The Harvey Langford Thread

[Kevin dyson 33]

8 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

This is going to be like when every plodder junior got some support on fan forums because “Greg Williams was slow”.

Turns out that none of those players was Greg Williams. We’ll see if Langford can buck the trend and be Marcus Bontempelli. He’ll need other traits that allow him to dominate in spite of being a plodder.

He’s definitely not a plodder. He’s not overly quick, but quick enough looking at all the videos. Speed also comes from knowing when to sprint too. If you read the game well it makes an huge difference. Also. If you tire easily, it effects your speed over the course of a game, and his endurance has significantly improved. 
 

 

Edited October 7 by Kevin dyson

[Axis of Bob 11,686]

7 minutes ago, Kevin dyson said:

He’s definitely not a plodder. He’s not overly quick, but quick enough looking at all the videos. Speed also comes from knowing when to sprint too. If you read the game well it makes an huge difference. Also. If you tire easily, it effects your speed over the course of a game, and his endurance has significantly improved. 

You know who else did all that?

Greg Williams. 😁

[old55 23,404]

Just like a great result is no guarantee of a good AFL career, a poor result is not a guarantee of failure but they do the tests for a reason and coming in the bottom echelon is not a good outcome for a midfielder. He'll really need to excel in other skills to be a worthy top 5 pick.

Edited October 7 by old55

[rjay 24,887]

Patrick Cripps is a bit of a plodder...

Must be a Carlton thing.

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

24 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

This is going to be like when every plodder junior got some support on fan forums because “Greg Williams was slow”.

Turns out that none of those players was Greg Williams. We’ll see if Langford can buck the trend and be Marcus Bontempelli. He’ll need other traits that allow him to dominate in spite of being a plodder.

Going off this, I take it you've barely watched him play.

Hilarious how most of you on here put so more emphasis on a simple athletic testing more then the footballing ability in itself.

Mark my words, Langford will be a 200 game elite player of the competition in years to come.

[old55 23,404]

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Going off this, I take it you've barely watched him play.

Hilarious how most of you on here put so more emphasis on a simple athletic testing more then the footballing ability in itself.

Mark my words, Langford will be a 200 game elite player of the competition in years to come.

I didn't say he won't make it but I did say they do the tests for a reason and Langford had a poor result. If we're not going to look at the results why bother doing them?

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

4 minutes ago, old55 said:

I didn't say he won't make it but I did say they do the tests for a reason and Langford had a poor result. If we're not going to look at the results why bother doing them?

Jason Taylor has been on record through a number of podcast that draft testing gives them a good reading more on there mental capacity then physical.

He has also stated that its not the be end all for determining that players draft selection or his footballing ability

So yeah, in other words it barely makes that much of a difference either way.

Edited October 7 by dazzledavey36

[Axis of Bob 11,686]

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Going off this, I take it you've barely watched him play.

Hilarious how most of you on here put so more emphasis on a simple athletic testing more then the footballing ability in itself.

Mark my words, Langford will be a 200 game elite player of the competition in years to come.

I didn’t say he wasn’t a good player, nor that he won’t be a good AFL player. 

But being able to run is important, particularly in a game that is quicker than ever and an emphasis on transition running. Bont is able to overcome his lack of speed with his brilliance of touch and skill to be able to win and distribute the ball under the huge amounts of physical pressure his lack of speed brings him. 

Similarly, Langford will need something to help him succeed under the highest amount of pressure because of his lack of natural athleticism. Will he have that ability at the next level? Time will tell.

FWIW, I don’t see a Bont comparison. I think a fairer one is a 6’3 Matt Crouch. Still a very good player but more of a straightforward footballer like Crouch than a mercurial one like Bont.

[old55 23,404]

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Jason Taylor has been on record through a number of podcast that draft testing gives them a good reading more on there mental capacity then physical.

He has also stated that its not the be end all for determining that players draft selection or his footballing ability

So yeah, in other words it barely makes that much of a difference either way.

Look you clearly love him and any critical observation is apparently worthless ...

[Axis of Bob 11,686]

10 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

He has also stated that its not the be end all for determining that players draft selection or his footballing ability

So yeah, in other words it barely makes that much of a difference either way.

That’s not a good summary of the value of testing. The testing just shows what they’ve probably already seen in the field. They know Langford is slow in the same way that they knew Windsor was quick, but that certainly doesn’t mean that being slow vs quick “barely makes a difference”. 

Athleticism is important. It’s also more important for some than others, which is why all the other slowest players at the combine are talls/rucks. It’s rare to have midfielders be the least athletic players on a team. They need something special to compensate, which recruiters will have assess with Langford.

Edited October 7 by Axis of Bob

[spirit of norm smith 16,292]

32 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Going off this, I take it you've barely watched him play.

Hilarious how most of you on here put so more emphasis on a simple athletic testing more then the footballing ability in itself.

Mark my words, Langford will be a 200 game elite player of the competition in years to come.

Agreed.  The best reference is the actually footy played through the year.  Langford has demonstrated his elite footy talent. The best players are well known before the combine athletic testing.  And the stars of today didn’t all excel at the combine. 

Edited October 7 by spirit of norm smith
U

[spirit of norm smith 16,292]

A few here are questioning Langford athleticism.  He’s 192cms and plays tall, with excellent contested footy, long kick and very good overhead.  
Resembles some other very good players.

Who am I? 

draft profile … WEAKNESSES
Given his height and size, XXX will most likely end up an inside midfielder, which means there is still improvements to be made in his contested ball winning. When he does come to terms with his build, he will look to be more powerful with it, and could work on his burst speed.    

ANSWER: Bontempelli

draft profile …WEAKNESSES
XXX is not a big runner, and only managed 13.2 in the beep test at this month's NAB AFL Draft Combine. That's something to build on, but will probably come as he grows more familiar with his size and strength. With greater spread from a contest, it will allow him to pick up a few more uncontested possessions and run with the ball more. 

ANSWER: Cripps 

[spirit of norm smith 16,292]

Happy if he’s our pick “5”

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

21 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

That’s not a good summary of the value of testing. The testing just shows what they’ve probably already seen in the field. They know Langford is slow in the same way that they knew Windsor was quick, but that certainly doesn’t mean that being slow vs quick “barely makes a difference”. 

Athleticism is important. It’s also more important for some than others, which is why all the other slowest players at the combine are talls/rucks. It’s rare to have midfielders be the least athletic players on a team. They need something special to compensate, which recruiters will have assess with Langford.

That's Jason Taylor's opinion of the draft testing, not mine.

I'll happily take his opinions over anyone that attempts to day otherwise.

32 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

I didn’t say he wasn’t a good player, nor that he won’t be a good AFL player. 

But being able to run is important, particularly in a game that is quicker than ever and an emphasis on transition running. Bont is able to overcome his lack of speed with his brilliance of touch and skill to be able to win and distribute the ball under the huge amounts of physical pressure his lack of speed brings him. 

Similarly, Langford will need something to help him succeed under the highest amount of pressure because of his lack of natural athleticism. Will he have that ability at the next level? Time will tell.

FWIW, I don’t see a Bont comparison. I think a fairer one is a 6’3 Matt Crouch. Still a very good player but more of a straightforward footballer like Crouch than a mercurial one like Bont.

Transition run isn't about speed.. it's the ability to cruise at a level that can get you to and from contests. Sam Mitchell was one of the slowest midfielders going around but it was his ability to gut run to and from contest at a consistent rate is why he was a champion inside midfielder. Langfords 2km was rated top 10 which means he's got the endurance to cover the ground.. massive tick. 

Langfords hands inside are just as impressive with his ability to get first use and disturbe cleanly to the outside.

He's a one touch player with clean hands and ability to manoeuvre into space and use his left peg.

One thing that's separates Langford from any other midfielders in the draft is that he's a goal kicking midfielder. 

In 15 games this year he's kicked 20.17 which shows he's got the versatility to go up forward and have a major impact as well. His best performance was a 33 disposal 4.0 game against Gippsland Power in round 9.

This is where the game is going in terms of midfielders being able to score and have an impact up froward. This is something we severely lack as we are far too often relying on Petracca as our one and only mid who is capable of doing this.

 

[Axis of Bob 11,686]

16 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

That's Jason Taylor's opinion of the draft testing, not mine.

I'll happily take his opinions over anyone that attempts to day otherwise.

No, your summation of Jason Taylor’s words isn’t good.

Taylor saying that “testing isn’t the be all and end all for determining that player’s  draft selection or his footballing ability” is not the same as saying that it “barely makes that much of a difference”.

I’ll take Taylor’s opinion over your incorrect interpretation of it.

As for the rest of it, I’m happy with old55’s assessment. We all have different ideas of players in the lead up to the draft, which is what makes it interesting. I will say though that there have been very few slow midfielders taken in the top ten since that 2013 draft, and even fewer successful ones. That doesn’t mean that he can’t make it but it does probably mean that he’ll need to be special.

 

Edited October 7 by Axis of Bob

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

32 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Transition run isn't about speed.. it's the ability to cruise at a level that can get you to and from contests. Sam Mitchell was one of the slowest midfielders going around but it was his ability to gut run to and from contest at a consistent rate is why he was a champion inside midfielder. Langfords 2km was rated top 10 which means he's got the endurance to cover the ground.. massive tick. 

Langfords hands inside are just as impressive with his ability to get first use and disturbe cleanly to the outside.

He's a one touch player with clean hands and ability to manoeuvre into space and use his left peg.

One thing that's separates Langford from any other midfielders in the draft is that he's a goal kicking midfielder. 

In 15 games this year he's kicked 20.17 which shows he's got the versatility to go up forward and have a major impact as well. His best performance was a 33 disposal 4.0 game against Gippsland Power in round 9.

This is where the game is going in terms of midfielders being able to score and have an impact up froward. This is something we severely lack as we are far too often relying on Petracca as our one and only mid who is capable of doing this.

Agree on the 2km time. If you don't have speed or endurance you're probably just a poor athlete, unless there's a reason that you're underdone. To grind out a quality 2km time after a long season is impressive and probably indicates there's scope to work on speed as a pro. Send him over to Judd McVee's grandpa.

There's a lot of pace put in the game at centre bounces these days that makes me a touch nervous but it's all about balance in there. He'll be the big bodied contested player and you'll surround him with speed.

The bigger concern I have with Langford's speed might be whether it impacts him up forward. There's not much room for slow forwards these days, but with his height and overhead marking you'd be hoping he's more of a 3rd tall when forward than having to purely chase, pressure and run hard to create separation from defenders.

Being a left footer and the way he moves makes me less concerned speed will be an issue when he has the ball especially in congestion.

As for the testing: Smart US Sports scouts talk about using testing for benchmarking. To play certain positions in the NFL or NBA you generally have to tick off certain boxes and if you're an outlier then they take a big look to see if it's something that's a real concern or not.

[58er 6,395]

On 26/08/2024 at 10:34, Ugottobekidding said:

Would add another dimension to our bomb it long into the forward line game plan. We need a serious clearance specialist however.

Another negative comment. On No 3 on Cal Twomey’s listand UK  just dismisses him outright. Must be in our 3 or 4 to be picked with our No 5 draft choice. 

[Edm 104]

Watching those highlights I’m not worried about his speed 

hopefully the bad testing means he drops to us at 5 

[old55 23,404]

10 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

That's Jason Taylor's opinion of the draft testing, not mine.

....

Langfords 2km was rated top 10 which means he's got the endurance to cover the ground.. massive tick. 

 

So combine test results "barely makes that much of a difference" but Langford's good result in the 2km time trial proves his endurance? OK!

My controversial view is that his 2km result is a positive and his 20m result is a negative.

Edited October 7 by old55

[Redleg 40,843]

Langford not in top 10 of one phantom draft out today by Kieran Francis, whoever he is.

Edited October 10 by Redleg

[old dee 23,781]

8 hours ago, Redleg said:

Langford not in top 10 of one phantom draft out today by Kieran Francis, whoever he is.

I had to smile at the above Mr. Leg. There are more experts than players these days.

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

8 hours ago, Redleg said:

Langford not in top 10 of one phantom draft out today by Kieran Francis, whoever he is.

Link? And who is Kieran Francis??

Edited October 11 by dazzledavey36

[Redleg 40,843]

25 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Link? And who is Kieran Francis??

The Sporting News yesterday, Top 10 AFL draft by Kieran Francis.

I can’t find link.

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

25 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Link? And who is Kieran Francis??

You’d be hard pressed to find a less important opinion on the draft 

https://www.sportingnews.com/au/author/kieran-francis

[Redleg 40,843]

ESPN version last month had him at 9.

We will see draft night.