2021 Wooden Spoon

[faible]

Walsh is a very good young player and Carlton are fortunate to have him. Based on what we saw of Matt Rowell Walsh is a long way behind him and that is my opinion on it.

Getting on the park is important too, what happens if Rowell plays for the next decade averaging 4 games a year, whilst Walsh plays 22 a season?

One ends up yet another unfulfilled 50 game talent, the other a 250 odd gamer.

 

[BigBreakfast]

If Walsh was anywhere near as dominant wouldn't coaches and players have likewise responded to how he was going and thus reduced his output as a result?

The evidence (not getting his first Brownlow vote until his 12th game for instance) suggests that they didn't feel the need to.

It's not like he started like a house-on-fire like Rowell did and then the opposition clamped down on him and his output slowed, as a result.

Dominated 2020 though, while Rowell was on the sideline. Played a new role on the wing and smashed it. Time will tell with these two but the gap is hardly a chasm.

 

[The 747]

Getting on the park is important too, what happens if Rowell plays for the next decade averaging 4 games a year, whilst Walsh plays 22 a season?

One ends up yet another unfulfilled 50 game talent, the other a 250 odd gamer.

Sure, as I said - based off what we have seen of Matt Rowell.

 

[FreeTK]

We gave up in games under Worsfold all the time and he always made excuses for the players and then let them all play the next week to respond, he would never drop players. Hopefully that changes going forward.

Wasn't there was a rumour of "undroppable" players due to the drugs saga?

 

[Milanista28]

Wasn't there was a rumour of "undroppable" players due to the drugs saga?

Yeah that rumor has been around for a bit, I don't think it's true, Truck/Woosha dropped Hooker and Bellchambers late last year and Stanton was dropped in 2017 when they returned. We wronged the players and became soft on them and that culture festered, I think it's starting to change which is good.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Wasn't there was a rumour of "undroppable" players due to the drugs saga?

dont think so......

We never drop david zaharakis and never took anything!

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Sure, as I said - based off what we have seen of Matt Rowell.

It's just too hard to compare a 22 game 1st season to a 4 game 1st season (removing Rowell's injury game).
About the only thing Rowell did better than Walsh in his first year, was hit the scoreboard - something that Walsh has now added to his game in his 2nd year.
Highest number of kicks in a game: Rowell = 11, Walsh = 23
Highest number of marks: Rowell = 1, Walsh = 12
Highest handballs: Rowell = 15, Walsh = 18
Highest disposals: Rowell= 26, Walsh = 32
Highest tackles: Rowell = 10, Walsh = 8
Highest R50s: Rowell = 6, Walsh = 4
Highest I50s: Rowell = 3, Walsh = 6
Highest clearances: Rowell = 7, Walsh = 7
Highest cont poss: Rowell = 14, Walsh = 16
Highest uncont poss: Rowell = 12, Walsh = 22

Unfortunately we'll never know whether Rowell would have gone on to break any first year player records. He might have. Looks like he'll be a ripper and records are there to be broken, but it's just impossible to compare these two on their first years. Rowell's sample size is too small and what is there doesn't support the theory. Look forward to seeing what he can produce in his second year though.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Yes, nowhere near. Rowell is the best first year player I have seen.

Judd for me

 

[faible]

It's just too hard to compare a 22 game 1st season to a 4 game 1st season (removing Rowell's injury game).
About the only thing Rowell did better than Walsh in his first year, was hit the scoreboard - something that Walsh has now added to his game in his 2nd year.
Highest number of kicks in a game: Rowell = 11, Walsh = 23
Highest number of marks: Rowell = 1, Walsh = 12
Highest handballs: Rowell = 15, Walsh = 18
Highest disposals: Rowell= 26, Walsh = 32
Highest tackles: Rowell = 10, Walsh = 8
Highest R50s: Rowell = 6, Walsh = 4
Highest I50s: Rowell = 3, Walsh = 6
Highest clearances: Rowell = 7, Walsh = 7
Highest cont poss: Rowell = 14, Walsh = 16
Highest uncont poss: Rowell = 12, Walsh = 22

Unfortunately we'll never know whether Rowell would have gone on to break any first year player records. He might have. Looks like he'll be a ripper and records are there to be broken, but it's just impossible to compare these two on their first years. Rowell's sample size is too small and what is there doesn't support the theory. Look forward to seeing what he can produce in his second year though.

This is one of the more unusual comparison I've seen...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

This is one of the more unusual comparison I've seen...

I don't disagree. Hard to compare averages with a 4 game sample size.
Rebound 50s was a good example. Rowell had one good game of 6 and the other three were 2, 1 and 2, but it skewed his average. Walsh was more consistent, despite not reaching as high as 6, consistently racking up 3s, with a couple of 4s.
Inside 50s was another one. Rowell's average was only marginally below Walsh's (2.75 to Walsh's 3.05). Rowell had games of 2, 3, 3 and 3, whereas Walsh had 8 games of 4s and 5s and a 6.

About the only fair comparison would be their first 4 games:

 

[faible]

I don't disagree. Hard to compare averages with a 4 game sample size.
Rebound 50s was a good example. Rowell had one good game of 6 and the other three were 2, 1 and 2, but it skewed his average. Walsh was more consistent, despite not reaching as high as 6, consistently racking up 3s, with a couple of 4s.
Inside 50s was another one. Rowell's average was only marginally below Walsh's (2.75 to Walsh's 3.05). Rowell had games of 2, 3, 3 and 3, whereas Walsh had 8 games of 4s and 5s and a 6.

About the only fair comparison would be their first 4 games:
View attachment 1064133

Different roles, sample sizes, and shortened game time.

I'd say the Brownlow vote stat says it all about the level of impact on the game though.

Rowell looks to have an immense ceiling as a player, but that requires him to be on the park every week and able to maintain the standard we saw in his first few games. Is one of the rare #1 draft picks who look legitimately likely to be the best player of their draft pool.

Walsh has shown he's durable and consistent, and will play a lot of AFL games at a very high level. No reason he doesn't play 300 AFL games and captain the football club at this point.

 

[The 747]

It's just too hard to compare a 22 game 1st season to a 4 game 1st season (removing Rowell's injury game).
About the only thing Rowell did better than Walsh in his first year, was hit the scoreboard - something that Walsh has now added to his game in his 2nd year.
Highest number of kicks in a game: Rowell = 11, Walsh = 23
Highest number of marks: Rowell = 1, Walsh = 12
Highest handballs: Rowell = 15, Walsh = 18
Highest disposals: Rowell= 26, Walsh = 32
Highest tackles: Rowell = 10, Walsh = 8
Highest R50s: Rowell = 6, Walsh = 4
Highest I50s: Rowell = 3, Walsh = 6
Highest clearances: Rowell = 7, Walsh = 7
Highest cont poss: Rowell = 14, Walsh = 16
Highest uncont poss: Rowell = 12, Walsh = 22

Unfortunately we'll never know whether Rowell would have gone on to break any first year player records. He might have. Looks like he'll be a ripper and records are there to be broken, but it's just impossible to compare these two on their first years. Rowell's sample size is too small and what is there doesn't support the theory. Look forward to seeing what he can produce in his second year though.

You say it is just too hard and then impossible to compare and then spend all that time comparing them.

You can cherry pick your stats all you want, you won't be changing my mind about either player.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

You say it is just too hard and then impossible to compare and then spend all that time comparing them.

You can cherry pick your stats all you want, you won't be changing my mind about either player.

Simply saying that if you rate one above the other, that is an attempt to compare. You can't regard one as being better than the other without comparing what they both have to offer. It's hard to compare what they both offer when one has only played 4 full games of AFL footy. It's nearly as bad as trying to claim the Kemp is the best ever 1st year player, but we just didn't get to see him play. At least we saw a little bit of what Rowell has to offer, but we didn't get the inevitable ups and downs of a 1st year player. At some point he would have copped more attention from taggers. He might have started to slow towards the end of the year as the stress and exhaustion from the season caught up with him. Too many what ifs.
I attempted to find some common ground, as statistical averages are fairly useless from 4 games.
Not trying to change anyone's mind. Simply saying that there's no factual basis to claiming Rowell is a better 1st year player than Walsh.
Good luck to him though. I hope he doesn't suffer any more injuries and goes on to be one of the best players in the league. If he does go on to be better than Walsh, then we will be doing pretty bloody good, because Walsh has shown over his first 39 games that he should be in for a long, distinguished career.
Even better if he wants to come and play for his childhood team...

 

[The 747]

Simply saying that if you rate one above the other, that is an attempt to compare. You can't regard one as being better than the other without comparing what they both have to offer. It's hard to compare what they both offer when one has only played 4 full games of AFL footy. It's nearly as bad as trying to claim the Kemp is the best ever 1st year player, but we just didn't get to see him play. At least we saw a little bit of what Rowell has to offer, but we didn't get the inevitable ups and downs of a 1st year player. At some point he would have copped more attention from taggers. He might have started to slow towards the end of the year as the stress and exhaustion from the season caught up with him. Too many what ifs.
I attempted to find some common ground, as statistical averages are fairly useless from 4 games.
Not trying to change anyone's mind. Simply saying that there's no factual basis to claiming Rowell is a better 1st year player than Walsh.
Good luck to him though. I hope he doesn't suffer any more injuries and goes on to be one of the best players in the league. If he does go on to be better than Walsh, then we will be doing pretty bloody good, because Walsh has shown over his first 39 games that he should be in for a long, distinguished career.
Even better if he wants to come and play for his childhood team...

I have eyes, I have seen both of them play. Rowell>>Walsh.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

You say it is just too hard and then impossible to compare and then spend all that time comparing them.

You can cherry pick your stats all you want, you won't be changing my mind about either player.

If you aren't open to having your mind changed, then what's the point of the discussion.

You prefer Rowell, good for you, youre objectively wrong.

 

[faible]

objectively

Depends on what measure. Rowell averages more Brownlow votes, goals, tackles, contested possessions, and clearances per game than Walsh (from shorter game time).

 

[The 747]

If you aren't open to having your mind changed, then what's the point of the discussion.

You prefer Rowell, good for you, youre objectively wrong.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

You'd think wrong.

Depends on what measure. Rowell averages more Brownlow votes, goals, tackles, contested possessions, and clearances per game than Walsh (from shorter game time).

And Walsh averages more disposals, goal assists, score involvements, effective disposals, uncontested possessions, marks, rebound 50's, inside 50's and has played more games, played in more wins, completed a whole season and been in contention for AA, won the rising star etc etc.

We can't really compare a 4 game player to the best young midfielder in the competition.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I'm as big a fan of stats as anyone, but at the end of the day, they don't mean jack-shit when one guy was literally BOG game after game (3 Brownlow votes and 10 coaches votes 3 weeks in a row, until injured), while the other guy was generally having nowhere near that IMPACT on games.

 

[perplexed]

Walsh has one wooden spoon.
Rowell doesn't have any yet.

 

[WillHayward]

Long shot but I can see Collingwood having an absolute shocker.

 

[WillHayward]

How did this thread get hijacked into a Rowell v Walsh jerkathon?

Start a separate thread for that if U like.

 

[Bjchan13]

Long shot but I can see Collingwood having an absolute shocker.

I think Collingwood are safe in the 8. They looked like flag favourites last season before losing some pretty important players for big chunks of the year. Still got up for a big finals win in Perth. Think in house they are pretty happy with the players they let go and then went on to have a ripper draft.

 

[HollyValentine]

Rowell > Walsh (so far)

 

[Don Won]

Rowell > Walsh (so far)

If they were both stocks, Walsh would be a big 4 bank - a safe investment that will do well for you regardless. Rowell would be a Pharmaceutical sitting on a cure for cancer (but not yet through full testing/approvals). Right now, I'm loading up on Rowell stock.