the long term.

I look at Gleeson as someone who is good for another 200 games of high quality from this point as a mid-sized defender/half back.

Redman has been really impressive at half forward particularly at VFL level where he has shown the ability to control the forward line.

It's still difficult to predict where Francis will end up being used but he has as much ability as anyone.

As long as it is as a small forward Tippa is another with a long career ahead of him.

Long is the last player we've seen. He does not look out of place at AFL level. I take my lead from Dodoro who does absolutely nothing to manage expectations in relation to Long. Long's capacity to work off the ball that will make or break him as the rest of the game is in his genes. His performances at AFL level suggest to me that his making it is a formality.

That's thirteen players we have seen this year that I am confident we will see no less than 10 years from. With two additional picks inside the top 20 lets call it fifteen. That's without having seen anything of Eades, Morgan and Nyuon.

In Laverde and Langford I see two players who can be good enough to go past Zach Merrett (who I think is now our best midfielder). I can see McKenna as one of the most damaging half backs in the game and I think that Fantasia is pretty much already there as a small forward. Throw in Daniher who I think will be the best key forward in the game and there is a shit load of elite talent.

The best part of is that the talent is that it's on each line. It's part of the reason that I am so impatient with our current list management strategy. The longer we delay getting these players into our side permanently the longer we are delaying a run that will end up with a few flags.

I think i am as optimistic as anyone - to a fault perhaps. But i don't see how you can make those calls on Langford and Mckenna in particular. Surely we've all been burned too many times to start locking in players for 10 years who haven't shown more than some spark? Good old Jetta was a 10 year lock from that perspective. FWIW, i think Langford will make it as a forward at least, but beyond that i will hedge my bets.

 

[Jade]

I think the way you judge the overall health of a list is when you look at the quality of the players who have 6 to 10+ years left in their careers and how they are complimented by the players who have 100 games left in their respective careers (excluding any players who are the wrong side of 30). There tends to be an overreaction to average ages which does not factor in the ability of a club to transition a side over time without rendering that side uncompetitive.

The next hundred games is what it will take to continue the turnover of a list with new recruits. I don't see there being a problem with a list as long as there are enough players with 100 quality games left to enable the continual evolution of a list. The days of bottoming out for two to four years should be a thing of the past (though teams who are at the top for extended periods might end up feeling the pinch because they justifiably hold on to veterans for a bit longer). Of course there will always be teams on the bottom of the ladder but it should end up being like Fremantle this year with one year dips which balance back out just as quickly.

As for the quality of our really young talent, I agree that we are as well placed as any club (though GWS will obviously have us covered for depth). While we've probably only got Daniher (who will be the best KPF of the next 8 or so years) and Hartley as long term key positions options we've easily got the next hundred games covered with Hooker, Hurley and Leuenberger still at the peak of their respective powers for the next 3 to 4 years. There is plenty of time to bring in the next generation of key position players.

It's the midfield that is probably most exciting (though it could just as easily be the forward line for the next few years depending on where certain players line up). It's unlike anything that we've assembled in the 20 years of footy that I can remember (probably since the mid-80s when we had a powerhouse midfield at least on paper).

Any side that can count on 10 years of footy from the likes of Heppell, Zach Merrett, Langford, Laverde and Parish has a core of midfielders that will set that club up for 10 years. There will be at least one more player of that quality, and possibly better, (pick 1) added in a month together with what will almost certainly be one more quality midfielder (pick 19).

Fantasia and McKenna have numerous elite attributes. If Fantasia plays 2017 at the same standard as 2016 he'll be in the top handful of small forwards in the game (while I don't expect non-Essendon opinion to agree my view is that he is already there). He could also add genuine pace and run to the middle.

McKenna is a powerhouse who will either settle at half back where he has the speed to be a game breaker or he could even move up to a wing or into the midfield proper. EFC fans ought to be as excited about McKenna as anyone, he's basically the prototype when it comes to his physical attributes and the rate of improvement displayed over two years suggests that he will have no trouble translating it into quality AFL football for the long term.

I look at Gleeson as someone who is good for another 200 games of high quality from this point as a mid-sized defender/half back.

Redman has been really impressive at half forward particularly at VFL level where he has shown the ability to control the forward line.

It's still difficult to predict where Francis will end up being used but he has as much ability as anyone.

As long as it is as a small forward Tippa is another with a long career ahead of him.

Long is the last player we've seen. He does not look out of place at AFL level. I take my lead from Dodoro who does absolutely nothing to manage expectations in relation to Long. Long's capacity to work off the ball that will make or break him as the rest of the game is in his genes. His performances at AFL level suggest to me that his making it is a formality.

That's thirteen players we have seen this year that I am confident we will see no less than 10 years from. With two additional picks inside the top 20 lets call it fifteen. That's without having seen anything of Eades, Morgan and Nyuon.

In Laverde and Langford I see two players who can be good enough to go past Zach Merrett (who I think is now our best midfielder). I can see McKenna as one of the most damaging half backs in the game and I think that Fantasia is pretty much already there as a small forward. Throw in Daniher who I think will be the best key forward in the game and there is a shit load of elite talent.

The best part of is that the talent is that it's on each line. It's part of the reason that I am so impatient with our current list management strategy. The longer we delay getting these players into our side permanently the longer we are delaying a run that will end up with a few flags.

Solid write up.

 

[BrunoV]

Going to deal with the three preceding posts together. I stand by it all.

Did not say that Laverde and Langford will be better than Merrett by the way. I'm saying that they have enough raw talent to be better. It will be a matter of whether they are driven enough because that is Merrett's best asset. He's not just a really good footballer, he's got a madman's work rate and desire to improve.

In relation to McKenna, and for a start, I said that he could be one of the most damaging rebounding defenders in the game, not the best.

The second point to make is that posters need to put his achievements into perspective. He started playing AFL at the end of 2014 and yet he hardly looked out of place during his run home of 8 consecutive games at the end of 2016 (i.e. less than 2 years) in a makeshift side. The rate of improvement required to achieve that feat is massive.

He kicks the ball off both feet and his right foot is accurate and powerful (even if he can still get it wrong). By the end of this year he was already a source of genuine counter-attacking run from half back. All of this is part of a package of athletic attributes which are the prototype for the modern small (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-10-03/who-stole-the-show-in-this-years-draft-combine - you'll see he finished in the top 10 for repeat sprints, the 20m and the agility test in a really strong draft).

The two best Irishmen of recent times are Kennelly and Hanley. I can't remember Kennelly at the end of year two but Hanley took three seasons to establish himself (based on his games played). If McKenna maintains the current rate of improvement he will play every game he is fit to play in 2018 (I think it should happen next year but accept that it is unlikely given competition for spots). There is one key point of difference between McKenna and the other Irishmen, he is a brute and naturally suited to the physicality of AFL - he was taking contested marks while playing as a small full forward in his first year of VFL. If you are not excited about McKenna you've not watched him closely enough.