Changes V Lions Rd3

[Clay Davis]

Today he is.

Two or three years from now, time will tell. Pitt could be the next Mundy, but hopefully with a faster development cycle.

I'm pretty confident in saying Darling will always be better than Pitt.

 

[Purple Jesus]

Awkward: The match won't even be over.

Oh but it will be, all but

 

[Righteo]

You've just got to look a bit deeper....Brisbane have some great players on their list, but they lack leg speed, and will gets badly found out in the second half.

Not to mention they still heavily rely on Simon Black to get traction in the clearances and their only legitimately good forward is playing his first game of the season, they also really need Leuenberger to play probably the best game of his career as you can't expect much from a debutant coming up against Sandi and Clarke on what would be the largest ground he's ever played on.

If Merret plays forward and not back then Pav should be looking at similar figures to last season (28 disposals and 5 goals), Patful and Raines aren't going to be able to go with him despite what Lions fans may think.

 

[BrisbaneLion9636]

Not to mention they still heavily rely on Simon Black to get traction in the clearances and their only legitimately good forward is playing his first game of the season, they also really need Leuenberger to play probably the best game of his career as you can't expect much from a debutant coming up against Sandi and Clarke on what would be the largest ground he's ever played on.

If Merret plays forward and not back then Pav should be looking at similar figures to last season (28 disposals and 5 goals), Patful and Raines aren't going to be able to go with him despite what Lions fans may think.

Merrett won't play forward, he'll be too busy spoiling your kicks that come in.
In all seriousness, we're starting to get some clearance work from the likes of Polkinghorne, Rockliff, Raines and the such. And Leuenberger is only just getting started.
Mind you, the debutant we have is impressive. Look at the leap on this fella

 

[Parasite]

Number 32 is going to cop a mouth full.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

Well, considering we still suck at converting forward entries into scores, and Darling is performing at a top four club while Pitt plays average footy in the WAFL, I wonder what the use to the team Pitt actually is.

Let's not forget we got some similar types to Pitt in last year's draft (Sheridan, Forster) and many at our own club from his draft cohort and afterwards have seemingly already gone past him (Mellington, Crozier, Neale).

Anyway, this has nothing to do with the game against Brisbane.

It's a lot if crying over spilt milk, though. If I regretted every decision I made in hindsight I'd be a gibbering mess.

 

[BrisbaneLion9636]

Oh but it will be, all but

Well played.

 

[FreoRicci]

This is a game that I'm sure Freo don't want to get too complacent about. Brisbane are coming off a 90 point drubbing so expect them to be fired up, not the 8 dollars predicted for tomorrow. Worried about Brown, he hasn't been injured in terms of soft tissue so I'm sure he's fit since the start of the season so expect a battle on McPharlin's hands.

 

[Clay Davis]

It's a lot if crying over spilt milk, though. If I regretted every decision I made in hindsight I'd be a gibbering mess.

Not really. The forward line remains an area of concern. I think we have a surfeit of flankers.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

Not really. The forward line remains an area of concern. I think we have a surfeit of flankers.

Yes really. Those decisions can't be undone, so the forward thinking is to identify the current problems with the forward line and work to fix them. Having a sook about what happened two years ago only panders to the rabble rousers.

 

[Taylor]

These things are well known. So is Kepler, so is JA so is Zac Clarke and Silvagni is as tall as him. So what? Who would you rather have as a third tall option in our forward line in the 2012 season? Darling or any of the above, who make up our second and third best tall options.

Let’s face it; it is Pav and then DAYLIGHT between him and our next best forward with NOTHING coming up through our ranks.

Darling a STILL 19 year old kid/man and as we have seen with Fyfe, not all of the old measurements are 100% accurate. Also, when you watch the Weagles play. Honestly, do you think that Darling is a little bigger than the 87kgs and 191cm that he is listed as? This guy is outplaying and out bodying his opponents as a 19 year old. What is he going to be like when he is 25?

It sounds like you are saying that Darling is not tall enough to be a viable forward option in his second year. Bizarre. He kicks goals and in his first year kicked as much as our LEADING goal kicker for the 2011 season. Not to mention being a tremendous exponent of forward pressure and creating turnovers as well as goal assists.

By mentioning the height of Mundy and Barlow, I take it that you want to move them out of the midfield and into the forward line as a tall option? Pav is 192cm (our best goal kicker in our history) and does that mean that you are saying that a 191cm player is not going to be requiring a tall strong defender? Your comment is irrelevant Taylor.

Your point is erroneous. You say we need a key forward then bring up Jack Darling as if his performance as the 4th best forward last year and the 3rd best forward this year is any evidence to argue that he should be our 2nd best forward, which he would be.

Darling is a very useful forward but he isn't Josh Kennedy, he isn't Lynch and he isn't anything close to LeCras. That's why he looks so good, most teams don't carry four shut down defenders in their side. If we had drafted him he would have had defender #2 on him and when Chris Mayne (who plays the same role and performs similarly) had to play in that condition he was horribly ineffective.

I don't have a problem with you believing Darling was a better choice at the time than Pitt, I'd agree with you on that but I don't think West Coast will ever build a forward line around him either. I don't agree that he is the great white forward hope to save our forward line after Pavlich.

I mentioned Barlow and Mundy to highlight just how marginal his "Tall forward" label is. Pendlebury and Judd are also as tall as Darling. He isn't going to be able to compete against a fit, spoiling, 195cm key back.

I think Darling will make a very good high forward flanker/midfielder. His size is useful in the middle, I think that's why Pavlich is playing in the middle. Let me explain that. With the substitution rule coming in we have seen an evolution of ruckmen drifting forward and the key defender strategies and changed with them, a big tall key defender like Keefe emerges, Zac Clarke and Matty Luey is thrown forward.

I think the trend will be towards super tall, athletic key position players. Jack Darling, even though I think he is a better pick than Pitt, isn't going to be able to compete against a defence boasting two 200cm athletes. He will need to adapt his game and, ironically, he'd be relying on delivery from half back flankers like Pitt to pass cleanly to him on the half forward flank.

Darling is a strong mark, Pitt is allegedly a strong kick. Each is a valuable weapon for their opposing flank positions in four years time.

Neither solves our forward line problems. We need to play the free agency very well, we'll probably end up paying overs in the short term for not developing any quality true key position forwards.

 

[E Shed]

Yes really. Those decisions can't be undone, so the forward thinking is to identify the current problems with the forward line and work to fix them. Having a sook about what happened two years ago only panders to the rabble rousers.

I'm hardly a rabble rouser, I have at times been called "a cheerleader for mediocrity" as well as a "useful idiot" and I consider it a subject worthy of debate.

At the time of Pitt's selection Bond said something along the lines of, we have enough ready to play talent now so we could afford to take a project player like Pitt and give him some time to develop. Without the train wreck of injuries last year I think it's fair to say we might not have seen him in the senior team at all last year. It's too early to make a call on whether he's going to be a good AFL player.

What is interesting and IMO worthy of debate is the thinking behind the selection. Good list management has every position on the ground covered with 1 or 2 players being groomed to fill the shoes of those who are getting closer to retirement in the senior team, again in every position.

Freo has an absolute dearth of KPP forwards. Pavlich then daylight. It's the thinking behind not taking a really good prospect like Darling that is being questioned. It's not a comparison (at least in my mind) between Darling and Pitt. We have an absolute surfeit of composed, skillful, rebounding half back types and nothing coming up under Pavlich. Nothing.
That to me is what is puzzling, not whether Pitt can play or not. Darling would be another piece in the difference between top 8 and top 4. Pitt isn't and won't be in the time Pav, Sandi & Luke have left IMO.

 

[dockshark]

Yes....but I'll say again that we passed on Darling due to attitude, which I support in principal. Darling may have outgrown the questions, but it's important for us to have standards that's we don't bend.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

E Shed, remember that at the time of considering Darling, it was the hey day of Fev. At the time I don't think we were willing to take the risk. Good on darling for not turning out to be a complete drongo, but at the time, we and other clubs couldn't be sure.

 

[kp junior]

I'm hardly a rabble rouser, I have at times been called "a cheerleader for mediocrity" as well as a "useful idiot" and I consider it a subject worthy of debate.

At the time of Pitt's selection Bond said something along the lines of, we have enough ready to play talent now so we could afford to take a project player like Pitt and give him some time to develop. Without the train wreck of injuries last year I think it's fair to say we might not have seen him in the senior team at all last year. It's too early to make a call on whether he's going to be a good AFL player.

What is interesting and IMO worthy of debate is the thinking behind the selection. Good list management has every position on the ground covered with 1 or 2 players being groomed to fill the shoes of those who are getting closer to retirement in the senior team, again in every position.

Freo has an absolute dearth of KPP forwards. Pavlich then daylight. It's the thinking behind not taking a really good prospect like Darling that is being questioned. It's not a comparison (at least in my mind) between Darling and Pitt. We have an absolute surfeit of composed, skillful, rebounding half back types and nothing coming up under Pavlich. Nothing.
That to me is what is puzzling, not whether Pitt can play or not. Darling would be another piece in the difference between top 8 and top 4. Pitt isn't and won't be in the time Pav, Sandi & Luke have left IMO.

And of course we made the decision to pass over the gun junior key forward, Kersten this time, again last year. Are we able to comment on that, or is that also crying over spilt milk?

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

And of course we made the decision to pass over the gun junior key forward, Kersten this time, again last year. Are we able to comment on that, or is that also crying over spilt milk?

only if your comment is:
"oh, daggnabbit, we didn't get kersten, even though he had a serious injury cloud over him and proved to not be that effective during the NAB cup and even though every other club passed on KPPs in the last draft".

we're so used to lamenting our deplorable history of recruiting that it's become a habit. no club has a 100% strike rate with recruiting, perhaps the top two or three have a 60-70% strike rate (i'm pulling this figure out of my arse). i don't even know what i'm arguing about anymore but dudes, how great is it that our only real structural problem is missing a decent second tall forward who can lead and mark? i don't doubt that we haven't identified this as an area of need.

 

[freo84]

It's all part of the plan guys. I'm certain that the club has a few KPF's lined up in the not so distant future *cough "Cloak" cough* or cough *goddard* cough........ perhaps an exciting youngster will popup and we will be in a position to grab em. Gotta have a great midfield 1st in my opinion otherwise having a great fwdline means nothing.

 

[strobe00]

I'm pretty confident in saying Darling will always be better than Pitt.

Well, good on you for putting it out there. Hopefully you're wrong though 'cause we picked the skinny tweener.

I'd never have picked Mundy to become a top line inside mid when I first saw him playing in the back line.

Pitt's apparently been working on his contested ball. That and his hunger for the contest were the two major issues I saw from him last year. If he continues to improve those areas then in a couple of years time it'll be fun to debate who's better. There's no real competition between him and Darling yet though, Darling has him now and might for a little while yet.

 

[strobe00]

i don't doubt that we haven't identified this as an area of need.

Am I the only one that found this confusing to read?

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

Am I the only one that found this confusing to read?

It was confusing to write. I think I had three goes at it.

 

[Seppo]

I have a tough decision to make this weekend. I will be missing out on watching/listening to a Freo game for the first time in years.

I'm camping while the game is on and out near Eildon 2hrs north of Melbourne, possibly with no 3G reception ruling out listening to it on my radio app.

Without wanting to know the results, i may come home and go straight to a special website to watch the replay. Need to switch off my phone as I'll be tempted to jump on Twitter, FB and BigFooty and spoil the score.

Has anyone tried to do this before?

 

[strobe00]

It was confusing to write. I think I had three goes at it.

So what did it mean in the end?

Or was it a Zen cryptic koan thing?

 

[Purple Suit]

Darling > Pitt, yes I know. But the really big fish we let get away was Mcleod in 94. I mean, if we had him.....

Too far back? When can we move on and stop sooking about it. I don't hear any complaints about picking Fyfe instead of Gunston in 09. You win some, you lose some and lately we have been winning a lot more than we have been losing.

 

[Clay Davis]

It's really arguable whether we have. Alex Johnson took us apart on the weekend. So did Sam Reid. Both went after our third round picks in 2009 and 2010.

Most on field evidence points to the fact we've been losing more than we've been winning.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

So what did it mean in the end?

Or was it a Zen cryptic koan thing?

It's just the type of non committal statement we tend to make, ie. saying 'I think I might have a zinger burger for dinner', when everyone knows I'll be smashing the burger with my face in an hour. Love the dirty bird.

If I remove the subjunctives from the statement, I meant to say 'I'm sure we have identified the problem and will be addressing it henceforth.' So it's not Zen, just your common garden variety mood confusion of verbs. I think.