|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | How many of Fraser’s 200 games were worthy of a number 1 pick? I’m with BIFC and RB on this one. |
BIT ROUGH, Josh carried our Rucks for years, on his lonesome, mostly _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
masoncox wrote: | Pies4shaw wrote: | How many of Fraser’s 200 games were worthy of a number 1 pick? I’m with BIFC and RB on this one. |
Frasier was fantastic in his earlier years. He went straight into the firsts with no vfl games.
It was injuries and using him as first ruck almost from the beginning that killed him. Go watch some of his games from early this century to see how good he was. |
The question posed, as I understand it, by this thread is the value we got from players for the draft pick we used on them. Fraser was a solid player but I doubt that anyone seriously thought of him (sober) as a genuine star of the competition at any stage of the competition. Thomas was, at one stage (and only briefly, because he was cut down by injuries just after he reached his peak), genuinely considered by many to be the best player in the league. Pendelebury, Swan, Cloke were, likewise, the best - or very close to - in their position and in the handful of match-winning guns of the competition. Fraser was never much more than a role player who delivered much less than his skills and talent promised. Grundy is about 15 times the ruckman Fraser ever was but wasn’t even a top ten pick. Fraser played his most useful football as a third tall in our forward line. Even there, though, history tells us that he was about half as useful as Leigh Brown proved to be in the same role. I wouldn’t have Fraser in the top 25 Collingwood players so far this century and, judged against what we used to get him, we didn’t get the value we might have expected from a number 1 pick.
To try to put some flesh on the bones of that assertion, I would have, off the top of my head, all of the following players ahead of him (in no particular order) in the “value for pick” stakes:
Maxwell, O’Brien, Pendlebury, Swan, Cloke, Shaw, Thomas, Lockyer, Grundy, Tarrant, Toovey, Leigh Brown, Reid, Ball, Didak, Dawes, Sidebottom, Beams, Fasolo and both Davis’. If you start thinking about the other players we have recruited other than via the draft, it starts to become obvious just how little Fraser delivered, despite his obvious ability. |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | masoncox wrote: | Pies4shaw wrote: | How many of Fraser’s 200 games were worthy of a number 1 pick? I’m with BIFC and RB on this one. |
Frasier was fantastic in his earlier years. He went straight into the firsts with no vfl games.
It was injuries and using him as first ruck almost from the beginning that killed him. Go watch some of his games from early this century to see how good he was. |
The question posed, as I understand it, by this thread is the value we got from players for the draft pick we used on them. Fraser was a solid player but I doubt that anyone seriously thought of him (sober) as a genuine star of the competition at any stage of the competition. Thomas was, at one stage (and only briefly, because he was cut down by injuries just after he reached his peak), genuinely considered by many to be the best player in the league. Pendelebury, Swan, Cloke were, likewise, the best - or very close to - in their position and in the handful of match-winning guns of the competition. Fraser was never much more than a role player who delivered much less than his skills and talent promised. Grundy is about 15 times the ruckman Fraser ever was but wasn’t even a top ten pick. Fraser played his most useful football as a third tall in our forward line. Even there, though, history tells us that he was about half as useful as Leigh Brown proved to be in the same role. I wouldn’t have Fraser in the top 25 Collingwood players so far this century and, judged against what we used to get him, we didn’t get the value we might have expected from a number 1 pick.
To try to put some flesh on the bones of that assertion, I would have, off the top of my head, all of the following players ahead of him (in no particular order) in the “value for pick” stakes:
Maxwell, O’Brien, Pendlebury, Swan, Cloke, Shaw, Thomas, Lockyer, Grundy, Tarrant, Toovey, Leigh Brown, Reid, Ball, Didak, Dawes, Sidebottom, Beams, Fasolo and both Davis’. If you start thinking about the other players we have recruited other than via the draft, it starts to become obvious just how little Fraser delivered, despite his obvious ability. |
Fraser was a freak. He was an amazing athlete and was something akin to Darcy Moore. Trouble was he was thrown into the main ruck role from day one. Imagine if this had happened to Moore. Fraser's body was wrecked by the club. Yes, we did not get the value out of him as one would expect. But I don't blame his talent, I blame the role that was given to him. There was also a question mark over his G and D.
some info from his first 3 years at the club that highlights how good he was considering he was so young for a big man to play such demanding roles.
[i]Fraser played 21 games in his first season. He won an AFL Rising Star nomination in his debut year. He played all 25 games in 2002, kicked 37 goals and played in the Grand Final team where he kicked three goals, following a three-goal haul in the Preliminary Final. In 2003 he had over 340 disposals in the season, 300 hit outs and kicked 20 goals.[/i
Darcy Moore enters his fourth year next year and he has been gently eased into the big time. Fraser was thrown into the wolf pit.
Last edited by masoncox on Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:35 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
How much do you think Fraser delivered despite his obvious ability is? I think you already know the answer. Didn't I say I started already? |
|
|
|
|
Geek
geek
Joined: 06 Apr 2006 Location: Jacana
|
Post subject: | |
|
I feel a bit for Rogan. While he was developing, he had Bucks and SSB roving to him, which would have been quite useful. But he himself was just a developing beanpole.
Fraser improved over time but Buckley and Burns retired and it was O'Bree and Licuria at his feet. Useful but not brilliant.
Then came the interstate game where he was up against Dean Cox, ruckman of the generation. But Rogan's got Ablett, Boomer and Bartel at his feet and he takes the big West Australian to the cleaners... until he does his PCL. Never reaches his true peak.
He was never going to be the next Polly Farmer. Did the small guy things brilliantly - for a tall guy. Wasn't so good at the big man stuff. Ask Peter Bell.
Still... I was a lot calmer when he was lining up for goal than just about anybody on our current list. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
Third time will be a charm!!!! _________________ Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pick 8 hasn't been bad.
tarrant and ben reid.
Pick 5 has given us Pendlebury and De goey, _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
And pick 65 has been fabulous. |
|
|
|
|
magpieazza
magpieazza
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Location: Griffith N.S.W
|
Post subject: | |
|
Josh Fraser was on a wave of form where I could say he was worth his weight.
IIRC he was in a good patch of form and earned a big V jumper but unluckily did his knee when jumping at the centre bounce!! Im pretty sure it happened that way and he was never the same since.
That indeed was sad and Collingwood missed out on a real player because of the dreaded knee.
So looking back he didnt become the player we hoped for but not through being a bad pick up by the club or lack of talent....just bad luck _________________ Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero. |
|
|
|
|
neil
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Location: Queensland
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: |
The question posed, as I understand it, by this thread is the value we got from players for the draft pick we used on them. Fraser was a solid player but I doubt that anyone seriously thought of him (sober) as a genuine star of the competition at any stage of the competition. Thomas was, at one stage (and only briefly, because he was cut down by injuries just after he reached his peak), genuinely considered by many to be the best player in the league. Pendelebury, Swan, Cloke were, likewise, the best - or very close to - in their position and in the handful of match-winning guns of the competition. Fraser was never much more than a role player who delivered much less than his skills and talent promised. Grundy is about 15 times the ruckman Fraser ever was but wasn’t even a top ten pick. Fraser played his most useful football as a third tall in our forward line. Even there, though, history tells us that he was about half as useful as Leigh Brown proved to be in the same role. I wouldn’t have Fraser in the top 25 Collingwood players so far this century and, judged against what we used to get him, we didn’t get the value we might have expected from a number 1 pick.
To try to put some flesh on the bones of that assertion, I would have, off the top of my head, all of the following players ahead of him (in no particular order) in the “value for pick” stakes:
Maxwell, O’Brien, Pendlebury, Swan, Cloke, Shaw, Thomas, Lockyer, Grundy, Tarrant, Toovey, Leigh Brown, Reid, Ball, Didak, Dawes, Sidebottom, Beams, Fasolo and both Davis’. If you start thinking about the other players we have recruited other than via the draft, it starts to become obvious just how little Fraser delivered, despite his obvious ability. | Seriously you have Lockyer Toovey Dawes Fasolo and the other Davis ahead of Fraser _________________ Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
What is it to you. Would you like to know more? Didn't I say I started already? |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
The Fraser draft was a disaster, which of course is not Fraser's fault, but we traded down the order to get McKee, who gave us no better service than a rookie ruckman might have given us. Pavlich at our original pick 3, I wouldn't have minded picking Fraser up at pick 1, because the two together would have delivered us the 2002 and 2003 premiership flags. Fraser was good floating down the ground and taking marks and kicking the odd goal or two, but was useless at the centre bounces, where Keating mauled him with his bigger body. In 2010 I think Fraser stated that he was a first ruckman in the team or nothing, so it was an easy choice for Malthouse to play Jolly instead (who wouldn't have preferred Jolly to Fraser?). Since Fraser was never going to replace Brown in the team his days were numbered at that point and hence left the club without being a premiership player, so you do feel a bit sorry for him. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
It's one of those apocryphal stories, but it was allegedly Josh who, in 2010 preseason when the club had a team meeting and asked the players to set goals, said "why don't we just win the fkn flag?"
I was dissapointed for him that he couldn't co-exist with Jolly. He deserved that flag. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
neil wrote: | Pies4shaw wrote: |
The question posed, as I understand it, by this thread is the value we got from players for the draft pick we used on them. Fraser was a solid player but I doubt that anyone seriously thought of him (sober) as a genuine star of the competition at any stage of the competition. Thomas was, at one stage (and only briefly, because he was cut down by injuries just after he reached his peak), genuinely considered by many to be the best player in the league. Pendelebury, Swan, Cloke were, likewise, the best - or very close to - in their position and in the handful of match-winning guns of the competition. Fraser was never much more than a role player who delivered much less than his skills and talent promised. Grundy is about 15 times the ruckman Fraser ever was but wasn’t even a top ten pick. Fraser played his most useful football as a third tall in our forward line. Even there, though, history tells us that he was about half as useful as Leigh Brown proved to be in the same role. I wouldn’t have Fraser in the top 25 Collingwood players so far this century and, judged against what we used to get him, we didn’t get the value we might have expected from a number 1 pick.
To try to put some flesh on the bones of that assertion, I would have, off the top of my head, all of the following players ahead of him (in no particular order) in the “value for pick” stakes:
Maxwell, O’Brien, Pendlebury, Swan, Cloke, Shaw, Thomas, Lockyer, Grundy, Tarrant, Toovey, Leigh Brown, Reid, Ball, Didak, Dawes, Sidebottom, Beams, Fasolo and both Davis’. If you start thinking about the other players we have recruited other than via the draft, it starts to become obvious just how little Fraser delivered, despite his obvious ability. | Seriously you have Lockyer Toovey Dawes Fasolo and the other Davis ahead of Fraser |
As value for pick, of course. Toovey, for example, played 100 good, solid games out of his 150 and we gave nothing for him. Dawes, for further example, was a pick 28 who managed to play as a key forward in a premiership side. Players taken that late are hit and miss selections but he helped to break open the 2010 Grand Final Replay by imposing himself physically on the game. Number 1 should be a genuine champion or you have wasted your pick. I saw virtually every game Fraser played - whatever he was, he was no champion. He was a cog in a wheel. He certainly had heaps of natural ability but, for some reason, was consistently outplayed by players with half his talent. It was emblematic of his career that he was supplanted in a team by an ex-rookie and a guy who was recruited at about pick 75 when the rest of the football world thought Leigh Brown’s time was up and those two were difference-makers. It is a measure of quite how underwhelming Fraser’s career was that he wouldn’t get a game in the best Collingwood side of the last 20 years. You couldn’t pick him as a forward ahead of Tarrant, Cloke or Rocca and he wouldn’t even get a look-in as a ruckman - even though we weren’t much chop in the ruck for many of those years, he was so far behind Grundy and Jolly that he wouldn’t even be in the conversation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|