The Harry Armstrong Thread

[FreedFromDesire 942]

My apologies if I haven't done this correctly. I had a check and couldn't see a thread for him already.

Fairly good mail we like this guy a lot. If Jagga Smith is selected before our first pick I wouldn't be surprised to see us take Armstrong, that's how much Jason Taylor likes him apparently. Expected to make an immediate impact, and said to be very versatile and good below his knees. I will defer to others who watch the potential draftees closer, as it's not something I take a great interest in. Please take this as reasonably reliable gossip as opposed to absolutely rock solid intel like others post here at times. Again, will defer to others opinions, but passing along what I've heard in terms of where the club rates him.

 

 

Edited October 23 by FreedFromDesire

[Sydee 4,404]

I don’t really see what he has that is any better than Jefferson who after two years has yet to get a game

Tauru above Armstrong for mine 

[Dee Viney Intervention 1,933]

Nothing against the player personally but I would be extremely disappointed if we used pick 5 on him. Mids, mids, mids please.Even with pick 9 would prefer others.  We have Jefferson and Kentfield who replaced a midfielder. Let’s get some balance on our list.

Edited October 23 by Dee Viney Intervention

[58er 6,418]

15 minutes ago, Sydee said:

I don’t really see what he has that is any better than Jefferson who after two years has yet to get a game

Tauru above Armstrong for mine 

Here here Sydee 

[Axis of Bob 11,782]

As I've sat with it more I've become more and more comfortable to draft him (even at 5). 

Brisbane won the flag with three tall forward (Daniher, Hipwood and Morris) against Sydney who played McDonald, McLean and Amartey. Geelong had Cameron, Neale and Henry (with Hawkins injured), and Port had Dixon, Geogiades and Marshall. The game seems to be swinging back a bit towards the key forwards now that there is more speed on the ball in attack, rather than the slower game allowing teams to defend talls with extra numbers. We started looking a lot more potent once we got Roo, Petty and Turner all playing in the forward line together. I think it's the speed of the game in transition that gives more one on one and opportunities in space, which is the strength of a key forward. We took Kentfield in the MSD, so we clearly don't think our key forward puzzle is completely solved.

Armstrong is a very good worker in space, as well as a player that can crash packs. He moves really, really well and plays the key forward role in a really modern way. A forward line of him, Roo and Jeffo gives us a very mobile group of talls that can work both coming at the ball and going with the ball, like the modern game requires. Since they aren't just big lugs, they're all players that can work in a range of setups and styles. Petty and Turner are natural defenders and would be the pillars of a really formidable defensive group.

Little Goffy made an excellent point on another thread about Darcy Fogarty getting a long term contract at Adelaide, showing how scarce KPFs are. And that's only Fogarty! If we think Armstrong is a really good one then why not grab him when we have a chance.

On a more personal note, I really want to draft him at 5 ..... just to see all the Demonlanders try to burn this place to the ground! 😁

[Mouseymoo 346]

I hope not, that was a pretty uninspiring highlights package. Drops more than he marks, doesn't really crash a pack and struggles from 50. Jefferson vibes hard. 

Can we just play it safe with two blue chip mids please. 

[BangBnagBang 689]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

As I've sat with it more I've become more and more comfortable to draft him (even at 5). 

Brisbane won the flag with three tall forward (Daniher, Hipwood and Morris) against Sydney who played McDonald, McLean and Amartey. Geelong had Cameron, Neale and Henry (with Hawkins injured), and Port had Dixon, Geogiades and Marshall. The game seems to be swinging back a bit towards the key forwards now that there is more speed on the ball in attack, rather than the slower game allowing teams to defend talls with extra numbers. We started looking a lot more potent once we got Roo, Petty and Turner all playing in the forward line together. I think it's the speed of the game in transition that gives more one on one and opportunities in space, which is the strength of a key forward. We took Kentfield in the MSD, so we clearly don't think our key forward puzzle is completely solved.

Armstrong is a very good worker in space, as well as a player that can crash packs. He moves really, really well and plays the key forward role in a really modern way. A forward line of him, Roo and Jeffo gives us a very mobile group of talls that can work both coming at the ball and going with the ball, like the modern game requires. Since they aren't just big lugs, they're all players that can work in a range of setups and styles. Petty and Turner are natural defenders and would be the pillars of a really formidable defensive group.

Little Goffy made an excellent point on another thread about Darcy Fogarty getting a long term contract at Adelaide, showing how scarce KPFs are. And that's only Fogarty! If we think Armstrong is a really good one then why not grab him when we have a chance.

On a more personal note, I really want to draft him at 5 ..... just to see all the Demonlanders try to burn this place to the ground! 😁

I couldn't disagree more. The game is turning into forward lines that have more smalls that can run up and back. See Haw or Pies. 

Bris had 1 tall fwd in Hipwood, a mid size with Morris and a Fwd/ruck in Daniher and 4 smalls (Rayner, Lohman, Cameron & Ah Chee that did all the damage. Syd had 3 talls that didn't touch the ball.

I dont see teams next year taking 3 talls fwds into games. Melb has Fritch as a mid size, Roo as the Fwd/Ruck and IMO only room for one other tall. Weather thats Petty/Disco or Jeffo. I think if we play Roo, Petty, Turner and Fritch we are not mobile enough and dont have enough forwards to get up the ground help with the transition game.

You dont need to be tall if there is speed on the ball and you are kicking to one on ones in space.

Edited October 23 by BangBnagBang

[adonski 12,036]

17 minutes ago, BangBnagBang said:

I couldn't disagree more. The game is turning into forward lines that have more smalls that can run up and back. See Haw or Pies. 

Bris had 1 tall fwd in Hipwood, a mid size with Morris and a Fwd/ruck in Daniher and 4 smalls (Rayner, Lohman, Cameron & Ah Chee that did all the damage. Syd had 3 talls that didn't touch the ball.

I dont see teams next year taking 3 talls fwds into games. Melb has Fritch as a mid size, Roo as the Fwd/Ruck and IMO only room for one other tall. Weather thats Petty/Disco or Jeffo. I think if we play Roo, Petty, Turner and Fritch we are not mobile enough and dont have enough forwards to get up the ground help with the transition game.

You dont need to be tall if there is speed on the ball and you are kicking to one on ones in space.

Key forward following ruck as an obsolete position 

[drysdale demon 4,830]

Midfielders followed by more midfielders.

[DeeSpencer 25,627]

33 minutes ago, BangBnagBang said:

I couldn't disagree more. The game is turning into forward lines that have more smalls that can run up and back. See Haw or Pies. 

Bris had 1 tall fwd in Hipwood, a mid size with Morris and a Fwd/ruck in Daniher and 4 smalls (Rayner, Lohman, Cameron & Ah Chee that did all the damage. Syd had 3 talls that didn't touch the ball.

 

Daniher rucks too but he was excellent forward and won them the game against GWS to even make the prelim.

Brisbane have gun mediums too but that isn’t an argument against good talls.

Hawks had Dear, Chol and Gunston and often times rucked Weddle or Nash to keep that forward set up in tact. Or sent Sicily forward after Gunston was subbed.

Mobile skilled key forwards are only getting more value. Sydney’s talls lack mobility and skills.

I’m suspect on Armstong’s skill level and just how mobile he is but if JT thinks he’s the real deal we should take him. 

[DeeSpencer 25,627]

1 hour ago, Dee Viney Intervention said:

Nothing against the player personally but I would be extremely disappointed if we used pick 5 on him. Mids, mids, mids please.Even with pick 9 would prefer others.  We have Jefferson and Kentfield who replaced a midfielder. Let’s get some balance on our list.

Kentfield is a non factor, a throw at the stumps who might be something in a few years.

Armstrong would be somewhat redundant with JVR, Turner and Jeffo but Clayton Oliver was the same when we had Tyson, Tracc, Gus, Viney. 

I suspect he won’t but if JT loves him then take him and sort the rest out later 

[Nascent 9,209]

 

[bluey 1,097]

Wouldn’t have to be much chop to go past our stable of tall forwards.

[manny100 1,538]

We have both Petty and Turner who can play back, especially Petty.

Lloyd said Armstrong was the best U18 consisted mark he has seen  including the King's.

We have May and TMc on the career tail end.

Jeffo, JVR and Armstrong may prove a good combo?

A mid at 9?

Our dilemma- will Oliver and/or Tracc look elsewhere next season? Probably not but do we select a 'contingency' elite mid just in case?

Elite KPF's are as rare as hens teeth.

 

[Fat Tony 5,228]

Armstrong looks to be very naturally skilled and coordinated, but he has an ordinary ground game and, with his light frame, there would have to be some doubts on his ability to get strong enough to out body AFL defenders. I think if we go this way, it is a bad sign on how we view Jefferson's prospects.

 

[demoncat 1,413]

Not at 5 pls 

[The Jackson FIX 3,099]

2 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

Brisbane won the flag with three tall forward (Daniher, Hipwood and Morris) against Sydney who played McDonald, McLean and Amartey. Geelong had Cameron, Neale and Henry (with Hawkins injured), and Port had Dixon, Geogiades and Marshall. The game seems to be swinging back a bit towards the key forwards

Were we watching the same finals series? All I saw was small forwards dominate. Ah Chee and Lohmann kicked 8 between them on GF day. Sydney’s 3x talls had 6 marks between them.

[Ted Lasso 19,459]

I wouldn't be upset if we picked him, but i think pick 5 will be a gun mid, and pick 9 will be the best available talent regardless of position, and if it's a tossup we'll probably take another mid

[Axis of Bob 11,782]

1 hour ago, BangBnagBang said:

I couldn't disagree more. The game is turning into forward lines that have more smalls that can run up and back. See Haw or Pies. 

Bris had 1 tall fwd in Hipwood, a mid size with Morris and a Fwd/ruck in Daniher and 4 smalls (Rayner, Lohman, Cameron & Ah Chee that did all the damage. Syd had 3 talls that didn't touch the ball.

Collingwood did that this year because they ran out of forward options, with injuries to Mihocek and McStay. When they won the flag last year they had Mihocek, Cameron/Cox, and McStay. When McStay went down with injury they played Frampton as a forward in the GF. 

Last year Collingwood (with 3 tall forwards) were the 4th highest scoring team, this year (with only 2) they were 9th. 

Hawthorn played 3 tall forwards all year this year. 

Just because those teams also have good mediums and smalls, who played well, doesn't mean that they don't play a three tall forward line. The talls drag defences around and leave the holes for smalls to do damage. The small forwards don't operate in a vacuum, and a team without tall forwards just allows defences to sit back behind the ball. 

The important thing is that they aren't just one dimensional markers, but are able to work up and down the ground to take part in play either high or deep. That's what happened with Sydney (and, to an extent, Port) where they had too many forward that were just big, chest out, presenters rather than players that could work either at the ball or with the ball. It's where Petty and Turner fall down a bit, which can make our forward setup clunky (although much better than when we tried playing small).

 

[Fat Tony 5,228]

4 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

Collingwood did that this year because they ran out of forward options, with injuries to Mihocek and McStay. When they won the flag last year they had Mihocek, Cameron/Cox, and McStay. When McStay went down with injury they played Frampton as a forward in the GF. 

Last year Collingwood (with 3 tall forwards) were the 4th highest scoring team, this year (with only 2) they were 9th. 

Hawthorn played 3 tall forwards all year this year. 

Just because those teams also have good mediums and smalls, who played well, doesn't mean that they don't play a three tall forward line. The talls drag defences around and leave the holes for smalls to do damage. The small forwards don't operate in a vacuum, and a team without tall forwards just allows defences to sit back behind the ball. 

The important thing is that they aren't just one dimensional markers, but are able to work up and down the ground to take part in play either high or deep. That's what happened with Sydney (and, to an extent, Port) where they had too many forward that were just big, chest out, presenters rather than players that could work either at the ball or with the ball. It's where Petty and Turner fall down a bit, which can make our forward setup clunky (although much better than when we tried playing small).

 

An issue we have is that Fritsch really only plays well when he is our deepest forward. He gets lazy with his pressure up the field and  isn't as efficient as he should be when kicking inside 50. This means he really plays best as a key forward.

Petty and Turner have both shown the ability to play forward and back, which gives us flexibility.

Does Armstrong offer a huge point of difference to Turner, Fritsch and Jefferson? I am all for picking him if he can become Jeremy Cameron.

[Farmer 875]

3 hours ago, Sydee said:

I don’t really see what he has that is any better than Jefferson who after two years has yet to get a game

Tauru above Armstrong for mine 

Is it valid simply to rate him as a key forward? I don’t  see why he couldn’t turn into a good CHB .  Good judges are pointing out we have to build up defensive strength for the future .Having said that, he is an excellent accurate kick. If we ended up with him at 9 I’d be delighted 

[Supreme_Demon 3,815]

2 hours ago, manny100 said:

We have both Petty and Turner who can play back, especially Petty.

Lloyd said Armstrong was the best U18 consisted mark he has seen  including the King's.

We have May and TMc on the career tail end.

Jeffo, JVR and Armstrong may prove a good combo?

A mid at 9?

Our dilemma- will Oliver and/or Tracc look elsewhere next season? Probably not but do we select a 'contingency' elite mid just in case?

Elite KPF's are as rare as hens teeth.

 

I saw that Matthew Lloyd highly rates him as well.

Does this add weight to the decision the Demons make?

I am torn about this.

Personally, I think we just simply take the best talent available regardless of position.

But after losing both Ben Brown and Josh Schache this year we definitely need to at least consider Harry Armstrong.

I don't really rate Harrison Petty as a tall forward. Besides, one or two games kicking bags of goals I believe he is far more consistent and reliable as a defender.

I am open to the possibility of choosing Harry Armstrong with pick #9. But would rather us take two high quality midfielders.

Whatever decision is made, I put my faith in Jason Taylor.

Edited October 23 by Supreme_Demon

[dazzledavey36 54,735]

Do not rate him at all.

Would be a genuine mistake wasiting pick 5 on an average tall forward. 

Both our picks should be purely focused on getting elite mids in.

[rjay 24,910]

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

Do not rate him at all.

Would be a genuine mistake wasiting pick 5 on an average tall forward. 

Both our picks should be purely focused on getting elite mids in.

What it is or what attributes you don't rate 'dazz'???

You obviously watch a bit of junior football and know people in the system so I'm interested in your feedback.

[dazzledavey36 54,735]

1 minute ago, rjay said:

What it is or what attributes you don't rate 'dazz'???

You obviously watch a bit of junior football and know people in the system so I'm interested in your feedback.

Personally I don't think we're in a position to take a developing tall so early in the draft. My understanding is that our draft motive is to bring in players that will be ready to step straight into senior footy next year and I cannot see that with Armstrong.

What I see in Armstrong is another Sam Weideman. HA lacks the intensity and defensive efforts as a key forward and can come across as laconic at times. He's not a big possession winner and has been lucky playing in such a successful side as the Sandy Dragons.

He's not a solid contested mark as it's been made out too. He tends to double grabs and can sometimes drop the easy one that key forward should just swallow up with ease. If you can't do this at junior level it's very hard to translate to AFL level

I take Matthew Lloyd's comment with a grain of salt. He said the same thing about Weideman in his draft year being the academy coach at the time.

If I'm picking a key forward, I'd easily take Jobe Shanahan over HA by a fair stretch.