Analysing our list - Who is AFL standard.

[beelzebub 22,724]

I'm going to do this with a very cynical, yet realistic, point of view.

1st/2nd year players are not included, as they have yet to establish themselves.

The following players are of AFL quality:

Nathan Jones, James Frawley, Mitch Clark (when fit), Dom Tyson, Bernie Vince.

Some other players are borderline, but they aren't included on the list, because they either lack the basic skills of football that their position requires on a regular basis, or are just too inconsistent (such as Grimes and Watts).

Quite damning really, but it indicates why we are where we are, and why we have been there for so long.

As for developing young talent. How can any young player have a realistic chance to become a decent player, when there are so few role models to learn from at the club.

add Cross

[Demon Disciple 11,211]

Not having a go directly at you Scythe and Sassy, but having Tom McDonald listed as 'keep' or 'yes', is a big part of our problem.

He lacks the 2 most important skills of being a decent (not great but decent) AFL player. His decision-making is abhorrent and his disposal is even worse (i wouldn't even consider it VFL standard). Sure certain areas can be improved with development, but there needs to be basic talent there to improve on. Unfortunately for Tom, he lacks so much of both. It's not his fault, he just isn't good enough and no matter how much development goes into him, the return on investing so much time and effort would not be worth it.

Sure he can run all day, but he lacks the basic skills required to play football at the highest level. I'm sure he's a great bloke, but he is simply not up to AFL standard, along with about half our list.

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

Really

• A decent forward line would not have allowed the Eagles players to zone off with the knowledge that their team mate would easily win a one on one contest
• A decent forward line either Hogan, Dawes and/or Clark would have lead strongly up the ground creating a hole behind them for Howe to lead into as 3rd/4th tall instead of going stationary one on one
• A decent forward line would have a provided a better contest and not allowed Meth Coast to just park themselves inside our forward 50 just waiting to hit us on the rebound
• A decent forward line would have seen no Pedersen, allowed us to play JKH from the get go as a crumbing forward and not had Toumpas and Byrnes as our two leading targets
• A fit Gawn would have allowed us to not have Spencer going one v 3 with the Meth Coast ruck division all day long and also provided another tall option resting forward and another target for the CHF who lead up the ground and wanted to get the ball in quick

All of this does not mean we win by any means what it means is we could have stretched the Meth Coast defence a bit more and may have provided our mids with the confidence of getting the ball inside 50 nice and early with some belief it would not come straight back out over your head

PSD. The midfield got smashed. The game was over after 10 minutes. We have "senior leaders" who do not have a desire for the contest coupled with the reality that they are slow.

A forward line would not change that.

[Demon Disciple 11,211]

add Cross

i did say cynical. I'd even go so far to say Mitch Clark shouldn't be on that list, as he hasn't really played for 2 years now.

[dee-luded 2,958]

i did say cynical. I'd even go so far to say Mitch Clark shouldn't be on that list, as he hasn't really played for 2 years now.

well we're all using different criteria to makeup our own lists then.

if we are making a list of who are good enough to compete at afl level now, this year. not an idealistic type list to use for a rebuild over the next 5 years.

[Demon Disciple 11,211]

well we're all using different criteria to makeup our own lists then.

if we are making a list of who are good enough to compete at afl level now, this year. not an idealistic type list to use for a rebuild over the next 5 years.

Agree, everyone has their own standards/criteria for which players' are being picked, but the one thing we all agree on, is that there are very few MFC listed players' that are of AFL quality.

[Pennant St Dee 11,876]

PSD. The midfield got smashed. The game was over after 10 minutes. We have "senior leaders" who do not have a desire for the contest coupled with the reality that they are slow.

A forward line would not change that.

Wyl Nic Nat smashed us early and used his athleticism in the first 20 minutes, he ran out of gas from about half way through the second. why do you think our inside 50 count was so high and our score ended up the way it did, last week was the same.

It doesn't have to be all our forwards back at once just 1 or two to give us structure and straighten us up

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

Wyl Nic Nat smashed us early and used his athleticism in the first 20 minutes, he ran out of gas from about half way through the second. why do you think our inside 50 count was so high and our score ended up the way it did, last week was the same.

It doesn't have to be all our forwards back at once just 1 or two to give us structure and straighten us up

Sure Nic Nat was a lot quieter in the second half. So were all the Eagles. The job was done. We were that brittle in the middle. Even one tall forward wouldn't have changed that.

[autocol 448]

Whilst I agree with your post, OP, if you do this on nearly any team's list you'll find you're making similar judgements. I don't know the Hawks list intimately, but let's just quickly scan down it to see who's a certain "Y" and who is a question mark...

2. Jarryd Roughead Y

3 Jordan Lewis Y

4 Matthew Suckling Y

5 Sam Mitchell Y

6 Josh Gibson Y

7 Ben McEvoy Y

8 Taylor Duryea ?

9 Shaun Burgoyne Y

10 Bradley Hill ?

11 Brendan Whitecross ?

12 Brad Sewell Y

13 Kyle Cheney ?

14 Grant Birchall Y

15 Luke Hodge Y

16 Isaac Smith Y

17 Brian Lake Y

18 Jonathon Ceglar ?

19 Jack Gunston Y

20 David Hale Y

22 Luke Breust Y

23 Tim O'Brien ?

24 Ben Stratton ?

25 Ryan Schoenmakers Y

26 Liam Shiels ?

27 Matt Spangher ?

28 Paul Puopolo ?

29 Will Langford ?

30 Luke Lowden ?

31 Angus Litherland ?

32 Jonathan Simpkin ?

33 Cyril Rioli Y

34 Jordan Kelly ?

35 Sam Grimley ?

37 Jed Anderson ?

38 Mitch Hallahan ?

39 Alex Woodward ?

40 Billy Hartung ?

41 James Sicily ?

42 Kaiden Brand ?

44 Dayle Garlett N

So yeah, there's a few extra "Y"s, but there's plenty of guys who you'd seriously have to wonder would get picked up by any other team. I think the majority of the underperformance of the Melbourne list is between the ears. Frawley being a prime example of someone outputting much less than their best.

(edit - Given that only 22 players per team can take the field, and the list is ~40 players long, roughly half the players on ANY team's list is likely to be considered "below AFL standard" because that standard is, by definition, the standard at which one can get a regular spot in a 22).

Edited March 31, 2014 by autocol

[Go the Biff 3,212]

Sure Nic Nat was a lot quieter in the second half. So were all the Eagles. The job was done. We were that brittle in the middle. Even one tall forward wouldn't have changed that.

Yeah it would've

10 minutes to go in the first quarter. We've stopped the bleeding. We are starting to show a bit. We are controlling the footy for the first time in the game. We go inside 50 4 or 5 times in a row. To nothing. Each time it comes out & we send it back to nothing. After it's repelled for the 5th time in a row we cough it up & they score a couple of cheap goals

Even one tall forward would have changed that

[Pennant St Dee 11,876]

Yeah it would've

10 minutes to go in the first quarter. We've stopped the bleeding. We are starting to show a bit. We are controlling the footy for the first time in the game. We go inside 50 4 or 5 times in a row. To nothing. Each time it comes out & we send it back to nothing. After it's repelled for the 5th time in a row we cough it up & they score a couple of cheap goals

Even one tall forward would have changed that

GTB don't tell him that some people see only what they want to see or at the very least comment on what they recall to fit their argument

[Go the Biff 3,212]

Whilst I agree with your post, OP, if you do this on nearly any team's list you'll find you're making similar judgements. I don't know the Hawks list intimately, but let's just quickly scan down it to see who's a certain "Y" and who is a question mark...

10 Bradley Hill ?

11 Brendan Whitecross ?

24 Ben Stratton ?

26 Liam Shiels ?

28 Paul Puopolo ?

So yeah, there's a few extra "Y"s, but there's plenty of guys who you'd seriously have to wonder would get picked up by any other team. I think the majority of the underperformance of the Melbourne list is between the ears. Frawley being a prime example of someone outputting much less than their best.

(edit - Given that only 22 players per team can take the field, and the list is ~40 players long, roughly half the players on ANY team's list is likely to be considered "below AFL standard" because that standard is, by definition, the standard at which one can get a regular spot in a 22).

You might have been a bit harsh. Can't see the blokes above as being anything but a "Y"

While you are probably right with the question mark on these guys, you wouldn't mind having them waiting in the wings

23 Tim O'Brien ?

29 Will Langford ?

31 Angus Litherland ?

37 Jed Anderson ?

38 Mitch Hallahan ?

40 Billy Hartung ?

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

GTB don't tell him that some people see only what they want to see or at the very least comment on what they recall to fit their argument

and that is your opinion. I saw the game in its entirety as i suspect you did.

When the job was done the Eagles kicked down a gear. They had us covered all over.

With an extra forward the Eagles may have needed to constrict us for a further 10 minutes...

[dee-luded 2,958]

Agree, everyone has their own standards/criteria for which players' are being picked, but the one thing we all agree on, is that there are very few MFC listed players' that are of AFL quality.

I'd say AFL ready.

again it comes down to development & culture, the areas we've been shown to be poor at over the long journey's. and selecting the right cattle.

we are belatedly on the right track IMO, with the current coaching staff. & i hope for improved development & disciplines with our list, going along.

I've picked the list for the best from this year, allowing a few to slide thru, with still a little time to find something under Roos & Stone. But others who are more athletic, but consistently poor decision makers,,, & kicks I've let go.

now we have picked up Cross, Tyson, Vince, Michie, etc, I think we can let some runners go.

I would keep Blease for one more,,, to allow time for Stone to work some magic.

Edited March 31, 2014 by dee-luded

[Pennant St Dee 11,876]

t

and that is your opinion. I saw the game in its entirety as i suspect you did.
When the job was done the Eagles kicked down a gear. They had us covered all over.
With an extra forward the Eagles may have needed to constrict us for a further 10 minutes...

Wyl we showed some deficiencies in there side being to tall maybe you didn't see it we moved the ball several times very quickly to our Half forward line where through lack of movement we hit a wall went handpass crazy and turned it over.

Nic Nat ran out of gas and we changed things up in the middle as you say we should have our players started reading the taps and we managed to find our own ball. They had three tall ruckman Nic Nat was the best of them, Coxy did little except provide instruction, Sinclair is still learning.

They don't put the cue in the rack, they annihilate weak opposition. but that is your opinion they just stopped when they were only 6 goals up

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

t

Wyl we showed some deficiencies in there side being to tall maybe you didn't see it we moved the ball several times very quickly to our Half forward line where through lack of movement we hit a wall went handpass crazy and turned it over.

Nic Nat ran out of gas and we changed things up in the middle as you say we should have our players started reading the taps and we managed to find our own ball. They had three tall ruckman Nic Nat was the best of them, Coxy did little except provide instruction, Sinclair is still learning.

They don't put the cue in the rack, they annihilate weak opposition. but that is your opinion they just stopped when they were only 6 goals up

The Eagles could have annilhilated us. That they backed it off is their own choice. The coach was unimpressed. But we had no answer. The Eales pressed up in their forward line numerous times to cause panic and indecision

Round 22 will be much tougher.

[old dee 23,256]

This may paint a depressing picture, but probably worth analysing. Nothing personal against any of the players mentioned, just an honest fans opinion.

*By AFL standard, I refer to their capacity to get a game in another side.

1. Jesse Hogan. Have seen enough to comfortably state he'll be a very good player. Ready-made - Yes.

2. Nathan Jones. Superstar - Yes.

3. Christian Salem. Looks like he could be a good player, but you never know until he plays AFL football - Question mark

4. Jack Watts. Lacks competitive instinct, but is still not a bad player - Yes.

5. Jimmy Toumpas. Has shown flashes, and I'm pretty sure he'll become a solid player, but at this stage, he is unproven. - Question mark

6. Chris Dawes. When fit - Yes

7. Jack Viney. Young, but can confidently say he is AFL standard. Yes

8. James Frawley. His disposal sure isn't AFL standard, but he'll still be quite a loss if he leaves. Yes

9. Jack Trengove. Sad to say that I'm not sure anymore. Time is on his side to prove doubters wrong, but unfortunately he's been declining for the better part of three years. - Question mark

10. Shannon Byrnes. The fact that he is leading our goal kicking sums up our situation perfectly. Lacks height, speed, skill, composure. - No

11. Mitch Clark. When fit, obviously, but who knows if we'll ever see that again. - Yes

12. Dom Tyson. Looks worth more than pick two just by himself. - Yes

13. Jordie McKenzie. Not a bad run-with player, but provides little else. Courageous? Yes. AFL standard? - No

14. Lynden Dunn. Has come along in leaps and bounds under Roos. - Yes

15. Mitch Clisby. Looked OK last year, but the fact he can't crack a game in our current state is a worry. Status as a second-year player gives him leniency. Question mark

16. Dean Kent. OK first year - Question mark.

17. Sam Blease. Has pace and little else. Doesn't apply nearly enough defensive pressure. - No

18. Daniel Cross. Workhorse. - Yes

19. James Strauss. Would love to say yes, but unfortunately injury has held him back, and when he's actually on the park, he hasn't shown much. - No

20. Colin Garland. God we miss him. - Yes

21. Cameron Pederson. - No. Moving on

22. Viv Michie. Hasn't had a great start to his MFC career, but I have faith he'll come along and be a serviceable player. Still - Question mark

23. Bernie Vince. Very good player. - Yes

24. Jay Kennedy-Harris. Has a chance to be handy. Unproven, obviously. Would like to see more. - Question mark

25. Tom McDonald. Good player who would look much better in a side that doesn't get slaughtered each week. - Yes

26. Daniel Nicholson. Lacks skill and football IQ. - No

27. Aiden Riley. From all accounts, seems he might be a good pickup, obviously haven't seen much though. - Question mark

29. Jayden Hunt. Left-field draft choice, Roos obviously sees something though. - Question mark

31. Jack Grimes.Tries, tries, and then tries some more. Unfortunate that his skills let him down so often though. Still, I'd say yes at this stage. Just

32. Michael Evans. Would like to see more. - Question mark

33. Dom Barry. As above. - Question mark

35. Luke Tapscott. Muscle and not much else. - No

37. Max Gawn. Has potential. - Question mark

38. Jeremy Howe. Gee a very tentative yes. Give him the benefit of the doubt as he's copping more attention than he should be. Lack of effort and desire very evident in the first two games. - Yes. Just

40. Mark Jamar. Not anymore - No.

42. Jake Spencer. Tries his heart out, but lacks so much co-ordination that it's not even funny. - No

44. Rohan Bail. Struggles immensely under any sort of pressure. - No

45. Matt Jones. Feel bad considering that he provided us with a lot of help in his first year. But would he get a game for most other AFL sides? - No

46. Dean Terlich.Tries very hard, but is oh so limited by his disposal. Line ball. - Question Mark

48. Jack Fitzpatrick. After showing a bit last year, looks like he's going nowhere fast. - No

Rookies:

39. Neville Jetta - No.

41. Alex Georgiou - Question mark

43. James Harmes - Question mark

47. Max King - Question mark

So of the 42 players on our list, in my opinion 14 are comfortably AFL standard. Of these, questions remain as to long-term future with the club (Dunn and Frawley, Cross due to age), injuries (Dawes and Clark) and general desire (Watts and Howe).

My three conclusions:

1. I think we have been expecting too much of Roos and co. They really don't have a lot to work with, unfortunately

2. It's going to take quite some time to turn this list over

3. I have far too much time on my hands on a Sunday night.

You are pretty close to my list Scythe.

A couple you have question mark on I have as NO i.e Terlick and Kent.

I also think Gawn has another 21 weeks to prove his body is up to AFL.

But you are correct it is a depressing picture when only 15 from 42 are a positive YES

Edited April 1, 2014 by old dee

[beelzebub 22,724]

Fire sale coming up

[Samael 560]

1. Jesse Hogan - yes

2. Nathan Jones - yes

3. Christian Salem - yes

4. Jack Watts - yes

5. Jimmy Toumpas - yes

6. Chris Dawes - yes

7. Jack Viney - yes

8. James Frawley - yes

9. Jack Trengove - yes

11. Mitch Clark - yes

12. Dom Tyson - yes

13. Jordie McKenzie - yes

14. Lynden Dunn - yes

18. Daniel Cross - yes

20. Colin Garland - yes

23. Bernie Vince - yes

25. Tom McDonald - yes

31. Jack Grimes - yes

15. Mitch Clisby - ? keep

19. James Strauss - ? keep

22. Viv Michie - ? keep

24. Jay Kennedy-Harris - ? keep

27. Aiden Riley - ? keep

29. Jayden Hunt - ? keep

32. Michael Evans - ? keep

33. Dom Barry - ? keep

37. Max Gawn - ? keep

38. Jeremy Howe - ? keep

42. Jake Spencer - ? keep

48. Jack Fitzpatrick - ? keep

10. Shannon Byrnes - ??? decide end of year

16. Dean Kent - no

17. Sam Blease - offer another 1Yr

21. Cameron Pederson - see contract out

26. Daniel Nicholson - ??? decide end of year

35. Luke Tapscott - ??? decide end of year

40. Mark Jamar - ??? decide end of year

44. Rohan Bail - No

45. Matt Jones - ??? decide end of year

46. Dean Terlich - ??? decide end of year

Rookies:

39. Neville Jetta - ??? decide end of year

41. Alex Georgiou - keep

43. James Harmes - keep

47. Max King - keep

I would like to see the number of games each has played listed against the names. I can't believe that assessments are being made on players that have played so few games and mostly negative. Watching the game and (masochist that I am) the replay its the 3 plus year players that are letting us down. The speed of decision making is slow for players with this level of experience. It was evident against St Kilda and blatant against WC. They seem to look for 2nd 3rd and 4th options. Maybe its lack of faith or fear of taking a risk but they are turning it over anyway. It makes their skills look poor. Watts is a perfect example and the difference between his Saints Game and Eagles is astounding. Roos should be saying forget the results and look for the improvement. I would rather see them treat the next few weeks until we can bolster the forward line, as a time for experimentation, risk, flare, first reaction. Stop over thinking the game, don't be hung up on consequences, after all they cant be much worse. As Alan Jeans said, just do. We might still lose but it would be more palatable.

[Guest]

The best way to look at trades/delistings is to look at potential upside and not stats alone. Can certain players, at the very least, get any better or ,at the very most, challenge to become among the very tippy top in their position? Not all will but we need to keep those who at least have the potential to reach those goals.
Sadly, I feel that the Matt Jones, Rohan Bails, Jake Spencers and Cam Pedersens of this world will not live up to this standard. As James Magner and James Sellar didn't last year. As much as I am happy that those blokes got onto an AFL list, they probably need to move on for us to advance as a team. They might be great in another team or another place in time but for where we are now, they aren't what we need.
Many of our 'star' players would be depth on other teams. The two Jacks immediately come to mind. On another team, they would contribute but they would be no where near the main attraction. Their endeavor is good but they lack the elite skills that the very best on the top teams have.
We need to ensure that these blokes can be the best they can and develop/recruit players who are capable of becoming, as the Yanks would put it, franchise players and let said depth players play their roles. People will jump on me for saying that about Trenners but from what we have seen thus far, he is no more than top up quality. He isn't a game breaker. We need to reconcile ourselves to that fact, ignore his draft position and status as a former captain and let him play a role that he is capable of doing and doing very well. That role is not Nathan Buckley style dominator.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Colin B. Flaubert

[Je Roos Salem 661]

Frawley and Grimes are barely AFL standard in the sense that they let us down week in, week out but don't have their positions questioned. A few years ago they both had talent and courage to burn. The effort they give with their disposal and their decision making is at times, pitiful. They are meant to be leaders yet neither can properly impact a game or make a bold decision to help us win. About time both of them got off cruise control and did something, seriously. Someone has to lead from the front, it's like they are just waiting until we play good footy again.

Lynden Dunn is suddenly fantastic? That's news to me. Sure, he can play on a man and kick a long ball, but he initiates much of our slow play out of defence, and his kick ins provide us with nothing. An example of his poor decision making was on the weekend, he had the ball open in space, but instead of running a full measure and having a long shot at the goals, he does a ridiculous bullet pass to Howe which misses by a mile and goes out on the full.

It may be harsh to single out a few players, but our experienced players simply aren't good enough or do anything bold enough to help out the team. You can sense that these players have been told a lot from many different coaches, and had to relearn their approach to footy over and over, but it simply hasn't worked. It's this terrible misunderstanding of footy and submissive thinking that has infiltrated their minds. That they must 'stick to their role' and everything will be ok. Why don't we play kick to kick to limit damage? Happens over and over. That's why you see Vince, Cross and Tyson actually at least taking a couple of risks and playing on.

[spirit of norm smith 13,621]

delist Bail, Byrnes, Evans, Nicholson ... Jamar and/or Spencer to go. Frawley likely to go. Thats six off.