Kerr - Still a dirty sniper

[Clay Davis]

Kerr was the number 1 mid for most of 2007 and managed to come runner up in the brownlow - so not exactly folding.

Nah. Judd was number one for the first half of the season. Pretty sure he was leading the Brownlow up until his groin started to give out, and even then, clubs were wary of him while he was playing.

 

[mysainters]

Sniper or otherwise, I hope he has a good year.

I want to the see the comp's best running around without injury, he is great to watch when he is up and about.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

So many different topics of conversation tangled up here.

I don't think the incident was that bad, but there's enough precedence to suggest it wasn't in any way an accident. He can't be given the benefit of the doubt, and should've been given a week.

The fact he did it in his comeback game is unbelievable. He needs to completely eradicate that sort of crap if he wants to play another 20 games. The leadership group should be dirty about this, and basically force him to play for Easts an extra week. He is so incredibly lucky the club kept him to begin with, let alone pay him an exorbitant amount to sit on his arse.

None of the above makes him a bad player though, nor does it diminish the impact he had from 2005 - 2007 when he was clearly a top 5 midfielder. A bleak future doesn't reduce the past either. He played a blinder last year before his injury, but that can easily be brushed aside when people are fabricating shit to back-up their point-of-view.

 

[Eagle87]

Nah. Judd was number one for the first half of the season. Pretty sure he was leading the Brownlow up until his groin started to give out, and even then, clubs were wary of him while he was playing.

Judd was brilliant until Round 8 when injured. By the end of Round 8 he had 18 votes

Kerr had 8 by the end of Round 8

Kerr polled 14 of his votes in his last 7 games of the season (polled in 5 games, got 3 votes in 4 of them and 2 votes in the other) (Rounds 13-20). Judd was routinely barely playing midfield in those games and was left out of a few and Cousins missed a couple of the games (didn't play at all til Round 16).

Kerr was our best mid across the season and to finish second in the Brownlow despite missing 5 games was remarkable. He was our best mid after Round 8 of that season and often was our only quality mid.

Unfortunately for Kerr he missed the last 2 games of the season with a hammy. He was in unbelievable form.

To under rate Kerr as some sort of third banana is about the same as arguing that Bartel only won it that year because he was a 4th stringer behind blokes like Ablett and Selwood and Chapman and Johnson and Corey and Kelly ... etc etc

Kerr was Top 3 in the Brownlow in 3 consecutive years. He started as our clear main inside mid in those 3 years. He and Judd started in the square.

He has temperament issues, no doubt but this witch hunt based on a minor incident in a WAFL game is primarily driven by a bunch of moralising judgementalists who always excuse acts of similar silliness by their own ...

 

[Clay Davis]

Judd was brilliant until Round 8 when injured. By the end of Round 8 he had 18 votes

He had 16, but it's still a fair amount per game.

No denying Kerr played quality football in those years, but the argument is whether it was easier for him to do so when bigger perceived threats were at the Eagles.

Judd still played most games after his injury, and coaches would have paid more attention to him, injury or not. His form in the first 8 games suggested that you ran a huge risk not minding him.

Even completely hobbled in the final against Port Judd got two pretty quality goals when West Coast needed it.

The run of Brownlow votes at the close of the season simply suggests Kerr was the best player of the game - it doesn't necessarily mean the opposition coaches saw him as the first call mid or tagged him.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Nah. Judd was number one for the first half of the season. Pretty sure he was leading the Brownlow up until his groin started to give out, and even then, clubs were wary of him while he was playing.

Judd was number 1 for 8 games,

Kerr was number 1 for about 10-12

Judd played forward pocket post Rd 8 - so he got a defender - Kerr got the main tag.

Kerr didn't fold in those games - as pointed out - he kept racking up brownlow votes

 

[Clay Davis]

Judd was number 1 for 8 games,

Kerr was number 1 for about 10-12

Judd played forward pocket post Rd 8 - so he got a defender - Kerr got the main tag.

Kerr didn't fold in those games - as pointed out - he kept racking up brownlow votes

Your perception of him being number 1 is based on hindsight and not how the opposition coaches would have planned each game. West Coast are notoriously cagey in regards to injuries, and as such, an idea of how badly Judd was going didn't really become apparent until the close of the season.

No way would any coach not treat Judd as number one mid in any game he lined up. The risks would be too great.

 

[Eagle87]

Your perception of him being number 1 is based on hindsight and not how the opposition coaches would have planned each game. West Coast are notoriously cagey in regards to injuries, and as such, an idea of how badly Judd was going didn't really become apparent until the close of the season.

No way would any coach not treat Judd as number one mid in any game he lined up. The risks would be too great.

Surely this is a pisstake?

Judd didn't play AT ALL in 2 games in which Kerr got 5 brownlow votes. Judd played, at least, 50% of his game time forward after the mid-season break and most people figured out he couldn't run by about Round 14 ... hence the clamour to get Cousins back ....

You really think opposition coaches planned for a hobbled Judd and let the bloke who was third and second in the 2 previous Brownlow medal counts run around relatively unscathed? Even with Cousins not playing or playing at 70% rat power?

Your fascination with the inner workings of our team is noted

 

[Clay Davis]

Surely this is a pisstake?

Judd didn't play AT ALL in 2 games in which Kerr got 5 brownlow votes. Judd played, at least, 50% of his game time forward after the mid-season break and most people figured out he couldn't run by about Round 14 ... hence the clamour to get Cousins back ....

Judd hasn't played at all in any games with Kerr since 2007, and Kerr has received more than a few Brownlow votes in that time. Means nothing.

You really think opposition coaches planned for a hobbled Judd and let the bloke who was third and second in the 2 previous Brownlow medal counts run around relatively unscathed? Even with Cousins not playing or playing at 70% rat power?

Judd's first game back from his first injury break he got 35 possessions. If 38 possessions in his first game back is 70% rat power for Cousins then that is amazing.

Your fascination with the inner workings of our team is noted

This is a discussion about whether Kerr is a champion of the game. I know you can't have discussions, but anyway.

Kerr is not a champion of the game. He is a rich man's Des Headland - looks a million bucks in a quality team, in a poor one he is average aside from the odd game, injury prone, and a headcase.

How he performed when your team finished 2nd, 1st, and 3rd in the home and away season masks his true impact as a player. Unlike Cousins who was in the top five players of the AFL when West Coast finished third last, or Judd who has single handedly taken a spoon club to the finals, Kerr is a rung or two below them, and a number of other players in the AFL.

 

[Eagle87]

This is a discussion about whether Kerr is a champion of the game. I know you can't have discussions, but anyway.

Kerr is not a champion of the game. He is a rich man's Des Headland - looks a million bucks in a quality team, in a poor one he is average aside from the odd game, injury prone, and a headcase.

How he performed when your team finished 2nd, 1st, and 3rd in the home and away season masks his true impact as a player. Unlike Cousins who was in the top five players of the AFL when West Coast finished third last, or Judd who has single handedly taken a spoon club to the finals, Kerr is a rung or two below them, and a number of other players in the AFL.

Clamouring again for the moral high ground "I'm better than you at discussion" ...

The reality is you rarely put together a coherent position and you ALWAYS put words in the mouths of others because your judgemental approach to others posting style means you see what you want to see in posts rather than whats actually written ...

Kerr finished Top 3 in the Brownlow in 3 consecutive seasons and was a part of one of the best midfields of all time. He was also an integral part of the improvement of the Eagles from a rabble and was clearly the Rising Star in his year despite the ludicrous decision to award it to Kosi ...

So basically he was the best kid in 2001, Top 3 in the Brownlow in 2005, 2006, 2007 .. and since age 24 he has been riddled by injury ...

And some Freo clowns want to rate Bell above him

One of the best players in the game when fit, which he hasn't been for 3 years ...

Your argument that he is likely behind Judd & Cousins in terms of his legacy is fine, so what? They are both Hall of Fame players.

The argument that Judd has single handedly got the Blues to finals and Kerr hasn't is ridiculously flawed ... Carlton have had a better list than West Coast in the last couple of years AND Judd has actually played ... I mean ridiculous stuff ...

If Kerr had remained fit since 2007 and played at the same level he did between 2001 and 2007 then we are talking a Top 10 player easily. The reason he hasn't done that is purely and simply an inability to get on the field.

To indicate that Kerr is no more than a rich mans Headland is to basically open up your mind and show off the lack of its quality ....

 

[Eagle87]

Judd hasn't played at all in any games with Kerr since 2007, and Kerr has received more than a few Brownlow votes in that time. Means nothing.

So Kerr still gets best on grounds when Judd isn't around ....

The only reason he hasn't got more is that HE HAS BARELY PLAYED.

The point remains the same, Kerr is a gun even without Judd when Kerr is fit and playing ... which seems to disprove your idea that he is merely a third banana....

Judd's first game back from his first injury break he got 35 possessions. If 38 possessions in his first game back is 70% rat power for Cousins then that is amazing.

Indeed, after 3 weeks off and on pain killers Judd did well ...

After that his season went:

11 possessions
21
20
14
11
Miss through injury
10
Miss through injury
12
Miss through injury


Cousins did do pretty well in total stats but his impact petered out after the first couple of games and he missed round 20 with injury ...

Anyone who watches football with both eyes open would acknowledge that Cousins was, first couple of games aside, a lesser player in 2007 than he had been previously ...

 

[Clay Davis]

Clamouring again for the moral high ground "I'm better than you at discussion" ...

Everything seems to be a 'moral' high ground with you. There are no morals here, you actually cannot have discussions. I don't claim any good or bad here - it's just a fact.

The rest of what your wrote is just a bunch of rubbish between a heavy overuse of ellipses.

So Kerr is one of the best players in the game when fit? He was fit in the first three rounds last year. How did he go then? Or is it not fair to judge a player on three games?

And Kerr is a rich man's Headland. Better player overall, naturally, but much worse in a poor team, injury prone and a headcase.

 

[Eagle87]

Everything seems to be a 'moral' high ground with you. There are no morals here, you actually cannot have discussions. I don't claim any good or bad here - it's just a fact.

I cannot have discussions with YOU because you can't leave your preconceptions, your prejudices and your biased reading at the door.

You just can't...

Rational, logical discussions with people who have a clue, no problem ..

The rest of what your wrote is just a bunch of rubbish between a heavy overuse of ellipses.

Of course it is. Because, again, it shows you for the shallow, clueless "analyst" you are.

So Kerr is best player in the game when fit?

I never claimed that. Not once. More strawmen from one of the poorest debaters on BF.

He was fit in the first three rounds last year. How did he go then? Or is it not fair to judge a player on three games?

He was not fully fit, had an interrupted pre-season and was in our best in the first 2 games before playing poorly v North. Of course he still got 20+ possessions in each game....

But yes, 3 games, is hardly indicative ....

And Kerr is a rich man's Headland. Better player overall, naturally, but much worse in a poor team, injury prone and a headcase.

Much worse in a poor team?, despite being best first year player in 2001 (when we were shocking), being our second best player in 2002 (when we were poor-ish) and despite being our highest Brownlow poller in 2008 and second in 2009 (behind Lecca) despite playing only 11 games in each year?

Surely you havent descended this far into idiocy?

I mean how can one have a discussion with a man who just throws unproven assertion like "Headland is better than Kerr in poor sides"? I mean surely you are trolling?

 

[Clay Davis]

I cannot have discussions with YOU because you can't leave your preconceptions, your prejudices and your biased reading at the door.

You just can't...

Rational, logical discussions with people who have a clue, no problem ..




Of course it is. Because, again, it shows you for the shallow, clueless "analyst" you are.

Nice rant.

I never claimed that. Not once. More strawmen from one of the poorest debaters on BF.

Apologies, edited to reflect your post

One of the best players in the game when fit

Not true at all.

He was not fully fit, had an interrupted pre-season and was in our best in the first 2 games before playing poorly v North. Of course he still got 20+ possessions in each game....

But yes, 3 games, is hardly indicative ....

How far do you need to go to make excuses for him? Plenty of players endure interrupted preseasons. IIRC Chris Judd did in his first season for Carlton and was second best on ground by his third game.

Much worse in a poor team?, despite being best first year player in 2001 (when we were shocking), being our second best player in 2002 (when we were poor-ish) and despite being our highest Brownlow poller in 2008 and second in 2009 (behind Lecca) despite playing only 11 games in each year?

Surely you havent descended this far into idiocy?

I mean how can one have a discussion with a man who just throws unproven assertion like "Headland is better than Kerr in poor sides"? I mean surely you are trolling?

I never said he was much worse than Headland. I said he was better than Headland. I said he was a much worse player in a poor team. Reiterating this point made earlier:

Kerr is not a champion of the game. He is a rich man's Des Headland - looks a million bucks in a quality team, in a poor one he is average aside from the odd game, injury prone, and a headcase.

Surely you can follow the flow of discussion? Wait a minute:

I know you can't have discussions, but anyway.

 

[GordonGecko]

He's a nut punching, headbutting, elbow dropping little sniper who cant handle a tag.

Leading the brownlow count in 2008 and being runner up in 2009 doesnt mean shit, you have been dreadful, there's virtually no one else to take votes off anyone with an ounce of talent.

Evidenced by the strong showing of Priddis in last years count, or does that mean he's a quality player, because from a team perspective he polled well in the Charlie?

You battler.

Kerr is a sniper who hasnt been able to shake a tag, the greats handle this, they rise above it, they dont lash out and if they do they go for the eyes.

 

[RICHWCE]

The only bitterness here, is in that spoon you've been sucking on.

Not to worry princess, woosha to get the Spanish Archer and Suma to step in and lead you to glory, pmsl..

and then we'll put that spoon in one of our premiership cups.

 

[dobbins]

I cannot have discussions with YOU because you can't leave your preconceptions, your prejudices and your biased reading at the door.

You just can't...

Rational, logical discussions with people who have a clue, no problem ..




Of course it is. Because, again, it shows you for the shallow, clueless "analyst" you are.



I never claimed that. Not once. More strawmen from one of the poorest debaters on BF.



He was not fully fit, had an interrupted pre-season and was in our best in the first 2 games before playing poorly v North. Of course he still got 20+ possessions in each game....

But yes, 3 games, is hardly indicative ....




Much worse in a poor team?, despite being best first year player in 2001 (when we were shocking), being our second best player in 2002 (when we were poor-ish) and despite being our highest Brownlow poller in 2008 and second in 2009 (behind Lecca) despite playing only 11 games in each year?

Surely you havent descended this far into idiocy?

I mean how can one have a discussion with a man who just throws unproven assertion like "Headland is better than Kerr in poor sides"? I mean surely you are trolling?

You sir remind me of a bully and an elitist....

 

[Saila]

He's a nut punching, headbutting, elbow dropping little sniper who cant handle a tag.

Leading the brownlow count in 2008 and being runner up in 2009 doesnt mean shit, you have been dreadful, there's virtually no one else to take votes off anyone with an ounce of talent.

Evidenced by the strong showing of Priddis in last years count, or does that mean he's a quality player, because from a team perspective he polled well in the Charlie?

You battler.

Kerr is a sniper who hasnt been able to shake a tag, the greats handle this, they rise above it, they dont lash out and if they do they go for the eyes.

Lol...

 

[who gives a]

Were you making the same comments when the messiah did the same thing to Pavlich last year and got away with it?..

spot on here a real dog is judd and not the first time either

 

[smitchell]

Explain to me how a bloke caught on tape to a drug trafficker, a bloke who beats up taxi drivers, a bloke who beats up 17 year olds, a bloke who forges prescriptions for valium and a bloke who continually lets his club down with acts such as the above, is still on the list?

Don't forget crossing swords with Sam Mitchell. Although I think he was just comparing

It's because the bogan elite love him, and when the bogan elite love something, the herd will follow.

Baaaaaaaaaaa

 

[smitchell]

spot on here a real dog is judd and not the first time either

Good point, you probably saw it live at subi.

what did you do with your no.3 eagles jumper?

 

[basalt]

really dont understand on what basis posters think he is a "has been". Apart from the fact he has not played much in the last two years due to injury/suspension.

The premise is he can not break a tag and was supposedly only ever good when surrounded by judd and cousins and not being tagged.

The stats are :
Year Games PPG
2001 19 15.6
2002 23 17.9
2003 21 19.3
2004 21 19.8
2005 22 20.9
2006 21 23.0
2007 17 27.1
2008 11 23.7
2009 11 19.5 av 23.2ppg after excluding 3 incomplete games injured
2010 4 19.5 av 22.7 ppg after excluding 1 incomplete game injured

Excluded the games in which kerr was injured in 2010 and 2009 due to the small number of games played in those years.

So the stats indicate that since Judd and cousins departed kerrs possessions per game have hardly changed from when cousins and judd played.

It is arguable that kerr has improved over those years as he has maintained a consistent output while in addition being tagged every week and in a team that has been generally well below average.

The only real outlier stats wise is the 2007 year when he averaged 27.1 ppg mostly on a super last 8 games that had 31 ppg average. Perhaps everyone compares the last three seasons to those eight games.

Source of stats is from eagles flying high website.

 

[mehow2g]

Judd hasnt exactly been himself since he left eagles.

There were 3 superstar mids to be tagged back in 06 1 or 2 are bound to run free.

If you cannot see that Kerr is an elite player then you dont know footy.

Haters gonna hate.

[youtube]-Meh5Z2c9Rs[/youtube]

^ 2010 in a spoon team Recent as last year shit player.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Kerr is not elite. There are very few elite players in the AFL, and by that I mean the best of the best, and Kerr isn't close to being in that group.

He's a very good player on his day, but he's not elite and never was.

 

[BIGBEZ]

Love this bolded bit. Wasn't there a fellow called Williams once? And some guy whose named rhymed with Mudd that people regularly complained about eye gouging and elbows?

Ill stand corrected on Grieg Williams very dirty player he would king hit nearly as much as Leigh Matthews both fair to label as snipers, loved everytime Rhys Jones belted him even though no longer at South (not very loyal of me but being honest) but Judd is not a sniper either, Goodes isnt even close to a sniper...