The Team - for now.
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests Registered Users: None |
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Fatui Attata
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
Frost over Langdon for footskills??? No way!! Height maybe, but no way footskills. _________________ I'm not the pheasant plucker I'm the pheasant plucker's son, and I'll be plucking pheasants til the pheasant plucker comes! "Try saying that with a mouthful of peanuts!!" Lou Richards |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
And yet again I say, go and check Sinclair's disposal efficiency. Yep, he missed a couple of goals, move on! |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
Fatui Attata wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
Frost over Langdon for footskills??? No way!! Height maybe, but no way footskills. |
I think he was suggesting Frost v Tooves; Langdon/Varcoe v Sinclair. |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby
Joined: 11 Feb 1998 Location: Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think Reid has to play back. I know there are compelling reasons for him to play forward and yes, Bucks kept saying he was going to play forward at this time last year, but that was before we found out White wasn't going to cut the mustard.
I also think that we must improve our kicking out of defence, whilst not losing pace. So I've gone for a slick kicking, hard running defence, with the required experience and body size.
B: Frost Brown Williams
HB: Langdon Reid Seedsman
C: Sidebottom Pendlebury Varcoe
HF: Freeman Cloke Broomhead
F: Elliott Karnezis Goldsack
Foll: Witts Swan Greenwood
IC: Grundy Fasolo Adams Blair
EM: Toovey, White, Keeffe, Thomas
Depth: Young Kennedy Sinclair Oxley Crisp Marsh Gault Dwyer _________________ After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | Fatui Attata wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
Frost over Langdon for footskills??? No way!! Height maybe, but no way footskills. |
I think he was suggesting Frost v Tooves; Langdon/Varcoe v Sinclair. |
What I'm suggesting is when everybody is back, Nathan Brown is a shoe in for FB and either Reid goes back to CHB or Keeffe plays as the other tall defender. So then Frost and Tooves are competing for the same position whether it be medium tall defender (Tooves) or another tall defender (Frost). Tooves is better at rebound than Frost, but Frost is the better lock down of the two, so that balances out. But Frost has better foot skills than Tooves and doesn't turn the ball over as much, so I prefer Frost to Tooves.
Marley is a lock in in the back pocket, has good foot skills and is good at rebound. So if Tooves comes up to half back, you have Langdon, Varcoe and Sinclair competing for one position, unless Varcoe plays further up the ground on wing or half forward. So then it's Langdon versus Sinclair. Sinclair is the faster of the two offering more rebound, but Sinclair turns the ball over more than Langdon. For that reason alone I prefer Langdon to Sinclair. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | jackcass wrote: | Fatui Attata wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
Frost over Langdon for footskills??? No way!! Height maybe, but no way footskills. |
I think he was suggesting Frost v Tooves; Langdon/Varcoe v Sinclair. |
What I'm suggesting is when everybody is back, Nathan Brown is a shoe in for FB and either Reid goes back to CHB or Keeffe plays as the other tall defender. So then Frost and Tooves are competing for the same position whether it be medium tall defender (Tooves) or another tall defender (Frost). Tooves is better at rebound than Frost, but Frost is the better lock down of the two, so that balances out. But Frost has better foot skills than Tooves and doesn't turn the ball over as much, so I prefer Frost to Tooves.
Marley is a lock in in the back pocket, has good foot skills and is good at rebound. So if Tooves comes up to half back, you have Langdon, Varcoe and Sinclair competing for one position, unless Varcoe plays further up the ground on wing or half forward. So then it's Langdon versus Sinclair. Sinclair is the faster of the two offering more rebound, but Sinclair turns the ball over more than Langdon. For that reason alone I prefer Langdon to Sinclair. |
And I repeat, check Sinclair's DE. Actually compare it to Langdon's.
You continue to pick players based on your perceptions of their flaws and limitations rather than their potential capacity so by default you stifle growth. |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | jackcass wrote: | Fatui Attata wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | roar wrote: | Why do I seem to be the only one who is concerned about lack of footskills come out of defence? |
That's why I prefer Frost over Toovey and Langdon or Varcoe over Sinclair. |
Frost over Langdon for footskills??? No way!! Height maybe, but no way footskills. |
I think he was suggesting Frost v Tooves; Langdon/Varcoe v Sinclair. |
What I'm suggesting is when everybody is back, Nathan Brown is a shoe in for FB and either Reid goes back to CHB or Keeffe plays as the other tall defender. So then Frost and Tooves are competing for the same position whether it be medium tall defender (Tooves) or another tall defender (Frost). Tooves is better at rebound than Frost, but Frost is the better lock down of the two, so that balances out. But Frost has better foot skills than Tooves and doesn't turn the ball over as much, so I prefer Frost to Tooves.
Marley is a lock in in the back pocket, has good foot skills and is good at rebound. So if Tooves comes up to half back, you have Langdon, Varcoe and Sinclair competing for one position, unless Varcoe plays further up the ground on wing or half forward. So then it's Langdon versus Sinclair. Sinclair is the faster of the two offering more rebound, but Sinclair turns the ball over more than Langdon. For that reason alone I prefer Langdon to Sinclair. |
And I repeat, check Sinclair's DE. Actually compare it to Langdon's.
You continue to pick players based on your perceptions of their flaws and limitations rather than their potential capacity so by default you stifle growth. |
if it were langdon vs sinclair, i'd pick sinkers nine times out of ten. if he can stay fit we should expect a big year from him. also, given it's langdon's second year it could go either way. here's hoping he continues on. with a full list to choose from he is going to have greater competition for a spot than what he experienced this season. _________________ Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
Langdon's disposal efficiency would be lower than average due to he being a first year player and making mistakes due to nervousness. He looks like a very good kick to me.
Sinclair has been in the system about 4 years and still turns the ball over whenever I watch him. So what exactly are Sinclair's disposal efficiency stats? Could someone quote them for me. Are they average, less than average or higher than average?
Varcoe doesn't turn over the ball to me, so I surprised when I read in the paper that his disposal efficiency stats are below average.
Can stats lie? |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
John Wren wrote: | if it were langdon vs sinclair, i'd pick sinkers nine times out of ten. if he can stay fit we should expect a big year from him. also, given it's langdon's second year it could go either way. here's hoping he continues on. with a full list to choose from he is going to have greater competition for a spot than what he experienced this season. |
Based on what we've seen of the 2 I'd agree JW but at the same time I have high expectations of both in 2015. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Langdon's disposal efficiency would be lower than average due to he being a first year player and making mistakes due to nervousness. He looks like a very good kick to me.
Sinclair has been in the system about 4 years and still turns the ball over whenever I watch him. So what exactly are Sinclair's disposal efficiency stats? Could someone quote them for me. Are they average, less than average or higher than average?
Varcoe doesn't turn over the ball to me, so I surprised when I read in the paper that his disposal efficiency stats are below average.
Can stats lie? |
Langdon gets a pass because he's a first year player yet Sinclair gets tagged as having poor disposal because he missed a few goals in his first few games. That's the sort of double standards that frustrate me.
Stats aren't the be all end all but they're an indication. I don't subscribe to any of the stats sites so can't provide them but Sinclair consistently in the 75-85% range whenever they're published. Sinclair now has 44 games under his belt and you'd expect him to either stamp himself as a player or fall by the way. I'm a fan and hope it's the former. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Langdon's disposal efficiency would be lower than average due to he being a first year player and making mistakes due to nervousness. He looks like a very good kick to me.
Sinclair has been in the system about 4 years and still turns the ball over whenever I watch him. So what exactly are Sinclair's disposal efficiency stats? Could someone quote them for me. Are they average, less than average or higher than average?
Varcoe doesn't turn over the ball to me, so I surprised when I read in the paper that his disposal efficiency stats are below average.
Can stats lie? |
Langdon gets a pass because he's a first year player yet Sinclair gets tagged as having poor disposal because he missed a few goals in his first few games. That's the sort of double standards that frustrate me.
Stats aren't the be all end all but they're an indication. I don't subscribe to any of the stats sites so can't provide them but Sinclair consistently in the 75-85% range whenever they're published. Sinclair now has 44 games under his belt and you'd expect him to either stamp himself as a player or fall by the way. I'm a fan and hope it's the former. |
Well I accept what you say Jackcass. Let's hope that Sinclair is not injured again next year, so we can properly assess his performance. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
When Blair is playing in the VFL
Will be the day I believe that Buckley
has at least a half a brain! _________________ we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010 Location: Benalla
|
Post subject: Re: The Team - for now. | |
|
E wrote: | Assuming none of the kids we recruit are ready in round 1, ans assuming that Scharenberg and Macaffer are the only two players not available for selection, and having regard to my hopes for the improvement in some of our kids, here is my go at round 1 2015.
B: Williams, Brown, Toovey
HB Langdon, Frost, Sinclair
C: Sidebottom, Greenwood, Varcoe
HF: Goldsack, Reid, Broomhead
F: Elliot, Cloke, Swan
R: Witts, Pendles, Adams
Bench: Grundy, Freeman, Kennedy, Seedsman
Pushing for selection: Keefe, White, Blair, Young, Fasolo, Thomas, Dwyer, Karnezis
Too young (or not good enough) to consider: Ramsey, Marsh, Oxley, Armstrong, Crisp, Moore, Pick 5, Pick 30, Pick 48 |
If Moore has a good PS he plays in round 1 IMO, I'd put him in a fwd pkt, no point stuffing around with him, the sooner we get him in the ones the better. _________________ Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010 Location: Benalla
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Langdon's disposal efficiency would be lower than average due to he being a first year player and making mistakes due to nervousness. He looks like a very good kick to me.
Sinclair has been in the system about 4 years and still turns the ball over whenever I watch him. So what exactly are Sinclair's disposal efficiency stats? Could someone quote them for me. Are they average, less than average or higher than average?
Varcoe doesn't turn over the ball to me, so I surprised when I read in the paper that his disposal efficiency stats are below average.
Can stats lie? |
Langdon gets a pass because he's a first year player yet Sinclair gets tagged as having poor disposal because he missed a few goals in his first few games. That's the sort of double standards that frustrate me.
Stats aren't the be all end all but they're an indication. I don't subscribe to any of the stats sites so can't provide them but Sinclair consistently in the 75-85% range whenever they're published. Sinclair now has 44 games under his belt and you'd expect him to either stamp himself as a player or fall by the way. I'm a fan and hope it's the former. |
Sinclair is not AFL standard IMO. _________________ Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | jackcass wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | Langdon's disposal efficiency would be lower than average due to he being a first year player and making mistakes due to nervousness. He looks like a very good kick to me.
Sinclair has been in the system about 4 years and still turns the ball over whenever I watch him. So what exactly are Sinclair's disposal efficiency stats? Could someone quote them for me. Are they average, less than average or higher than average?
Varcoe doesn't turn over the ball to me, so I surprised when I read in the paper that his disposal efficiency stats are below average.
Can stats lie? |
Langdon gets a pass because he's a first year player yet Sinclair gets tagged as having poor disposal because he missed a few goals in his first few games. That's the sort of double standards that frustrate me.
Stats aren't the be all end all but they're an indication. I don't subscribe to any of the stats sites so can't provide them but Sinclair consistently in the 75-85% range whenever they're published. Sinclair now has 44 games under his belt and you'd expect him to either stamp himself as a player or fall by the way. I'm a fan and hope it's the former. |
Well I accept what you say Jackcass. Let's hope that Sinclair is not injured again next year, so we can properly assess his performance. |
Too true, time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|