Interesting selections. Don,t think JKH or Smith have shown they can bring any more than Pedersen or Kent. If they don,t perform questions need to be asked. Re Pedersen, was clearly voted on here as a better option than spud Dawes. There was a reason for that, he can put in useful performances.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:13, Dr evil said:

Thinking of having roast Pedersons with my dinner, thoughts?

As long as you eat something mate, drinking on an empty stomach isn't a great plan.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:18, Skuit said:

That you should spell his name correctly before you call him a spod.

Masher isn't a fan.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:18, Skuit said:

That you should spell his name correctly before you call him a spod.

Not familiar with Spod's, are they good??

  On 23/04/2017 at 04:26, Cranky Franky said:

If you can't see his value to the team well you must be blind.  For the last 2 years he has been our 2nd best big bodied forward after Hogan.

Whatever your views on him are if you are on the list & playing well you should be given an opportunity doesn't matter if you are Joel McDonald, James Magner, Phil Read, Chris Lamb or anyone else. 

When you have no back up ruckman, key defender or key forward like last week it is suicide to go into the game without some insurance.

 

 

No, like it or not Watts has been streets ahead of him.

He might not get the taps as a 2nd ruck but he gives us more of an advantage around the ground and when forward hits the scoreboard more than Pedders.

His only value now is as backup and he won't be carried into a game as insurance, that's a waste of a position.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:26, Dr evil said:

Not familiar with Spod's, are they good??

Taste like chicken

The continued want by some to play Pedersen reminds me of the wraps by some Demonlanders on Dawes.

Both were ordinary depth players.

I think with the 'system' we're looking to play, there won't be a need for Pedersen. We'll either go big and back in Weideman's development, which I'd agree with, or we'll go with a small, quicker forwardline. Obviously, Pedo fits into neither system.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:28, rjay said:

No, like it or not Watts has been streets ahead of him.

He might not get the taps as a 2nd ruck but he gives us more of an advantage around the ground and when forward hits the scoreboard more than Pedders.

His only value now is as backup and he won't be carried into a game as insurance, that's a waste of a position.

Spencer is insurance....

  On 23/04/2017 at 04:09, ProDee said:

The old-fashioned journeyman footballer who doesn't impact games, has never kicked 20 goals in 6 completed seasons, never kicked 4 goals in a game, and doesn't consistently contest in the air.  He doesn't provide enough opportunities for a key forward, either for himself, or his teammates, and isn't part of the future.

He's insurance, but clearly (and rightly) not part of Goodwin's plans. 

When your main ruckman is out injured, your key tall forward suspended, and your project tall forward horribly out of form and / or inured you lose two games partly because your next best big forward spends little time forward as he is rucking.

When does one make an insurance claim - not as if there is a loss of no claim bonus, or an up-front to pay?

Perhaps he'd be worth a shot in the backline?

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:40, Dr evil said:

Perhaps he'd be worth a shot in the backline?

Instead of the fleet of foot McDonald and Frost, in an offensively-minded defence? I wouldn't think so.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:40, Dr evil said:

Perhaps he'd be worth a shot in the backline?

That should be another shot. He could take a contested defensive grab but was very very slow to move it on from the mark.

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:43, Skuit said:

He could take a contested defensive grab but was very very slow to move it on from the mark.

Yeah i agree, he's a hard one because i am not sure he can really play any role besides the third tall/ruck and given we have had the injuries we have had and he still hasn't played i don't think he's going to get much of a look in 

 

Anyone comparing Pederson's contribution to Dawes just isn't paying attention!

Pederson CAN take a contested mark

Pederson DOES snag a goal on a tight angle

Pederson DOES compete in the air to bring the ball to ground

Pederson DOES spoil when he needs to

Pederson is NOT afraid of body contact

Pederson HAS gone down to Casey and proved himself at the lower level

Pederson HAS completed several pre-season preparations

Do I need to continue?

 

  On 23/04/2017 at 08:06, waynewussell said:

 

Do I need to continue?

 

No.

Just make your point

I'm a pedo man.

  On 23/04/2017 at 06:51, Hell Bent said:

Watch the last qtr of our Hawks win last year, he was instrumental in turning the game for us, one of the best wins we have had in more than 10 years.

I don`t think too many here think he is best 22, however he has been an important role player when he is required, and I`d have thought in the past 2 weeks he would have been required as many on here suggested. IMO, if we`d played him for Weid, we`d have won. We could have left Watts forward all day too, which improves the whole forward structure particularly with Hogan out.

Goodwin clearly disagrees with me though!

That's exactly my point, it's only a qtr

I'd prefer to see Pedo in the team. He contributes. And he can take a mark.

 

 

  On 23/04/2017 at 06:50, Dr evil said:

The stat is, the % of teams that play finals with a potato in their teams is 0

Hawthorn won a flag with Chips playing.

  On 23/04/2017 at 08:50, Ron Burgundy said:

I'd prefer to see Pedo in the team. He contributes. And he can take a mark.

 

 

We're #1 for marks so far this year. The key though, we're just about bottom for contested marks alongside Hawthorn and Essendon. With Gawn out, this isn't getting any better, and Spencer has the opposite problem to Dawes - his hands are too soft. The issue is, it alters our outlet structure when under pressure or kicking in from defence (see Freo 3rd qtr.)

  On 23/04/2017 at 07:38, monoccular said:

When does one make an insurance claim - not as if there is a loss of no claim bonus, or an up-front to pay?

It's a last resort.

Let's hope we don't have to find out.

Bottom line ?  Goodwin >>>> Demonland posters.

  On 23/04/2017 at 09:37, Skuit said:

We're #1 for marks so far this year. The key though, we're just about bottom for contested marks alongside Hawthorn and Essendon. With Gawn out, this isn't getting any better, and Spencer has the opposite problem to Dawes - his hands are too soft. The issue is, it alters our outlet structure when under pressure or kicking in from defence (see Freo 3rd qtr.)

Hogan out for half the games too.

We led contested marks against both Saints and Blues.

  On 23/04/2017 at 08:06, waynewussell said:

Pederson CAN take a contested mark

Pederson DOES snag a goal on a tight angle

Pederson DOES compete in the air to bring the ball to ground

Pederson DOES spoil when he needs to

Pederson is NOT afraid of body contact

Pederson HAS gone down to Casey and proved himself at the lower level

Pederson HAS completed several pre-season preparations

Do I need to continue?

 

Free the Pedo?

  On 23/04/2017 at 06:01, --coach-- said:

Interestingly in 2016 he played in 6 wins and 3 losses which is 66%.

Without MFC won 4 and lost 13 which is 30.7%.

Therefore in 2016 we won 66% of our games when he was in the side and 30.7% when not in the side, which is a pretty strong statsistic I reckon.

That's not even remotely statistically correct.