Tim Smith v Cam Pedersen

[samcantstandya 913]

1 hour ago, Lampers said:

My understanding was he was happy to play another year if the club wanted him to, but was also comfortable to get started on his post AFL life. 

The club didn’t want him to go again, so he retired. Not a genuine retirement where the player has had enough, but not pushed out against his will either. Somewhere in the middle.

And yes, he wasn’t “one of the boys” in the eyes of the footy department and therefore was always a mediocre game away from being dropped.

He made the right call. Especially with the recruitment of Pruess he would never get a game.

[Gator 16,891]

Pederson's time was up and Smith lacks AFL class.

In my view Keilty doesn't have the athletic traits to succeed in the backline at AFL level, so I like the move forward.  Key forwards don't have to be quite as athletic if they read the game well, work hard and understand leading patterns.  I'm not sure if he'll make it, but I think he has a better shot than Tim Smith and it's well worth a try.

[Deemania since 56 6,119]

On 12/20/2018 at 4:39 PM, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I can't see a single thing in Tim Smith that would warrant him being on an AFL list.

The one thing he was supposed to bring to the AFL table was elite accuracy, but at 4 goals 5 thus far, he couldn't even excel at that.

However, I see a brighter future in our other Smith

 

 

Agree. Joel Smith has a package to develop some more and should become a colossal asset soon; game time experience is one of these elements where confidence can improve within the team function.  

[Whispering_Jack 27,918]

No disrespect but we are debating about two players who would be sitting well outside our best 22 - probably outside our best 30 - so you have to take into account their future potential and value to the club. Cameron Pedersen will be 32 when the 2019 season starts at the end of March. He was never all that quick but he’s at an age when the body starts slowing down.

Smith is four years younger and  while neither would have been likely to have much of an impact, the club’s decision to go for the younger man is correct in this instance.

[Lil_red_fire_engine 10,132]

On 12/26/2018 at 12:15 PM, Whispering_Jack said:

No disrespect but we are debating about two players who would be sitting well outside our best 22 - probably outside our best 30 - so you have to take into account their future potential and value to the club. Cameron Pedersen will be 32 when the 2019 season starts at the end of March. He was never all that quick but he’s at an age when the body starts slowing down.

Smith is four years younger and  while neither would have been likely to have much of an impact, the club’s decision to go for the younger man is correct in this instance.

I assume you will have T-Mac and Weid in your best 22? Now do your side if one is unavailable. Now do your side if both are unavailable. There is best 22 and then next up based on position. If this happens it appears we will be playing one tall KPF or relying on the resting ruck as the second tall or expecting the role to filled by one of two Smiths or Keilty. The only other would be to tinker with our back 6 which i suspect will be unlikely. Another year for Ped as the last spot on our list I would have thought would have been a reasonable contingency. T Smith I feel is limited but really has not had a clear run of it once he has made the senior side. 

[Mach5 4,482]

12 minutes ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

I assume you will have T-Mac and Weid in your best 22? Now do your side if one is unavailable. Now do your side if both are unavailable. There is best 22 and then next up based on position. If this happens it appears we will be playing one tall KPF or relying on the resting ruck as the second tall or expecting the role to filled by one of two Smiths or Keilty. The only other would be to tinker with our back 6 which i suspect will be unlikely. Another year for Ped as the last spot on our list I would have thought would have been a reasonable contingency. T Smith I feel is limited but really has not had a clear run of it once he has made the senior side. 

It’s the right option if you value Tim Smith as a forward higher than Pedersen, and in my opinion we should, and do.

[BAMF 3,783]

3 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

I assume you will have T-Mac and Weid in your best 22? Now do your side if one is unavailable. Now do your side if both are unavailable. There is best 22 and then next up based on position. If this happens it appears we will be playing one tall KPF or relying on the resting ruck as the second tall or expecting the role to filled by one of two Smiths or Keilty. The only other would be to tinker with our back 6 which i suspect will be unlikely. Another year for Ped as the last spot on our list I would have thought would have been a reasonable contingency. T Smith I feel is limited but really has not had a clear run of it once he has made the senior side. 

Both were at a similar skill level. If we had kept Pedo we will still have the same problem if TMac or Weid is unavailable. 

But yes. It would be great to have a good third option.

[deanox 8,511]

We will be playing 3 KPF's at times, from TMac, Weid and Preuss. 

If one goes down, we'll still have two up forward. 

If two go down we will consider playing a back up KPP such as T Smith or Pedo, but we may also consider playing AVB forward or shifting one of the medium/KPDs May, OMac, Frost or J Smith (we probably won't play all four in the backline at once) forward. 

I think Tim Smith has effectively been kept as our 3rd ruck option to protect TMac in case Gawn and Preuss go down. He might get a run as a forward on form but that isn't likely. However it is unlikely that Pedo would get a run either.

[Cranky Franky 1,476]

On 12/29/2018 at 11:56 AM, Mach5 said:

It’s the right option if you value Tim Smith as a forward higher than Pedersen, and in my opinion we should, and do.

How on earth would you value Smith higher than Pedersen as a forward ??

Pedersen played lots of solid games at Melbourne as a forward while Smith did nothing in his couple of appearances.

And last season Pedersen was outstanding at Casey while Smith did very little and was poor in the finals.

 

 

[rjay 23,850]

50 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

How on earth would you value Smith higher than Pedersen as a forward ??

Pedersen played lots of solid games at Melbourne as a forward while Smith did nothing in his couple of appearances.

And last season Pedersen was outstanding at Casey while Smith did very little and was poor in the finals.

 

 

No matter which way you cut it 'Cranky', Pedders was finished as an AFL player.

I suspect Smith will be gone at the end of this season but the ball is in his court now.

He will need an outstanding season at Casey and to really take his opportunities if he gets the call up.

[Mach5 4,482]

7 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

How on earth would you value Smith higher than Pedersen as a forward ??

Pedersen played lots of solid games at Melbourne as a forward while Smith did nothing in his couple of appearances.

And last season Pedersen was outstanding at Casey while Smith did very little and was poor in the finals.

 

 

 

Because I do, and so it seems does the footy dept. Pedersen was a poor option as forward and didn’t perform. His only value lied in his ability to be a mobile back-up ruckman, and we no longer had the need for that with Preuss coming on board.

[Cranky Franky 1,476]

"Because I do" is pretty lame evidence.

At least I can point to the stats that show Pedo ran rings around Smith at Casey - maybe you should check them out.

[daisycutter 28,452]

a strange thread. like comparing ludo with snakes and ladders

[dworship 3,342]

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

a strange thread. like comparing ludo with snakes and ladders

Well Cranky Franky seems to get a bit snakey when people don't agree with him.

[Satyriconhome 9,982]

14 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

"Because I do" is pretty lame evidence.

At least I can point to the stats that show Pedo ran rings around Smith at Casey - maybe you should check them out.

Of course Smith battled manfully, carrying a foot injury so as not to weaken the team further, maybe that helped Pedo run rings

[Mach5 4,482]

15 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

"Because I do" is pretty lame evidence.

At least I can point to the stats that show Pedo ran rings around Smith at Casey - maybe you should check them out.

 

Well, that is because “Because I do” is not actually evidence, and was never intended as such.

Mate, if you can’t see with your own eyes, and are trying to rely on stats to form an opinion, your opinion is of little interest to me. Feel free to carry on.

[Deemania since 56 6,119]

On 12/31/2018 at 9:58 AM, rjay said:

No matter which way you cut it 'Cranky', Pedders was finished as an AFL player.

I suspect Smith will be gone at the end of this season but the ball is in his court now.

He will need an outstanding season at Casey and to really take his opportunities if he gets the call up.

Fingers crossed.

[Cranky Franky 1,476]

This will probably go down as one of the most meaningless debates in Demonland history.  And look I am not suggesting Pedersen  was any more than a journeyman battler who was approaching the end of the line.

Its just that by any objective measurement, statistics, form, influence of games, goals, ability to play different roles at Casey & at Melbourne  Pedo was about a 7 & Smith a 5.

I watched them both closely in the Casey finals & Pederson was solid while Smith was poor so I was stunned when he was kept on the list.

  

 

[Mach5 4,482]

5 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

This will probably go down as one of the most meaningless debates in Demonland history.  And look I am not suggesting Pedersen  was any more than a journeyman battler who was approaching the end of the line.

Its just that by any objective measurement, statistics, form, influence of games, goals, ability to play different roles at Casey & at Melbourne  Pedo was about a 7 & Smith a 5.

I watched them both closely in the Casey finals & Pederson was solid while Smith was poor so I was stunned when he was kept on the list.

  

 

 

Mate, Smith is a better forward than Pedersen, and the coaching dept had informed Pedersen his future on the list depended on his ability to perform as a defender, so they obviously agreed.

Both probably not up to it, but Smith a better forward. Not much else to it.

[Cranky Franky 1,476]

My last ever post on this .......

If you reckon Smith is a better forward than Pedersen I'm pretty much speechless. I suppose if he improves on his 4 senior games & racks up 80 odd matches like Pedo did you will be proved right.

Anyhow at Casey in 2018 Smith played 15 games for 12 goals while Pedersen had 17 games for 32 goals. 

[Watson11 1,881]

If Tmac/Weids are injured, the next key forward will be a role player and we’ll be looking for goals elsewhere.  The role will be to provide a contest, bring the ball to ground, tackle, pressure, etc.  Those stats are the stats Goody would be interested in, not the fact Pedersen averaged 2 goals a game at Casey.  Smith averaged 6 tackles a game in his limited opportunities.

[daisycutter 28,452]

if pedo was smith's age they would have kept pedo

anyways, this dumb argument is just about the fringes. neither player is of any great consequence given our list and options

[Demon Dude 425]

Pederson was cooked. had lost his leg speed so he couldn't get to enough contests, so why would they give him another year. like Bernie he was done. 

[daisycutter 28,452]

51 minutes ago, Demon Dude said:

Pederson was cooked. had lost his leg speed so he couldn't get to enough contests, so why would they give him another year. like Bernie he was done. 

but smith was (is) no better.....

this is why this thread is so weird

[Damo 2,969]

I like Pedo and he has been good for us but Smith has capacity to have a better year. Its neither a puzzle or a reason for argument.