Player Watch Henry Schade (Delisted 2017)

Remove this Banner Ad

jackcass said:
Yeah this. While we await the development of McLarty and McCarthy, Schade may well be competing with Goldsack, and Keeffe for that 3rd tall position, opposition depending. Signs are promising with Schade but not as inspiring as a few are suggesting. Look forward to watching his development over the season, has some tools and may well become a very good defender at senior level.
Click to expand...
McCarthy seems to be being developed as a forward/ruck from what I've seen at training.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Apex36 said:
McCarthy seems to be being developed as a forward/ruck from what I've seen at training.
Click to expand...

Time will tell where he ends up. Not uncommon for forward prospects to end up playing defense.
 
jackcass said:
Time will tell where he ends up. Not uncommon for forward prospects to end up playing defense.
Click to expand...
That's all well and good, but you were talking as if McCarthy was being groomed for a defensive role alongside McLarty. I was just pointing out that's not the case at this point.
 
jackcass said:
Happy to pick the player who offers more now. Goldy has been building form through the preseason and not sure how anyone can have Schade ahead of him at this stage. That said, it still could well come down to match ups, Reid and Dunn have the KPD roles sorted, do they free either of them up or allow either Schade or Sack to play FB or CHB? I guess Sinclair's injury allows the flexibility to upgrade Schade if they decide to go that way.
Click to expand...

Is Schade a more viable option for KPD than Goldy? Ive always thought that was one of Goldys issues , he cant play KPD.
 
OniAu said:
Is Schade a more viable option for KPD than Goldy? Ive always thought that was one of Goldys issues , he cant play KPD.
Click to expand...

Depends on the KPF and when you look at the Doggies they'll use a combination of Stringer (192), Dunkley (190), Cordy (193), and Crameri (189) in the absence of Redpath, Campbell, and Roughy. I think the Sack is better suited to those medium talls at this stage. Caveat being the potential inclusion of English as a forward - 2nd ruck whom Schade would seem better suited to.
 
Last edited:
sr36 said:
How's he been going?
Click to expand...
Hard to tell, I haven't seen a whole lot of him yet. I've seen other reports which are very complimentary though. Haven't been to training for a while now because I'm back at work and I only go through the city once every couple of months.
 
legendstatus said:
Reckon he'll keep Goldy out of the side, has a bit of Zac Dawson about him though.....


Sent from my warped mind
Click to expand...

I couldn't work out who he reminded me of...Dawson analogy bang on (which scares me)

Personally I think Goldy's better at this stage but I hope Schade does develop and provide us w options
 
jackcass said:
Depends on the KPF and when you look at the Doggies they'll use a combination of Stringer (192), Dunkley (190), Cordy (193), and Crameri (189) in the absence of Redpath, Campbell, and Roughy. I think the Sack is better suited to those medium talls at this stage. Caveat being the potential inclusion of English as a forward - 2nd ruck whom Schade would seem better suited to.
Click to expand...
Cloke?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

MagpieBat said:
Officially elevated.


Schade takes the nominated rookied slot, meaning he can be available for selection all year, while Cox comes onto the list temporarily for Sinclair...
Click to expand...
Why does Schade not Cox get the year-long elevation? With Keeffe already elevated, do we need another tall defender over a 2nd ruck? I would have thought Cox would be an automatic inclusion. Perhaps Keeffe should have been left on the rookie list.
 
TheGreatGrundy said:
Why does Schade not Cox get the year-long elevation? With Keeffe already elevated, do we need another tall defender over a 2nd ruck? I would have thought Cox would be an automatic inclusion. Perhaps Keeffe should have been left on the rookie list.
Click to expand...

Probably because Keeffe is being groomed to be the 2nd ruck (which I don't think he should) which boggles me as to why he'd get an elevation ahead of Cox as Cox is already somewhat proven in that role whether Keeffe isn't. If Keeffe was still playing in defence I'd maybe pick him ahead of Schade.
 
mike123 said:
Probably because Keeffe is being groomed to be the 2nd ruck (which I don't think he should) which boggles me as to why he'd get an elevation ahead of Cox as Cox is already somewhat proven in that role whether Keeffe isn't. If Keeffe was still playing in defence I'd maybe pick him ahead of Schade.
Click to expand...
I would have thought that Cox was far more accomplished in the ruck and more of a threat up forward than Keeffe.
 
I personally didn't see anything special in him during pre season, but we need all the defenders we can get. Was okay against Richmond but I'm not expecting much from him, best of luck Henry
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Henry Schade (Delisted 2017)

Similar threads

TradeDraft
Player Watch Jack Bytel (Delisted 2024)
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
202
Views
12K
Jen2310
Jen2310
TradeDraft
Player Watch Josh Eyre (Delisted 2024)
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
191
Views
13K
localfootylegend23
localfootylegend23
Maggie5
List Mgmt. Teams Delistings and Retirements
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
pablo disco bar
pablo disco bar
TradeDraft
Player Watch Oleg Markov (Delisted 2024)
38 39 40 41 42
Replies
1K
Views
51K
sr36
sr36

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top