On 02/02/2017 at 12:06, Redleg said:

I amended my post, probably after you replied, but what I added was that the player we picked up with pick 53, that we got in the deal for Tyson/Salem, was a kid called Hunt.

We ended up with Tyson, Salem and Hunt, for 2, 20 and 72. A pretty handy day's work.

This is a really important point I think, I may get shot down for this but I rate hunt just about on par with Kelly for talent, i find it unbelievable that he didn't get a rising star nomination last season. 

A really great example of a player those who attend training can see the talent of but those who rely on game day only probably didn't know much about, I think we might have another one this year with young smith as well, I really think he's one who could surprise a lot of people this year and play fairly regular senior games 

  On 03/02/2017 at 11:47, Redleg said:

GM	K	HB	D	M	G	B	T	HO	FF	FA	AF *	SC *
Total	24	301	265	566	90	14	16	94	0	13	12	1,977	1,916
Average	24	12.5	11.0	23.6	3.8	0.6	0.7	3.9	0	0.5	0.5	89.9	87.1

Kelly

GM	K	HB	D	M	G	B	T	HO	FF	FA	AF *	SC *
Total	21	230	299	529	87	11	11	90	9	13	19	1,951	1,903
Average	21	11.0	14.2	25.2	4.1	0.5	0.5	4.3	0.4	0.6	0.9	92.9	90.6

 

Tyson

I know stats aren't everything but they are a start.

Stats don't tell you that Josh Kelly lowers his eyes better than anyone in the comp. Great execution as well. Kid is absolute class. If he does consider our club in the future it would be a massive coup. He is exactly what we need. Viney or Oliver getting the ball in Kelly's hands. Hogan would be happy to see that.

  On 03/02/2017 at 13:34, KingDingAling said:

Stats don't tell you that Josh Kelly lowers his eyes better than anyone in the comp. Great execution as well. Kid is absolute class. If he does consider our club in the future it would be a massive coup. He is exactly what we need. Viney or Oliver getting the ball in Kelly's hands. Hogan would be happy to see that.

Do you think you may have exaggerated a tad with your opening sentence? 

He is obviously a very good footballer as I have said, but I just don't like the word champion being thrown around, as easily as it is on here.

When I think champion, I think of Selwood, Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell, Nick Reiwoldt as examples of some current players and possible future champions such as Bont and Cripps in the younger brigade.

Would I like him at Melbourne, of course?

Could he be a champion in years to come, of course, if he starts to regularly dominate games and become a matchwinner.

I haven't yet seen that with Kelly.

  On 03/02/2017 at 11:47, Redleg said:

GM	K	HB	D	M	G	B	T	HO	FF	FA	AF *	SC *
Total	24	301	265	566	90	14	16	94	0	13	12	1,977	1,916
Average	24	12.5	11.0	23.6	3.8	0.6	0.7	3.9	0	0.5	0.5	89.9	87.1

Kelly

GM	K	HB	D	M	G	B	T	HO	FF	FA	AF *	SC *
Total	21	230	299	529	87	11	11	90	9	13	19	1,951	1,903
Average	21	11.0	14.2	25.2	4.1	0.5	0.5	4.3	0.4	0.6	0.9	92.9	90.6

 

Tyson

I know stats aren't everything but they are a start.

Averages over their career to date and they are very similar, Dom has only played 11 more games and shades Kelly in most areas.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=12&playerStatus2=A&tid2=25&type=A&pid1=3641&pid2=3919&fid1=C&fid2=C

when you look at those numbers, the biggest differential is the 18 months age gap that tyson has on kelly.

also interesting that whilst dom makes 1 more 'clanger' per game, his actual de% is higher, and obviously as an inside player dom's clearances are slightly higher and kelly's i50s are slightly higher.

both are very, very good players - easy to argue that kelly's ceiling is higher, but i think the trade in and of itself is a classic win-win.

Edited February 5, 20178 yr by DemonAndrew

One other matter to consider is that if each of Melbourne and GWS has one of these players injured and unable to play, we still have one on the ground and GWS does not. That's not a reason in itself to do the deal, but it shouldn't be ignored as one of the benefits. 

  On 03/02/2017 at 23:40, Redleg said:

Do you think you may have exaggerated a tad with your opening sentence?

No. Josh Kelly lowers his eyes better than anyone else in the competition. I actually watched him last year.

If you swapped players and but them in each team, D.Tyson would still have more impact, he would be unbelievable for GWS.  Very different players, ideally we want Salem playing the same role as Kelly but for us.  Two beautiful kicks

  On 05/02/2017 at 23:24, KingDingAling said:

No. Josh Kelly lowers his eyes better than anyone else in the competition. I actually watched him last year.

I'm not the most one-eyed supporter but have told friends that I believe Watts is the best kick to a leading forward in the game. When you say lowering the eyes are you referring to that?

Watch Watts' passes vs GWS in the 4th quarter and Hawthorn in the 4th quarter from last season. More or less perfection where he drew the forward to the ball and didn't allow for any chance of an intercept while completing difficult options.

Kelly is obviously better at full speed but others like Stephen Hill are his equal.

The trade was great for us at the time and was a no-brainer.

But as our list stands right now, I'd have Kelly over Tyson. 

Kelly possesses attributes that our midfield sorely lack. And as good as Tyson is inside, we have a plethora of mids who are super strong inside. 

Would be a dream if were to land him. But I can't see him moving back home anytime soon.

  On 05/02/2017 at 23:24, KingDingAling said:

No. Josh Kelly lowers his eyes better than anyone else in the competition. I actually watched him last year.

And you watched every other player in the AFL as well?

  On 06/02/2017 at 02:51, stevethemanjordan said:

The trade was great for us at the time and was a no-brainer.

But as our list stands right now, I'd have Kelly over Tyson. 

Kelly possesses attributes that our midfield sorely lack. And as good as Tyson is inside, we have a plethora of mids who are super strong inside. 

Would be a dream if were to land him. But I can't see him moving back home anytime soon.

We don't have one the same as Tyson though 'steve'...

He brings what Jones & Viney don't and is a very important part of the mix.

Edited February 6, 20178 yr by rjay

  On 30/01/2017 at 11:50, McQueen said:

You blokes do realise we're talking about Nat Fyfe.

 

  On 30/01/2017 at 11:54, don't make me angry said:

Martin and Nat are freeagents 

 

  On 30/01/2017 at 12:01, don't make me angry said:

Sorry I said Martin is a free agent not Kelly 

 

  On 30/01/2017 at 22:41, Danelska said:

Potential derail -but who would you rather - Fyfe or Kelly?

Maybe this re emphasizes the need to insert (player name) instead of (he) when replying to a post that doesn't contain a name?

We've selected some really poor players with first round draft picks and we've done some dumb trades previously, but Kelly for Tyson and Salem ain't in either of these categories.

In fact, it was a super astute trade.

 

  On 06/02/2017 at 10:27, Ron Burgundy said:

We've selected some really poor players with first round draft picks and we've done some dumb trades previously, but Kelly for Tyson and Salem ain't in either of these categories.

In fact, it was a super astute trade.

 

Wasn't it Kelly for Tyson, Salem and pick 20?

Regardless, a good deal for both clubs 

  On 06/02/2017 at 11:21, Moonshadow said:

Wasn't it Kelly for Tyson, Salem and pick 20?

Regardless, a good deal for both clubs 

You are right, it was a good deal for both clubs

We got

Tyson

Salem

Hunt

They got

Kelly

Lobb

  On 06/02/2017 at 11:50, fndee said:

You are right, it was a good deal for both clubs

We got

Tyson

Salem

Hunt

They got

Kelly

Lobb

Tyson is already a very good player and I expect Salem and Hunt will step up this year, in fact I would be prepared to say that they will both be stars of the competition, both of these players are on the verge of setting the comp alight.

 

  On 04/02/2017 at 04:16, Dante said:

Averages over their career to date and they are very similar, Dom has only played 11 more games and shades Kelly in most areas.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?playerStatus1=A&tid1=12&playerStatus2=A&tid2=25&type=A&pid1=3641&pid2=3919&fid1=C&fid2=C

Stats are dangerous in the wrong hands. They have to always be seen in context. I don't think there's much point in comparing these stat's at this point. Kelly hasn't had any injuries that I know of. Tyson has played many of his games initially coming back from a serious injury after a lost season and then other injuries on the way through. Wait until they are both injury free with full preseasons if you really want to compare their raw ability as players. 

If people here could pick one of Kelly, Bontempelli or Cripps, who would you take now?

I'd go with Cripps.

This sliding doors business is getting a tad out of hand. In only slightly different circumstances, we could just as well have sent pick 23 to GWS. And then it would have been Tyson, Salem & Hunt for Kelly and the price of a Sylvia rather than Lobb (although possibly then Hartung, McStay or M. Crouch). Or some such. We traded picks 2, 20 and 72 for Tyson and picks 9 and 53. Whom each team picked up thereafter is partly a matter of luck - especially with the later speculative picks - and therefore should be judged according to different criteria. We might have well wanted Sharenberg or Aish, or even Bonts, but who knows? We have Salem. The crux of the deal was giving up a shot on Kelly and a second-rounder for Tyson and a top-ten pick. Was that a win at the time? In my opinion, yes.   

  On 06/02/2017 at 10:17, rjay said:

We don't have one the same as Tyson though 'steve'...

He brings what Jones & Viney don't and is a very important part of the mix.

Nobody is the same.

However, as our list stands right now, Tyson is the least versatile of all our mids and his inside work is hardly far and away better than any of Brayshaw, Viney, Jones, Petracca and Oliver. 

He may be more valuable once Jones retires.

But Kelly would be of greater value to us going into the 2017 season. Nobody at our club possesses the running power or class of Kelly. (Hunt has the pace, not the endurance).

Edited February 7, 20178 yr by stevethemanjordan

  On 07/02/2017 at 01:03, Clint Bizkit said:

If people here could pick one of Kelly, Bontempelli or Cripps, who would you take now?

I'd go with Cripps.

Bont without question

  On 07/02/2017 at 01:03, Clint Bizkit said:

If people here could pick one of Kelly, Bontempelli or Cripps, who would you take now?

I'd go with Cripps.

Bont, no doubt. Clarry will eclipse Cripps and the class of Kelly is a cherry. Bontempelli is the rare game-breaker.

  On 06/02/2017 at 10:24, monoccular said:

 

 

 

Maybe this re emphasizes the need to insert (player name) instead of (he) when replying to a post that doesn't contain a name?

Classic derail, thread titled Josh Kelly but there's discussions of at least 6 other players in the same thread.

  On 07/02/2017 at 01:27, boydie said:

Classic derail, thread titled Josh Kelly but there's discussions of at least 6 other players in the same thread.

All of whom are being compared to Kelly and or discussed in the context of the Kelly trade and the Kelly draft year.

In short, unlike several other threads, this thread still seems very much on point to me.