Past #1: Daniel Currie - officially traded to Gold Coast in exchange for a third round selection (#53)

[Tas]

It is not Curries fault he has been mediocre, he was in lacklustre form this pre-season and should never have been picked to play until he hit some form. The problem is our lucky dip match selection committee.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

Ofcourse it's not Curries fault he's not up to AFL standard, it is what it is. And I mean it's ok to give him a game, but at half time in that match you could just tell he's not up to standard. What was negligent was Brad Scott and company selecting him twice more after that effort when it was patently clear he wasn't up to it.

 

[Gasometer]

Brad was correct.

Gaso was incorrect.

 

[Engimal]

Okay ruck, pretty useless forward. Would rather Majak.

 

[TheBuzz]

Although I've said this before at least once in other threads, I'll say it again just because we have the official thread here.

IMHO:

There is very little between Currie & Goldy on current form. Currie is a better tap ruckman while Goldy is a bit more mobile around the ground. Both are disappointing overhead marks for their size, & both suck as key forwards.

The main difference is that Goldy is pretty much a fully developed & experienced player while Dan has plenty of development to come though senior AFL experience.

Goldstein deserves the #1 ruck spot as he has the runs on the board and has played better than he is now. But when straight up comparing the two I think they are currently relatively even, with Currie having more upside into the future.

 

[RobZombie]

Goldstein deserves the #1 ruck spot as he has the runs on the board and has played better than he is now. But when straight up comparing the two I think they are currently relatively even, with Currie having more upside into the future.

While I agree that some of the dismissiveness here is OTT, he's ... um ... 1 year younger than Goldy. Can he really, at 25, develop into an AA-squad level ruckman?

 

[Event Horizon]

Watching Hank play live at the G yesterday was both good and painful. I was happy for him, and Geelong played a very lively forward set up compared to ours, but gee, only we can manufacture the situation where we trade some very handy ruck/forwards away to good clubs, and are then forced to draft a battler and play him in the same position.

 

[tazaa]

In the last quarter there was a loose ball in the middle of the ground which H jumped on and knocked towards Selwood that set up a Geelong goal. It was the sort of intensity and effort that makes you smile and proud of your ruckman.

 

[BowWow1978]

Very nice BE, but I was at the game on Saturday and he is not up to AFL level " As a forward " he is OK as a ruck, but to slow when the ball hits the deck with zero defensive skills.

As a back up Ruck all good, but please not as a forward.

And that is the problem. He's not the best mark going around and unfortunately for him offers less than nothing when the ball hits the ground.

 

[TheBuzz]

While I agree that some of the dismissiveness here is OTT, he's ... um ... 1 year younger than Goldy. Can he really, at 25, develop into an AA-squad level ruckman?

You can argue about these percentages, but I would estimate a players development would come from 25% phyisical development, 25% coaching, 25% training and 25% match day experience.

Of that development from match day experience, I would say half if it could only come from senior AFL games.

Based on that I would say there is around 12.5% improvement Currie has in him that Goldstein does not.

As one senile former player would say, you know it makes sense.

 

[Event Horizon]

In the last quarter there was a loose ball in the middle of the ground which H jumped on and knocked towards Selwood that set up a Geelong goal. It was the sort of intensity and effort that makes you smile and proud of your ruckman.

What about his confident gather and a 20m handball that set up Geelong's first goal of the game?

 

[tazaa]

What about his confident gather and a 20m handball that set up Geelong's first goal of the game?

He was always seen as a 4th midfielder was H. Always forgotten from his time with us just how good he was around the ground and his general link up play. Wrapped for him.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Ofcourse it's not Curries fault he's not up to AFL standard, it is what it is. And I mean it's ok to give him a game, but at half time in that match you could just tell he's not up to standard. What was negligent was Brad Scott and company selecting him twice more after that effort when it was patently clear he wasn't up to it.

I just don't think you can write off a player after his debut game. He's kicked a couple of goals, taken a few grabs and most importantly given Goldy a break so he hopefully runs out games and the season a bit better. There's something to work with there.

As I said before, I'm happy for him to have a spell in the VFL, especially if Maj is right to go, but I hardly think Currie has been a disaster to date.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Watching Hank play live at the G yesterday was both good and painful. I was happy for him, and Geelong played a very lively forward set up compared to ours, but gee, only we can manufacture the situation where we trade some very handy ruck/forwards away to good clubs, and are then forced to draft a battler and play him in the same position.

Could we put up with another 12 months without getting H on the park, especially given the salary he (rightfully) commands? As for Hale, he's a good fit at the Hawks, but he'd been pretty ordinary for a while with us before we traded him.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

I just don't think you can write off a player after his debut game. He's kicked a couple of goals, taken a few grabs and most importantly given Goldy a break so he hopefully runs out games and the season a bit better. There's something to work with there.

As I said before, I'm happy for him to have a spell in the VFL, especially if Maj is right to go, but I hardly think Currie has been a disaster to date.

Currie will not improve on being as slow as a sedated sloth. To get away with being that slow and immobile you have to be 14 feet tall like Sandilands or have absolute vice like hands, and even then you will be forever battling. Currie has neither of these attributes. He doesn't cover the ground, he has poor skills, his tap work is no better than an average AFL ruckman meaning there is no way he can perform to a level that is required to be a good AFL footballer. I'm sorry, but there is no cause for optimism with Daniel Currie, there just isn't. He's a back up, last resort ruckman type player. Nothing else.

All the best teams have an out and out ruckman and a ruckman who plays forward effectively. We have someone absolutely tailor made for that role in Drew Petrie, yet we insist on persisting with something that is so so counter-intuitive it beggers belief.

Thanks for the efforts Dan, and we'll try and find you a home elsewhere next season so you can have another crack, but you're just not for us.

 

[Tas]

Watching Hank play live at the G yesterday was both good and painful. I was happy for him, and Geelong played a very lively forward set up compared to ours, but gee, only we can manufacture the situation where we trade some very handy ruck/forwards away to good clubs, and are then forced to draft a battler and play him in the same position.

Hank didn't want to be a predominately forward, he wanted to be the #1 ruckman which wasn't going to happen with us, we couldn't really afford to pay $500k for a makeshift forward and a part time ruckman.

 

[Tas]

We need to put Currie back in the VFL playing just the ruck and get some form, because if something happens to Goldy then Currie is our #1 ruckman and I would prefer to see him find some form in the ruck. Daw is the better prospect to be mostly a forward with some time in the ruck as a chop out, his leap and athletic ability will be suited for ruckman which bother Goldy the most.

 

[Event Horizon]

Currie will not improve on being as slow as a sedated sloth. To get away with being that slow and immobile you have to be 14 feet tall like Sandilands or have absolute vice like hands, and even then you will be forever battling. Currie has neither of these attributes. He doesn't cover the ground, he has poor skills, his tap work is no better than an average AFL ruckman meaning there is no way he can perform to a level that is required to be a good AFL footballer. I'm sorry, but there is no cause for optimism with Daniel Currie, there just isn't. He's a back up, last resort ruckman type player. Nothing else.

All the best teams have an out and out ruckman and a ruckman who plays forward effectively. We have someone absolutely tailor made for that role in Drew Petrie, yet we insist on persisting with something that is so so counter-intuitive it beggers belief.

Thanks for the efforts Dan, and we'll try and find you a home elsewhere next season so you can have another crack, but you're just not for us.

Drew is too old to be jerked around between ruck and forward. He'd be finished if we tried to do that on regular basis. We just have to hope that Daw is that type of player for us, to be an effective forward, help Goldy 5 minutes a quarter and also provide pressure to lock the ball in the forward line. But we still need to draft a young ruckman this year one would think, as if Goldy was to go down, I wouldn't want to be relying on Currie as a number 1 ruckman.

 

[Event Horizon]

Hank didn't want to be a predominately forward, he wanted to be the #1 ruckman which wasn't going to happen with us, we couldn't really afford to pay $500k for a makeshift forward and a part time ruckman.

Well, he is more of a forward than a ruck at Geelong, and seems to be happy enough.

 

[Tas]

Well, he is more of a forward than a ruck at Geelong, and seems to be happy enough.

Happy is relative.

 

[Twinkletoes]

Well, he is more of a forward than a ruck at Geelong, and seems to be happy enough.

I think he's happy to be back on the field more than anything.

 

[Tas]

I think he's happy to be back on the field more than anything.

Yep. It is also a totally different environment. He was our #1 ruckman and was dethroned, it is a very different emotional and psychological experience to fitting in at a new club.

 

[scottywiper]

I jumped off the Goldy train when he lost a contest across half-forward in the last quarter, losing his feet and going to ground.
Has been a fine player for us but is giving us absolutely nothing around the ground this year and it's hurting us.
He had five touches to 3-4 time...not good enough.
I'm not saying Currie will do much better, but Goldy needs to get some urgency into his game.
I'm not sure what he does after the centre bounce...he doesn't get behind the ball to be a marking presence in defence and he doesn't even pop up as a marking target when we kick out after a behind.

 

[DarwinRoo]

Must be some good weed in New Zealand

 

[tales129]

Goldy vs hmac

Disposals 10 v 16
Marks 3 v 5
Tackles 3 v 7
Hitouts 29 v 7


Goldy pure ruckman
Hamish better round the ground