Delisted today by the Tigers.

I recall there were some differences of opinion between the pundits as to Ben Lennon's ability. Some thought highly of him while others found deficiencies in his makeup. His career at Richmond was marred by a series of injuries and in the end, he wasn't able to break into the premiership team.

Opinions?

Ahhhh.  Tough one. Talented. No doubt. 

Whats going on mentally is a query.  Why hasn’t he made it or played more.  He could be a very very good player. 

Talented 22 year old. Not sure why it hasn’t clicked for him.

why get rid of Watts to only bring in this fella?

Sure Lennon is a mid/HFF, but Watts would have been a much preferred option than Lennon. Pass.

I imagine he might go OK if he worked closely with McCartney.

36 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

why get rid of Watts to only bring in this fella?

Sure Lennon is a mid/HFF, but Watts would have been a much preferred option than Lennon. Pass.

Isn't the question more of a 'Why keep Watts and have a developing star poached on a massive offer' issue? I think future economics comes into it far more than whether we're immediately upgrading/downgrading. Anyone we bring in at HF is being added to the depth and to place pressure on selection be it an 18 year old or a 25 year old delistee

Edited October 26, 20177 yr by Deeprived Childhood

Good skills
Poor endurance
Average speed
Not overly physical

I think he's a half back flanker and I'm not sure why the Tigers didn't play him there in the VFL if they clearly weren't putting him in their AFL team as a forward. Not that he'd make their backline at AFL level which is a strength but at least he'd show something and develop his game.

If we had a heap of spare list spots I'd take him and play him half back with the knowledge he can play forward if needed but we don't have the spots so I'm not all that interested. Some team is probably getting a nice enough player.

8 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Good skills
Poor endurance
Average speed
Not overly physical

I think he's a half back flanker and I'm not sure why the Tigers didn't play him there in the VFL if they clearly weren't putting him in their AFL team as a forward. Not that he'd make their backline at AFL level which is a strength but at least he'd show something and develop his game.

If we had a heap of spare list spots I'd take him and play him half back with the knowledge he can play forward if needed but we don't have the spots so I'm not all that interested. Some team is probably getting a nice enough player.

is he better than Wagner? That's our current HB base-line.

I went all the way back to around this time four years ago when poster Fifty-5 raised this long post by Bigfooty poster Quigley who summed up Ben Lennon as follows:-

"Ben Lennon
DOB 5/7/95 Ht 189 Wt 80

Lennon has been a Twomey love child this year, putting out several articles telling us how great Lennon is and how he is a virtual certainty for the top 10. Play anywhere on the ground, explosive, elite kick yadda yadda yadda. Well personally I do not see it. He looks like the typical second tier Metro kid who finishes the year well and they are talked up out of all proportion. A lot of people on BF have jumped onboard the Lennon love train and it is possible that I am wrong but if he is taken in the top 10 I am going to be shocked. This is not a case where I rate his tools a bit differently to others I just do not see him having those tools to start with.

Lets start with probably the big issue. Of the flanker/midfield groups he would sit firmly at or very close to bottom for athleticism and very real questions have to be asked about whether he has the athletic ability to play at AFL level most especially in his preferred HFF role. Lets start physically. 189cm is pretty good for a midfielder but it is getting to be pretty average for a flanker and combine that with short arms and small hands and we are not off to a fantastic start in supposedly his strength area. Another thing which gets talked up is his explosiveness. Well he was bottom 20% (this includes rucks remember) over the first 5m of the 20m sprint and his back half was nothing out of the ordinary leaving him with a time in the 3.20 range. So pace and explosiveness are a cross. I will say that his repeat sprints were better but that only put him up into the average category.

I have seen show a good lateral movement to evade tacklers but I have also seen him get nailed by tacklers that I thought he should have been able to step around and so I was interested to see what he scored in the agility test. Bottom 5%. The only players who scored worse than him on the agility test were a few rucks and many of them scored better than him. I will say that I was surprised with the result. I had a big range in my mind where he could go but bottom 5% was well below where I thought he would end up. Beep in the mid 13s was nothing to write home about and a bottom 25% in the 3km was disappointing. A lot of the highlights for Lennon are him taking nice marks so jumping was expected to be decent at the very least. Well he was bottom 10% in the vertical and below 50% in each of the running jumps. 

If I am honest I will concede that these results surprised me a lot. I did not expect him to be a stand out athlete but I did think he was probably going to be above average. He obviously plays better than he tests but these sort of athletic deficiencies are often found out at AFL level when playing against guys who are just as smart as you are as a footballer and are much superior athletes. So even before we start to look at his game there are big question marks.

Okay onto his game and I hear a lot of talk about how great a kick Lennon is. Pin point passes over 50m to hit guys in stride on the chest. Well I have to say that I have missed those ones. I would say that Lennon is a good kick but I am not seeing it as being elite and it is probably a fair way from that. He does have good penetration and can hoof it 55m. His usual approach is to go with long or 3/4 kicks which are most often to contests. He does not tend to look to use short to intermediate targets as much as he should and will probably be instructed to lower his eyes more at AFL level. I do not rate his decision making or vision as being anything more than average for his position. He tends to take obvious targets which is not bad but I do not see him setting up play like Billings say who played a similar role at the Champs. Around goals he could also be better and will miss goals you would like to see him get. He waves the ball a little in his set shot approach but nothing too bad. As with his field kicking he has good range and might actually be better further from goal where the pressure is on him a bit less.

Okay I have been very harsh on him up to this time. What does he do well? Well his marking gets a lot of praise and I would tend to agree with that. I think his hands are good (but not great) and he uses his body excellently in marking contests. He is strong through the core and maintains focus and balance really well in body on body situations. He judges the ball in the air pretty well and marks most that come his way. With the ball on the ground he has really clean hands for a flanker and this gives him a bit more time to work with than others. He can swoop and collect at pace and make opportunities.

Lennon does have some class about him and good things do often happen when he is involved in the play. This is a little hard to explain but I think he has good football IQ about some things (reading the play, body work, positioning around goal) but I probably couldn't say that about everything (decision making, leading and passing lanes). In most games there will be a wow moment or two which really make you notice him - a spin move out of a pack, a swooping pick up and go etc.

Teams have wanted to see him more as a midfielder this year (you can probably hide athletic deficiencies a little more there) and credit too him that he stood up and put up some good numbers there in the TAC. He did not play a heap of games but averaged 25 disposals a game over the year and 28 disposals over the last 4 or 5 games when playing a lot of midfield time. He played as a half forward at the Champs and only managed 12.6 disposals per game which I did not think was a particularly good return. I particularly followed him in the SA game where he matched up on Scharenberg quite a bit and Scharenberg gave him an absolute bath. The difference in ability was very evident in that game and cemented for me that he was not in that class and definitely not a top 10 pick for me.

If I was looking at him I would be trying to develop him into a Sidebottom type midfielder who can go forward. Sidebottom is also not the most athletic player in the world and has a similar good but not great kick. Sidebottom's decision making are probably better than Lennon's but you would hope that would come. Lennon's clean hands also allow some prospect that he will develop a decent inside game as he gets more time on ball. I have been pretty harsh on Lennon but I have to stress that I actually don't mind him as a prospect. I just think talk of him being a top 10er should be way off base."

... and that possibly explains why he didn't make Richmond's grand final team and why he's on the outer today.

Tweener.

Vanilla with no weapons.

Prendergast would have loved him

I'm not going to copy the whole of WJ's copy of Quigley's comments. But there is so much negativity there I'm concerned that WJ has almost breached Demonland's rules about defamation. That's a seriously critical piece.   

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

That's a seriously critical piece.   

By the best in the business.

Quigley is a freak with his footy observations.

8 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not going to copy the whole of WJ's copy of Quigley's comments. But there is so much negativity there I'm concerned that WJ has almost breached Demonland's rules about defamation. That's a seriously critical piece.   

The only thing that I can see that's in any way defamatory is the suggestion that I almost breached Demonland's rules about defamation.

was rated by some as highly as Bontempelli in his draft year. But for whatever reason can't get it done. No idea why. Great skills, athletic band a proven player at under 18 level against guys who are now A graders. 

He's a dud with no weapons. Next!

On 10/26/2017 at 6:24 PM, Whispering_Jack said:

Delisted today by the Tigers.

I recall there were some differences of opinion between the pundits as to Ben Lennon's ability. Some thought highly of him while others found deficiencies in his makeup. His career at Richmond was marred by a series of injuries and in the end, he wasn't able to break into the premiership team.

Opinions?

As someone with a very astute eye I will go out on a limb and say Ben Lennon is the best get this trade period - taking into consideration of the fact we will get him for nothing. Yes MFC, get this kid on our list FFS, can play football.

21 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

He's a dud with no weapons. Next!

You mean he is not an explosive type player or fires blanks?

22 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

You mean he is not an explosive type player or fires blanks?

Don't quit your day job sat-man.

On 27 October 2017 at 10:55 AM, ProDee said:

By the best in the business.

Quigley is a freak with his footy observations.

They all get a few wrong, but I can't forget his rating of Josh Green as a top 5 pick.

Having said that, he (along with the other amateur draftee assessors) keeps his focus on talent and athletic ability, not so much character, personality, resilience, etc.

5 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

You mean he is not an explosive type player or fires blanks?

With a lion tattoo on his tummy it probably means both !

23 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

They all get a few wrong, but I can't forget his rating of Josh Green as a top 5 pick.

Having said that, he (along with the other amateur draftee assessors) keeps his focus on talent and athletic ability, not so much character, personality, resilience, etc.

Hard to evaluate character and personality from high up in the stands.

10 hours ago, Mach5 said:

They all get a few wrong, but I can't forget his rating of Josh Green as a top 5 pick.

Having said that, he (along with the other amateur draftee assessors) keeps his focus on talent and athletic ability, not so much character, personality, resilience, etc.

Quigley never does a phantom draft.  He never attempts to guess which club will take who.  He just rates them on ability.

And obviously in the case you mentioned he got it wrong.

I wouldn't let that dissuade you from his ability to observe.

On 27/10/2017 at 7:56 PM, KingDingAling said:

As someone with a very astute eye I will go out on a limb and say Ben Lennon is the best get this trade period - taking into consideration of the fact we will get him for nothing. Yes MFC, get this kid on our list FFS, can play football.

Did you just open a post containing your opinion by first telling us all you have a very astute eye?

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

Did you just open a post containing your opinion by first telling us all you have a very astute eye?

Chuck Berry also used to play with his dingaling.