Dawes vs Pedo.... the poll

[The Lobster Effect 893]

This topic  is always a constant debate on Demonland so I was interested in seeing people's thoughts via a poll on who we should keep for next year.

Edited July 30, 2016 by The Lobster Effect

[Wiseblood 24,637]

This should go well...

[Ricky P 757]

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

This should go well...

Haha this will turn into such a shitfight. As if it really matters which old battle axe third forward we let hang on for another year while the kids come through.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

You should change it so that you can only select one option.

[stuie 7,374]

We'd surely keep one of them, and honestly think they're neck and neck and the next few weeks will decide which one stays. They'd be offered the same contract you'd think.

Dawes maybe 1% ahead at this stage purely based on him being a year younger.

[Moonshadow 17,677]

Watch Stuie and Saty shout down everyone with a view.

Would like to see Pedo build a tank, and then definitely keep him. If he could run out a game he'd be a regular. Can't see it happening, so suspect Dawes may stay on 1 year minimal deal.

Not that it's a list priority, but if we happen trade for a KPF later in the year they both might go.

Weed and Hulett will get games next year after good preseasons.

[The Lobster Effect 893]

6 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

You should change it so that you can only select one option.

Done

[The Lobster Effect 893]

2 minutes ago, stuie said:

We'd surely keep one of them, and honestly think they're neck and neck and the next few weeks will decide which one stays. They'd be offered the same contract you'd think.

Dawes maybe 1% ahead at this stage purely based on him being a year younger.

Yeh Dawes would have to take a massive paycut

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, The Lobster Effect said:

Yeh Dawes would have to take a massive paycut

If one of them is kept on you'd expect them to be on 1 year at pretty much the minimum dollars or just above.

 

[Moonshadow 17,677]

Dawes departing or on a significantly reduced 2017 contract opens up a fair bit of SC space next year.

[titan_uranus 25,046]

My vote is Pedersen only, for two reasons:

1. Pedersen is more versatile. He can play KPF, KPD and second ruck. Dawes is only KPF.
2. Pedersen is a better mark. Dawes, IMO, is too bad of a mark to warrant a spot at CHF.

There's no doubt we need to do better than both but if I had the decision I'd give Pedersen another year and I'd be looking to move Dawes on (good bloke, good team man, but not good enough IMO).

[old dee 23,879]

1 hour ago, The Lobster Effect said:

Yeh Dawes would have to take a massive paycut

To zero in my opinion.

 

[deeko 952]

I thought Cams start of the year this season was better than anything Dawes has produced for us to date.

Id rather Pedo as I think he plays both a key forward role better than Dawes, rucks better and can occasionally go doe back to assist. Not saying he does any of these that well but I think he does them better than Dawes.

I thank Dawesy for coming to us when we were shot and I'm sure he gave his all but really, as a recruit he's been a massive failure imo

[Bitter but optimistic 22,250]

Both these guys do have positive attributes. Dawes has terrific endurance for a big bloke. He is tough and has to pull a big defender. He also has footy smarts and can be very creative.

Pedo did appear to have improved his tank before his injury /illness. He gets to contests and is a good kick. For mine though, the defining factor is his ability to take a strong mark. A KP forward/defender must be able to do this.

So, at the risk of offending my good mate Stuie, I'm voting for Pedo.

Also, gotta love the nickname.

[John Demonic 5,865]

Vickery

[Bitter but optimistic 22,250]

3 minutes ago, johndemons said:

Vickery

Nah! But his Missus is welcome!

[DV8 2,271]

2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

My vote is Pedersen only, for two reasons:

1. Pedersen is more versatile. He can play KPF, KPD and second ruck. Dawes is only KPF.
2. Pedersen is a better mark. Dawes, IMO, is too bad of a mark to warrant a spot at CHF.

There's no doubt we need to do better than both but if I had the decision I'd give Pedersen another year and I'd be looking to move Dawes on (good bloke, good team man, but not good enough IMO).

Keep Pedo, & rookie Dawes, if he's so good around the club-rooms.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,511]

It all comes down to price.

I wouldn't think either of them would be demanding high salaries and Dawes in particular is excellent around the club for the younger forwards and both provide a big body to take the pressure off the developing players.

[BAMF 4,395]

Neither. 

If I had to choose it would be Pedo because he can ruck.

[P-man 13,366]

1 minute ago, Night Crawler said:

Neither. 

If I had to choose it would be Pedo because he can ruck.

When you say neither, are you saying that we will recruit someone else to take their role, or do you think Hulett/Weed/someone else already on the list is equipped and ready to assume that role full time in 2017?

[Wiseblood 24,637]

7 minutes ago, P-man said:

When you say neither, are you saying that we will recruit someone else to take their role, or do you think Hulett/Weed/someone else already on the list is equipped and ready to assume that role full time in 2017?

And that's the crux of it.  If we let both go, who do we recruit to fill the void who plays their roles better?  Weideman and Hulett can't ruck, and it would be disappointing to see us let both go only to recruit someone *cough* Vickery *cough* who is a sideways step, not a forward one.

[Deestar9 1,649]

Thank god we have more astute minds than ours who will make the ultimate decision ?

[spirit of norm smith 16,591]

One must go and one must stay... both SHOULD go!!! I cannot see either in September where the pace and intensity would be too much for either. Likely Dawes to go and Pedersen will stay.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,098]

I rate Dawes higher as a forward, but Pedersen is a legitimate swingman who can play anywhere on the ground including the ruck.  I think he provides better value to the side because of this.  That being said, neither of them should be starting for us next year. 

[Guest]

Ideally I'd prefer neither to be on our list next year, just aren't good enough for a team that wants to play finals. Unless we sign a replacement though we have to keep one at a minimum.