Past #1: Hamish McIntosh - drafted at pick 9 in '02 ND - traded to Geelong for #36 in '12 trade period

[Daz]

Not sure either about fast there Husk. Certainly hard and consistent compared to Hamish, Tarrant runs all day but is a plodder as well.

I am with Tron, I am still unconvinced Hamish couldn't play a role up forward and ruck, but as he is going we wont know anyway.

Tarrant is quick in a straight line. Just has no agility.

 

[Saintly31]

Tarrant is quick in a straight line. Just has no agility.

Yeah, he is quicker for the first 5 steps but defenders keep up pretty easily after that.

Turning doesn't go that well.

 

[Cameron Barry]

It's amazing everytime someone has a different opinion to yours, they're a keyboard warrior.

It was an opinion Mark but Chrissy's comments were a bit rich, especially as they are untrue & complete rhetoric. I'm not a fan of selecting HM IMO I think it's a big ask with the injuries his had & age factor. I don't think the cats should offer their first round & a sweetener. I'd prefer they looked elsewhere

 

[Dickie Greenleaf]

Tarrant is quick in a straight line. Just has no agility.

True.

H has neither straight line speed, curvy speed,....any speed and has the same agility as Tarrant.

Hasn't played perma forward since his junior days and it's highly questionable his output or performance would be any better than Tarrants.

He's a meat and potatoes ruckman only unfortunately.

 

[mark73]

It was an opinion Mark but Chrissy's comments were a bit rich, especially as they are untrue & complete rhetoric. I'm not a fan of selecting HM IMO I think it's a big ask with the injuries his had & age factor. I don't think the cats should offer their first round & a sweetener. I'd prefer they looked elsewhere

I don't necessarily disagree with your concern. But I also know what he can do, and pick 40 is a laugh. If he has been given the all clear, which is supposedly the case, you're going to have to do better than that.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

If Hamish really wants to LEAVE i want to here offers from the other 3-4 clubs that were interested in him...

 

[Husk]

Tarrant is quick in a straight line. Just has no agility.

Yeah he is faster than many here give him credit for.

TBH I'm not even a real fan of the 3 talls. I think it was exposed badly at ground level on occasion. A player like Black would be a much better addition as the 3rd tall with his ground level skills and agility.

 

[Zebrah]

Yeah he is faster than many here give him credit for.

TBH I'm not even a real fan of the 3 talls. I think it was exposed badly at ground level on occasion. A player like Black would be a much better addition as the 3rd tall with his ground level skills and agility.

Very surprised anyone would not be a fan of our forward set up in the second half of the year - it was crucial in turning our season around and playing some of the best footy we have seen in 10 years.

 

[Husk]

Very surprised anyone would not be a fan of our forward set up in the second half of the year - it was crucial in turning our season around and playing some of the best footy we have seen in 10 years.

The midfield winning its fair share was the reason we turned things around.

 

[Zebrah]

The midfield winning its fair share was the reason we turned things around.

Well you obviously can't have one without the other, but it was clear to me that the midfield played with more confidence and purpose once we had three big guys who could all take a contested mark in the forward 50. They ran harder and were more decisive, which meant they did not force themselves into positions where they had to give off inefficient handballs.

 

[giantroo]

Well you obviously can't have one without the other, but it was clear to me that the midfield played with more confidence and purpose once we had three big guys who could all take a contested mark in the forward 50. They ran harder and were more decisive, which meant they did not force themselves into positions where they had to give off inefficient handballs.

Bang on!

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

StKilda are rumored to be showing interest.

 

[Psicosis]

Worst comes to worst, we keep him next year and he leaves the following off-season as a free agent. The compensation pick we'd get for him would likely be better then a lot of the offers.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I'm hoping for him to get back in the senior side, blitz, then go on and play another 100+ games for North

 

[hiddink]

McIntosh plus delaney for pick 15. Happy? And would Geel do it?
If we don't get a 15-28ish pick for H. I say keep him and next year under FA he'll leave and we would get that compo pick in that range. What would be the point in bolstering our competition now for literally nothing?

Geel and North could be fighting for the same possie come finals.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

McIntosh plus delaney for pick 15. Happy? And would Geel do it?

Why do we even have to trader with Geelong? Wouldn't you prefer to just keep them both?

Geelong need players more than we have to get rid of them.

 

[hiddink]

100% agreed 'hard to beat' they are our "fringe" players why should we make them their "best 22" for nothing.

 

[Saintly31]

Well you obviously can't have one without the other, but it was clear to me that the midfield played with more confidence and purpose once we had three big guys who could all take a contested mark in the forward 50. They ran harder and were more decisive, which meant they did not force themselves into positions where they had to give off inefficient handballs.

lol. Tarrant couldn't take a contested mark against a 5yo.

Biggest misconception on this board is his marking ability. I don't mind him playing as he has other talents, but why people think this bemuses me and certainly not a reason why McIntosh might be traded.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

lol. Tarrant couldn't take a contested mark against a 5yo.

Biggest misconception on this board is his marking ability. I don't mind him playing as he has other talents, but why people think this bemuses me.

It's not a misconception. When Tarrant sticks up both and dukes and has a good fly at the ball he is an excellent contested mark. And considering he has played less than 50 games it is an area that will rapidly improve over the next two seasons.


Where he isn't good is when the ball is in flight and he has to stand his ground in a stationary position, he gets caught out way too often and defenders find it really easy to spoil him when he is trying to protect space.

 

[Saintly31]

It's not a misconception. When Tarrant sticks up both and dukes and has a good fly at the ball he is an excellent contested mark. And considering he has played less than 50 games it is an area that will rapidly improve over the next two seasons.

Where he isn't good is when the ball is in flight and he has to stand his ground in a stationary position, he gets caught out way too often and defenders find it really easy to spoil him when he is trying to protect space.

Anyone with a slight bit of ability can mark when they have the run at the ball - even Dawes takes some of those.

A real contested mark is how you describe it in your second para - basically never happens. He is awful in that position and needs a lot of work.

 

[Husk]

Anyone with a slight bit of ability can mark when they have the run at the ball - even Dawes takes some of those.

A real contested mark is how you describe it in your second para - basically never happens. He is awful in that position and needs a lot of work.

Agree with that, which is why the 3 talls idea is a fallacy. It was not Tarrants contested marking ability that made it work, it was his leading into space and work rate. Very few times was his size and strength a factor in his scoring of goals.

He deserved his spot no doubt, but to think the structure could not be improved upon with a more rounded player is silly IMO.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

People need to remind themselves that Tarrant and Hansen played at 23 years of age this season (Hansen turned 24 on 17th August).

They are just arriving as KPP's.

Hansen: 9.5 disposals, 4.25 marks, 1.66 goals
Tarrant: 10.5 disposals, 3.25 marks, 1.43 goals

Drew Petrie took over the key forward mantle after Sav and Thommo retired in 2007 at 24 years of age. He also played some game time in the ruck.

Petrie: 12.1 disposals, 5.5 marks, 1.52 goals.

The triple towers is going to explode in the next 0-30 games people. Have patience.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Agree with that, which is why the 3 talls idea is a fallacy. It was not Tarrants contested marking ability that made it work, it was his leading into space and work rate. Very few times was his size and strength a factor in his scoring of goals.

He deserved his spot no doubt, but to think the structure could not be improved upon with a more rounded player is silly IMO.

This works two ways.

Tarrant, Hansen and Petrie combination also makes the opposition switch up it's defence.

The triple towers is not the problem.

It
All
Comes
Down
To
The
Midfield
Pulling
It's
Weight!

 

[Husk]

This works two ways.

Tarrant, Hansen and Petrie combination also makes the opposition switch up it's defence.

The triple towers is not the problem.

It
All
Comes
Down
To
The
Midfield
Pulling
It's
Weight!

I agree, but I would also add that tall forwards are more a victim of delivery than smaller types, or those players who are more capable at ground level. If you have a player who is good 1v1 and can crumb goals or is agile at ground level, then a quick kick into the F50 when under pressure is still dangerous. Franklin is a prime example.

With the 3 marking targets, it was often just 1 or 2 of Tarrant/Petrie/Hansen down there, and all the opposition had to do was bring it to ground and sweep it away.

I just felt we got a bit predictable towards the end of the season. We need players with more strings to their bows down there IMO.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I agree, but I would also add that tall forwards are more a victim of delivery than smaller types, or those players who are more capable at ground level. If you have a player who is good 1v1 and can crumb goals or is agile at ground level, then a quick kick into the F50 when under pressure is still dangerous. Franklin is a prime example.

With the 3 marking targets, it was often just 1 or 2 of Tarrant/Petrie/Hansen down there, and all the opposition had to do was bring it to ground and sweep it away.

I just felt we got a bit predictable towards the end of the season. We need players with more strings to their bows down there IMO.

So what do you suggest? We alter a 154 goal/season structure?

Harvey, Harper, Adams, Thomas and Campbell don't give us enough ground cover?

Bring back Edwards?

Is this about Aaron Black?