Jump to content

Nate Caddy

DeeSpencer
DeeSpencer
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

Given he's now been linked to us by a number of media outlets (potentially all just copying from Twomey's original report mind you) I think it's time for his own thread.

Pros:
- 25 goals in 9 games at Coates league level, including 4 with bags of 4 or more and 4 games of 19 or more disposals
- Has a natural presence to the way he hits contests and uses his body
- top 10 in agility
- big wingspan and solid frame
- competes at ground level
- didn't look out of place in the VFL
 

Cons:
- Undersized for a tall forward and his midfield time looked like a worthy experiment more than a sure thing
- Not a huge impact at the national champs
- Field kicking looks a little shaky

 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
     

    I watched a lot of TAC Cup and state footy in 2014-15 with a friend who was working for a Melbourne based club as a talent scout. Any comparisons between Caddy and Charlie Curnow are way off.

    Caddy doesn’t have the explosiveness nor the ability below the feet like Curnow did back then. I thought Curnow was Kouta II. I also thought Harry McKay was a future all-Australian CHB and that Weitering was overrated. Anyway…

    Not to say we shouldn’t draft Caddy, rather the Curnow comp is not a good one in my eyes. 

  • Quote
    • Like 8
    Just now, JJJ said:

    I watched a lot of TAC Cup and state footy in 2014-15 with a friend who was working for a Melbourne based club as a talent scout. Any comparisons between Caddy and Charlie Curnow are way off.

    Caddy doesn’t have the explosiveness nor the ability below the feet like Curnow did back then. I thought Curnow was Kouta II. I also thought Harry McKay was a future all-Australian CHB and that Weitering was overrated. Anyway…

    Not to say we shouldn’t draft Caddy, rather the Curnow comp is not a good one in my eyes. 

    A better comparison is Jake Stringer, i don't think we will take Caddy unless he is there at pick 11. 

    there is no universe where he's a better player than Riley Sanders 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Clap 1
    • Shocked 1

    Got a bit of manchild about him. 

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    Would seem like a reliable forward presence, willing to compete, all of that.

    I'd feel okay if we got him but I suspect we'll miss out on who we really have our eye on because of North's bonus pick. Such is life.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    15 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:

    A better comparison is Jake Stringer, i don't think we will take Caddy unless he is there at pick 11. 

    there is no universe where he's a better player than Riley Sanders 

    Spot on 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    How about the universe where we need a potential key forward more than anything else.

    Having watched his highlights, we will take Caddy at No.6 because we can't risk him being taken at 7, 8, 9 or 10.

    The only reason we won't is that he may yet go to North at pick 3 - his agility makes him impossible to overlook.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    7 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

    How about the universe where we need a potential key forward more than anything else.

    Having watched his highlights, we will take Caddy at No.6 because we can't risk him being taken at 7, 8, 9 or 10.

    The only reason we won't is that he may yet go to North at pick 3 - his agility makes him impossible to overlook.

    Both Curtin and O'Sullivan can play the key forward role better than Caddy can. he's not a key forward, he doesn't quite fit into any of the traditional player catagories, he's not good enough to be a pure mid, and he's probably a 3rd tall as a forward which we already have covered with Smith/Fritsh/Melksham/McAdam

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Curtin is sliding and I reckon Geelong and Essendon will have tricky times deciding whether to take him if the more versatile Caddy ain't available - so he could yet slip to our pick 11.

    O'Sullivan looks good - is he good enough for our pick 6? I reckon Adelaide may take him at 10. If not he'd be a great project get for us at 11.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    6 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

    Curtin is sliding and I reckon Geelong and Essendon will have tricky times deciding whether to take him if the more versatile Caddy ain't available - so he could yet slip to our pick 11.

    O'Sullivan looks good - is he good enough for our pick 6? I reckon Adelaide may take him at 10. If not he'd be a great project get for us at 11.

    So the Curtin is coming down.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 6

    O'Sullivan if he is there at 6, just gives that key, really Tomlinson, Schache, B Brown, Tmac 2024 will be there last at Melbourne. May and then Petty uncertainly the year after.

    You get a key, give them 12 months development at Casey to push for selection the following year.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Caddy looks a very ordinary kick to me. I don't get the wraps on him.

    I'd have Curtin or O'Sullivan at 6 IMO. I'd have O'Sullivan ahead, but that's just me.

    JT has a better record with mids than talls (Petty being the exception), so it'll be interesting to see who we rate in the top 10.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    7 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

    Caddy looks a very ordinary kick to me. I don't get the wraps on him.

    I'd have Curtin or O'Sullivan at 6 IMO. I'd have O'Sullivan ahead, but that's just me.

    JT has a better record with mids than talls (Petty being the exception), so it'll be interesting to see who we rate in the top 10.

    I just had a look at JT’s draft history with talls. It is not as bad as some point out. JVR, Petty and LJ are stand out wins. The only big miss I can see is Weid. The rest have been speculative picks used with late draft picks. 
     

    Trading in May, BBB, Thommo and Lever and having Max and TMac on the list when he arrived has meant there was little need to draft many talls. 

     

     

  • Quote
    • Like 7
    21 minutes ago, Demonsterative said:

    I just had a look at JT’s draft history with talls. It is not as bad as some point out. JVR, Petty and LJ are stand out wins. The only big miss I can see is Weid. The rest have been speculative picks used with late draft picks. 
     

    Trading in May, BBB, Thommo and Lever and having Max and TMac on the list when he arrived has meant there was little need to draft many talls. 

     

     

    Good call mate. I guess it's that Weideman pick in a draft with all those talls that makes it seem like a worse record haha.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    His highlights are good but you have to see him in the flesh to see what he does when he has not got the ball, his highlights mainly show that he can mark a ball and kick goals from about 40-45 meters.

    Also I noticed that his kicking lack the depth required by a CHF.

    I need a large sample to say yes or no to recruiting him at 6 or 11.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    10 minutes ago, durango said:

    His highlights are good but you have to see him in the flesh to see what he does when he has not got the ball, his highlights mainly show that he can mark a ball and kick goals from about 40-45 meters.

    Also I noticed that his kicking lack the depth required by a CHF.

    I need a large sample to say yes or no to recruiting him at 6 or 11.

    Are you JT's research assistant?

  • Quote
    • Haha 2

    • Author
    3 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:

    Both Curtin and O'Sullivan can play the key forward role better than Caddy can. he's not a key forward, he doesn't quite fit into any of the traditional player catagories, he's not good enough to be a pure mid, and he's probably a 3rd tall as a forward which we already have covered with Smith/Fritsh/Melksham/McAdam

    I’d strongly disagree. If Caddy was listed as 195cm would you question him as a key forward? The way he plays is as a key forward, I’m not worried by a couple of centimetres.

    Similarly I don’t see O’Sullivan or Curtin as great aerial players. O’Sullivan especially has great size but I see both of them as much stronger zoning players than they are as aerial contesters. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    26 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    I’d strongly disagree. If Caddy was listed as 195cm would you question him as a key forward? The way he plays is as a key forward, I’m not worried by a couple of centimetres.

    Similarly I don’t see O’Sullivan or Curtin as great aerial players. O’Sullivan especially has great size but I see both of them as much stronger zoning players than they are as aerial contesters. 

    Yes, because i have seen him play... he's actually a similar height to Jacob Van Rooyen but they're very different players

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    25 minutes ago, Dwight Schrute said:

    Yes, because i have seen him play... he's actually a similar height to Jacob Van Rooyen but they're very different players

    Caddy is listed at 193cm at the moment but he’s still growing from reports. JVR around 194 so there’s not much difference there 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    4 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

    Caddy is listed at 193cm at the moment but he’s still growing from reports. JVR around 194 so there’s not much difference there 

    I think what Dwight is saying is that height is irrelevant. He doesn't think Caddy plays like a KPF. Hence Caddy vs JVR 'they're different players'.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Author
    55 minutes ago, Dwight Schrute said:

    Yes, because i have seen him play... he's actually a similar height to Jacob Van Rooyen but they're very different players

    So what about his game isn’t key forward if height isn’t your issue? He draws the ball and competes strongly in the air to my eyes 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: Geelong

      "It's officially time for some alarm bells. I'm concerned about the lack of impact from their best players." This comment about one of the teams contesting this Friday night’s game came earlier in the week from a so-called expert radio commentator by the name of Kane Cornes. He wasn’t referring to the Melbourne Football Club but rather, this week’s home side, Geelong.The Cats are purring along with 1 win and 2 defeats and a percentage of 126.2 (courtesy of a big win at GMHBA Stadium in Round 1 vs Fremantle) which is one win more than Melbourne and double the percentage so I guess that, in the case of the Demons, its not just alarm bells, but distress signals. But don’t rely on me. Listen to Cornes who said this week about Melbourne:- “They can’t run. If you can’t run at speed and get out of the contest then you’re in trouble.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 04

      Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit.
      Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 1 reply
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Gold Coast

      For a brief period of time in the early afternoon of yesterday, the Casey Demons occupied top place on the Smithy’s VFL table. This was only made possible by virtue of the fact that the team was the only one in this crazy competition to have played twice and it’s 1½ wins gave it an unassailable lead on the other 20 teams, some of who had yet to play a game.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Gold Coast

      In my all-time nightmare game, the team is so ill-disciplined that it concedes its first two goals with the courtesy of not one, but two, fifty metre penalties while opening its own scoring with four behinds in a row and losing a talented youngster with good decision-making skills and a lethal left foot kick, subbed off in the first quarter with what looks like a bad knee injury. 

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Gold Coast

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 31st March @ the all new time of 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse the Demons loss at the MCG to the Suns in the Round 03. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

        • Like
      • 69 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All