Traded #25: Jake Stringer - 📦 Traded to GWS for Pick #53 - 16/10

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
25 - stringer.jpg
Contract Status: Out of contract 2024
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 19, Harlequin
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tat update: is now a guernsey

 
 
I’ve said this before and I know we’re literally out of options at the moment but he costs us games in the middle. He’s unaccountable and just hunts the footy out of the centres, great when the ball breaks our way, useless otherwise.

He’s had 12 shots on goal in the last 2 games, he should be someone we isolate deep forward.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Zach Package said:
I’ve said this before and I know we’re literally out of options at the moment but he costs us games in the middle. He’s unaccountable and just hunts the footy out of the centres, great when the ball breaks our way, useless otherwise.

He’s had 12 shots on goal in the last 2 games, he should be someone we isolate deep forward.
Click to expand...
He is always going to be the same in the middle. It is his one wood and that is attack footy like a bull with mad cow.
Would be good to have someone else who can play the role as well.
Right now the gap between good Jake and bad Jake is massive and it is that way because he has been injured a lot and is not fit. I do not buy into the contract year stuff. He has always been a player that has had to have a modified training program due to his broken leg and since we have been pushing him to train at midfield level he has had massive break downs and taken 4 or 5 games to get back into form.
Right now he is probably not the right player for us given our deficiencies. He is the guy who turns it on for a quarter here and there in a good side and wins you a game but he is not the guy you want to rely on week in and week out to play consistent footy and keep you in games.
 
ant555 said:
He is always going to be the same in the middle. It is his one wood and that is attack footy like a bull with mad cow.
Would be good to have someone else who can play the role as well.
Right now the gap between good Jake and bad Jake is massive and it is that way because he has been injured a lot and is not fit. I do not buy into the contract year stuff. He has always been a player that has had to have a modified training program due to his broken leg and since we have been pushing him to train at midfield level he has had massive break downs and taken 4 or 5 games to get back into form.
Right now he is probably not the right player for us given our deficiencies. He is the guy who turns it on for a quarter here and there in a good side and wins you a game but he is not the guy you want to rely on week in and week out to play consistent footy and keep you in games.
Click to expand...

I’m fine with him being a flaky, charismatic enigma but I just don’t think he’s viable in the middle beyond a ‘we need 3 goals in 5 minutes’ type situation where you just fly him through the stoppage and don’t really mind if it goes the other way.

If you’re the opposition you’re sweating on him because whoever is on him will have a clean exit out the front of the contest with no opponent because he will pay them no mind.

Should not be in the midfield rotation.
 
the thing that disappoints me the most, is his lack of leadership

he still acts like a big sook if he doesn't get a handball, a free kick, or misses a shot he knows he should kick.

i know that's just kinda how it is, but i can't see how we can be a successful side when he displays those behavious as one of our highest paid players

that's not to mention what i believe is a lack of professionalism in looking after his body.
 
He didn't have a great game on the weekend, but that's been the teams underperforming story of the whole year.
He was influential in that run of victories the dons had last year and he provides an x factor difference that is hard for any team to get.

A good team would figure out how to get the best out of Jake more often then not.
 
Chief Hopper said:
He didn't have a great game on the weekend, but that's been the teams underperforming story of the whole year.
He was influential in that run of victories the dons had last year and he provides an x factor difference that is hard for any team to get.

A good team would figure out how to get the best out of Jake more often then not.
Click to expand...
agreed. but Jake is a big boy - he needs to work out how to get the best out of Jake.
 
When Jake is on he is the package. When he is off he is the baggage. All players have a bad day but our guys seem to have too many together. I often wonder what our plan B is when planA is not working.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

WindyHillWarrior said:
Yep, I’d offer Parish, Stringer, Hind and Heppell up.

They’re all part of the cultural problems in one way or another.
Click to expand...


Been thinking this for a while now re Stringer.

I can't think of an analogy I like but he's not a player you can rebuild with, you need to be a good side before you can be trusted with a player like Stringer. He would be amazing at a side where he just plugs in as x-factor, few players can win games off their own boot the way Stringer does.

For us, he's a bit of a liability. There are clear issues with professionalism and structurally we don't need x-factor, we need hard working marking targets and hard working smalls.

Hey Melbourne, you want to add 30 goals to your bottom line next year? Stringer kicks 50 to 60 for the Dees, no problem and he splits the attention on their key forwards.
 
BrunoV said:
Been thinking this for a while now re Stringer.

I can't think of an analogy I like but he's not a player you can rebuild with, you need to be a good side because you can be trusted with a player like Stringer. He would be amazing at a side where he just plugs in as x-factor, few players can win games off their own boot the way Stringer does.

For us, he's a bit of a liability. There are clear issues with professionalism and structurally we don't need x-factor, we need hard working marking targets and hard working smalls.

Hey Melbourne, you want to add 30 goals to your bottom line next year? Stringer kicks 50 to 60 for the Dees, no problem and he splits the attention on their key forwards.
Click to expand...
Sad but probably true.
 
FiSWtjRUUAABdk0


 
BrunoV said:
Been thinking this for a while now re Stringer.

I can't think of an analogy I like but he's not a player you can rebuild with, you need to be a good side before you can be trusted with a player like Stringer. He would be amazing at a side where he just plugs in as x-factor, few players can win games off their own boot the way Stringer does.

For us, he's a bit of a liability. There are clear issues with professionalism and structurally we don't need x-factor, we need hard working marking targets and hard working smalls.

Hey Melbourne, you want to add 30 goals to your bottom line next year? Stringer kicks 50 to 60 for the Dees, no problem and he splits the attention on their key forwards.
Click to expand...
I think he was so frustrated last year without a decent small forward or 2. Will be interesting how he goes with Tippa back.

Definitely won't see success with us but still love to have an x factor player. Footy is becoming boring enough.
 
For the love of god put him on 1 year contracts so every year is a contract year.
 
This photo is a shocker. Surely it’s a pisstake. No professional athlete would dare to turn up to preseason looking like this. He has to be wearing
Russell Crowes fat suit.
 
Dirty bulk phase.
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

Traded #25: Jake Stringer - 📦 Traded to GWS for Pick #53 - 16/10

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top