Zaharakis, how good do u think he can be.

[Slattery_20]

Lets look at things , we are talking above average are we not ? not good, or very good or super star, above average.

Average players play 50 odd games over a 6 or so year period, below average players generally play 20, 30 games (baring injury stopping them from playing more of course) while poor players only ever play a few games if any.
Great teams tend have more above average players on their lists as it is what gives them the depth to be a great team.

I really suspect that personal bias has a lot to do with how fans rate players in other sides. I do my own ratings based on the fact i have seen 80% of the current players come through the system before being drafted.
To get back onto topic a bit here is a comparison, i rate Beams as very good, Zaka as good and Toovey as above average and someone like Nahas who is a fringe player as the standard for average.

When you see 150 plus kids at under 18 level every year you get an appreciation for those who can consistently make AFL sides as above average and it is a simple fact that those who continually make good sides in the 16 to 22nd spots are better than those who make the same spots week in and week out in the bottom sides.

Talking in general, obviously; but not in every case.

Mark Blake played probably 65 out of 75 in the Cats' 3 years on top.
I seriously don't think he's any better than a fringe player at any other side.
Just happened to be in a squad where guys in his spot kept getting hurt, retiring or going elsewhere.
Is he better than the 19th placed player @ Essendon in that period, say Ricky Dyson or Slatts or NLM etc?
I don't think so, it could be argued I guess.

Some guys are just lucky.
Blake was - Toovey a bit - but I don't think Beams falls into that.

 

[Summer Nights]

Lets look at things , we are talking above average are we not ? not good, or very good or super star, above average.

Average players play 50 odd games over a 6 or so year period, below average players generally play 20, 30 games (baring injury stopping them from playing more of course) while poor players only ever play a few games if any.
Great teams tend have more above average players on their lists as it is what gives them the depth to be a great team.

Oh, so the number of games you play and the success of the team you play in determines your position relative to the average (without exception, I'm guessing)?

In general, there will be a trend, but you can't just apply the rule across the board.

Mark Blake, a champion of the game?

 

[Yoda_]

Hm..

Surprised everyone is looking so far away at comparisons. Why not look at the bloke who is at the helm of this great ship of ours?

Reminds me a lot of James Hird (not the build but style of play) that young David goes about his business.

Moves well, uses it really well, struggles off the left (even king James did ), finds space well and is much quicker than people give him credit for (Hird was quick prior to all his foot problems, pre 99).

Zaka will be a star (I hope) and after reading 6 pages of peoples opinions, one thing, one quote has stood out was

The only thing I see here is Zaka is getting a little overhyped because we are so desperate for that next star to come through we begin to pump the living daylights of the tyres of our promising types.

and it is true, people are so desperate for success they almost become nieve to the lack of polish we actually have on our list.

Zaka fortunately for us, is a blue chip midfielder in the making..

 

[ant555]

Oh, so the number of games you play and the success of the team you play in determines your position relative to the average (without exception, I'm guessing)?

In general, there will be a trend, but you can't just apply the rule across the board.

Mark Blake, a champion of the game?

Of course it not across the board, nothing involving football is always across the board as there are too many variables. For every 10 examples of something you can always find 1 that will buck the trend.

If you want to be a tool and take what i have said out of context then go ahead space cadet. Where did i say player like Blake where champions of the game ?

Mark Bolton is a good example of an average player, rarely in the best 22 for a whole season but at a struggling club managed to stay around for a good number of seasons and play 100 + games yet he would not be called a great success in recruiting terms.

 

[Summer Nights]

Cheers.

 

[ant555]

Talking in general, obviously; but not in every case.

Mark Blake played probably 65 out of 75 in the Cats' 3 years on top.
I seriously don't think he's any better than a fringe player at any other side.
Just happened to be in a squad where guys in his spot kept getting hurt, retiring or going elsewhere.
Is he better than the 19th placed player @ Essendon in that period, say Ricky Dyson or Slatts or NLM etc?
I don't think so, it could be argued I guess.

Some guys are just lucky.
Blake was - Toovey a bit - but I don't think Beams falls into that.

Very easy to pick ruck man as they are generally in a box of their own as clubs generally only carry 4 to 6 of them at various stages of development.

I would have thought you knew me better, s**t i would not have lasted 2 years if my mind set was every situation is the same.

 

[Call Me Cake]

To me, it's just so exciting that we'll actually be able to see him in 2013, 2014, ect;

Heck I'm excited for 2011.

It's a privilege to me, really. Because there's just something about him that makes you think he'll be a joy to watch in the coming years.

If there's any comparison I'd make, it'd be Chapman. If you watch Chapman in his youth (when he had hair), you'd see what I mean. Hard nut, goes right in there, and when he gets the ball, he's like an excited cat (no pun intended) with a stuffed animal in his mouth - he makes the most of it. The body stature helps in the comparison too.

But of course, it's just my opinion. We'll all have our own comparisons and what not - that is, before he makes a name for himself (as if no one already remembers it being shouted over and over again by now...)

But yeah, comparisons aside. There's just something about him. Something that says "this isn't bull, you've got something". Bias is a probability, but I speak about Zaka in a way that I don't really speak about the rest of our players.

As for the Collingwood stuff - I really don't understand what that has to do with Zaka, but in my opinion, I see Collingwood as more of a swarm of bees. One of them ain't so useful, and you don't really see what's so special about them. But when they work together in unison, things happen. So I guess what I'm trying to say is - it's more the gameplan that Malthouse has set and executed with a group, rather than individual output (see Geelong). The fact that the players have been so spread out and even across the board, is probably why each one of them makes each other look better than they really are when pitted one-on-one.

But enough about that...

 

[DVD Player]

Yes he is above average. Has played 50 games in the last two seasons in a side that has only lost 12 games in that period.
Sorry but if you have played every game in a two year period in a side that has finished 3rd and then 1st then you must be above average.

Yes, he may have played 50 games in the past 2 seasons, but that however does not equate to being an above average player imo. Other factors need to be considered, such as Collingwoods options when selecting for Toovey's position. He may be the best of a number of below par options, making him the most effective player Collingwood possess in his position, but not necessarily an above average player.


EDIT: I see it's already been covered. Apologies.

 

[ant555]

Fine, if you do not want an insight into an inside way of thinking and you just want to go along with the rest of the sheep then go ahead.
I guess it is very easy to be the average punter...

 

[DaSawx]

No one new Ablett was going to get to the heights he did, or Swan, or plenty of top league players.

Just because someone rates players 1-100 doesn't they'll stay that way through their careers.

We have no idea how good a lot of players will be still, and they all have different peak times as well.

 

[topdon]

He reminds me of Mark Mercuri. This kid is an absolute jem and i look forward to him developing into the one of the premier players in the league. I am very confident of this.

 

[yaco55]

Sorry, back on topic...

Zaka may not be a star, but he will have special games.

I think he'll be an A+ grader sometimes, and a B grader others.

You have got me confused !

A grader or B Grader means that you when you reach your peak performance you maintain that for a number of years.

How can you jump from A Grade to b Grade - You are one or the other.

 

[yaco55]

Dont know why people are denigrating Toovey.

Good, solid player, reliable as a one on one player - first rule of being a defender - kicking can be unreliable - team orientated - hard working.

Don't see why he is considered a HACK.

 

[Summer Nights]

You have got me confused !

A grader or B Grader means that you when you reach your peak performance you maintain that for a number of years.

How can you jump from A Grade to b Grade - You are one or the other.

Yeah bad choice of words. Just mean he'll be a special player but not all the time.

 

[Heppell2Hurley]

[youtube]6dCj1TfbRnI[/youtube]

How's the acceleration at 1:20

This kid is ultra professional. He will give himself every chance to be the best player he can be. A very important attribute for the modern day footballer.

 

[Heppell2Hurley]

Yeah bad choice of words. Just mean he'll be a special player but not all the time.

No footballer is special all the time. James Hird was special only 97.8% of the time.

 

[daffo]

IMO Zaka could be our best player and get a couple of AA's.

 

[Coldacre]

he's up there with Tony Antrobus & Willie Dick