Kerr - Still a dirty sniper

[Eagle87]

People have such short memories, and it doesn't help that Freo supporters think he was at his best in the Purple.


Bell from 98'-00' produced better football than Kerr, even in his purple patch around 07'.


He was just about the premier midfielder in one of the successful sides of the last 20 years.


Kerr hasn't come close to averaging 27 disposals and over a goal a game in a season.

Devasting isn't the word either.

The most goals Kerr kicked in a season was 20, that was in his second season when he played alot of it as a forward.

The most disposals he's averaged is 27, again, he only managed 1 season anywhere close to that.



Bell kicked 20+ goals in 7 seasons, in 99' he averaged 25 disposals and kicked 32 goals.

In 2000 he averaged 26 disposals and kicked 24 goals.


All in a period where statistics were far less inflated!


Unlucky not have a Norm Smith medal, few players have had 32 possessions and kicked 4 goals from the midfield in a Grand Final and not won it.


The only laughable thing is dismissing Bell as a genuine A grader.



Don't confuse style over substance.


Bell has it completely over Kerr.

Norf supporters are reknowned for their overestimation of their own players and for thinking anyone cares ...

You probably reckon Norf were the team of the 90's too

 

[GordonGecko]

E87, you want me to reach around first or do you want to get this party started?

Love you Xo

 

[Clay Davis]

When you throw a number out as "destroying" anothers argument and its relevance is immediately discounted by more meaningful numbers, thats called a flaw.

Ignoring them and moving into diversion and silliness doesnt change that..

What are you on about?

You dispute Kerr was an AA and Top 3 in 3 consecutive Brownlows?

I don't dispute his awards or his placings. What I dispute is your contention that uninjured, he is currently one of the best players in the AFL. This just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. Compare his uninjured starts of the last three seasons with those players like Judd in 2007 or J Brown in 2006 - who got 13 votes from 10 games in which his team only won 4, before getting injured.

We're supposed to believe Kerr is at the level of these guys?

Plenty will dispute he was ahead of Kosi, regardless, he was at worst second best kid in the comp in his first season when we were shit. Which tends to undermine your notions of him being poor in a poor side.

Rhys Palmer won a Rising Star in a side that finished third last. Rising Stars often come from poorer sides. A product of high draft picks and early debuts in terrible teams. Means nothing.

In a game we were massive underdogs in and (at that stage) Brisbane were Top 4 favourites ... they also won their first 4 games ..

.

So what? If Kerr was among the best players in the game, he wouldn't have been second best in a losing side - he'd be best on ground. Like Judd was when Carlton were destroyed by Collingwood (the premiers)

Your BIG argument was that Judd was second best on ground in his third game back after a pre-season of injury .... but you discount when Kerr did better ...

Second best on ground overall - as rated by the umpires. No one rated Kerr as second best on ground in any of the games he played in 2010.

More typical cheap shots ...

Hehehe. So funny.

Says the man who makes baseless assertions, plays the man and rarely the ball and runs away from any debate of his debunked points ...

Is this you talking about yourself again

Yes, thats it

I've found that when you dissect quotes you lose context. Like I am now. What were we talking about?

Despite there being no evidence that this is even the case ....

Plenty of evidence. Made time and again on here. Remember when Kerr got 40 possessions a couple of years ago in a loss? Back when you were good, a 40 possession game from Kerr would have been an instant 3 Brownlow vote game and gushing about him being star class. I recall people writing that it was the second most pointless 40 possession game in history (the most pointless being Priddis's in the same game).

Kerr has barely played when we have been shit. In 2001 he was one of the 2 best kids in the AFL - we were shit. In 2008-2010 he has played 26 games.

Refer to prior Rhys Palmer argument. Poor young man has had the most serious of injuries to contend with and he's being written off as a hack, yet to the same stage, he has achieved more than Kerr, who now needs to be excused because of his injuries.

In those games he was typically our best performer v all others over those 26 games ...

Hard to perform when you are not out there.

Sure is, but that doesn't mean that he is one of the best in the comp.

Interesting stat.

Not even the majority of Blues fans reckon he was better for them than us. Pretty much no-one from any other side does.

Please find stats which show the majority of Blues fan believe that Judd was better at West Coast.

Certainly the umpires didn't believe that.

Interesting stat though. Nice to see you actually trying to make an argument

This cursed memory of a goldfish you have!

Nope. Point made.

I'm sure you'll rehash it in your reply. Maybe word it differently this time. Don't worry, I won't get confused if it is a slightly different sentence.

I am checking it now ... probably gave up because it was your usual uni undergrad shallow drivel ... but I will check ...

EDIT: Ok, here it is, your last post in that thread:



You really want me to respond to that? Really?

Wow, its deep ...

I meant the last post in reply to you, you dullard, I made many more posts after that while you vanished. Strange that you tried to win on some point where you say I was chased out of a forum, but where the reality was I continued posting and you disappeared. That's just .... (<-ellipses!) ... weird.

 

[Pykie]

Norf supporters are reknowned for their overestimation of their own players and for thinking anyone cares ...

You probably reckon Norf were the team of the 90's too

There's no need to overstate Bell, he had a quality career, one of North's premier players of the 90's, his stats speak for themselves.

Certainly for consistency, Bell accumulated possessions well for many years, and was a quality midfielder. Had a better overall career than Kerr.

But he was not at the level Kerr reached at his peak.

Yeah well, you could make the same argument for Koutoufides vs Carey.........


But you wouldn't.



I dont constitute 15 weeks vs 7 years a great argument.

 

[Quinz]

I dont constitute 15 weeks vs 7 years a great argument.

Kerr at his best, isn't/wasn't better than Peter Bell.

That's what we're talking about. Kerr at his peak was better than Bell at his peak.

Don't see anyone suggesting Bell wasn't a very good player.

 

[Clay Davis]

Unlucky not have a Norm Smith medal, few players have had 32 possessions and kicked 4 goals from the midfield in a Grand Final and not won it.

Well said. Thought he was robbed in that match.

 

[ndot]

LMFAO. this thread has descended in kerr vs peter bell?

bell was a solid accumulator and thanks to his time at trashmantle i saw him play a lot. but wow... to suggest he ever reached the level of kerr in his prime?

 

[Pykie]

That's what we're talking about. Kerr at his peak was better than Bell at his peak.

Don't see anyone suggesting Bell wasn't a very good player.

I disagree, I think you have to maintain the level for at least 2-3 seasons for it to be considered "ÿour best"


On your theory Adrian McAdam is one of the best small forwards of all time.

 

[Eagle87]

You mean like how I posted in there today quite a bit? You never did reply to my last post in this thread. Why not? You can't? That's it, I bet you can't.

Ok ....

I meant the last post in reply to you, you dullard .....

While reading your mind probably is an interesting waste of ones time, I am not inclined to do it. If you want me to respond to a post, a post you describe as "my last post in *insert entire thread*" then I would assume you are referring to your last post in said thread ...

If you meant some other post, that wasn't your last, why not say so? ...

The rest of your post adds nothing just restates a view that Kerr was outstanding when fit and has been less outstanding when he hasn't played ... Brilliant ...

Thanks ...

Feel free to link the actual post you mean, its a 25 page thread, I am disinclined to trawl through and guess what the hell you are referring to ...

 

[pacemaker]

Got a double helping when they handed out talent, but obviously didn't stand in line where they handed out the brains.

What a di%khead.

What a dog act from a shit player.

Reminds me of the time Judd elbowed Pavlich in the face and cut his face open.

 

[Eagle87]

I disagree, I think you have to maintain the level for at least 2-3 seasons for it to be considered "ÿour best"


On your theory Adrian McAdam is one of the best small forwards of all time.

Brownlow Medal:

2005: Daniel Kerr 3rd
2006: Daniel Kerr 2nd
2007: Daniel Kerr 2nd

That 2-3 seasons enough for you

 

[Quinz]

I disagree, I think you have to maintain the level for at least 2-3 seasons for it to be considered "ÿour best"

He was top 3 in the Brownlow three years in a row from 05-07. Hardly a flash in the pan season in 07, just the best of the three.

 

[ndot]

Brownlow Medal:

2005: Daniel Kerr 3rd
2006: Daniel Kerr 2nd
2007: Daniel Kerr 2nd

That 2-3 seasons enough for you

haha that's some nasty pwnage

 

[Clay Davis]

How often did Scott West place in the Brownlow? Did anyone ever think him the equal of Carey, Voss, Hird, Buckley, etc?

 

[Pykie]

He was top 3 in the Brownlow three years in a row from 05-07. Hardly a flash in the pan season in 07, just the best of the three.

haha that's some nasty pwnage

2005: 20 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.
2006: 23 Disposals p/game, 11 goals.
2007: 27 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.


Yep "devastatingly" elite.



As I said, style over substance.

 

[placebo]

2005: 20 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.
2006: 23 Disposals p/game, 11 goals.
2007: 27 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.


Yep "devastatingly" elite.



As I said, style over substance.

Did you actually watch Kerr in those years?

He could tear a game apart with 15-20 disposals.
He never was a huge accumulator, nor did he have to be.

In 2005-2006, he spent time as a burst player off the bench as well. Like I said, not an accumulator but god was he effective. At his peak he was as effective (in some games, more so) than Judd and Cousins.

Furthermore, when did 'most possessions = best player?'

 

[ndot]

show me peter bell's highlights package where he takes mark of the year, kicks goal of the year, beats five opponents in a GF, embarasses fraser gehrig for trying the don't argue, makes barry hall his bitch and kicks a match winning goal from tight on the boundary line.... then we'll talk.

seriously... peter ****ing bell? of all the stupid shit i've read on bigfooty

 

[ndot]

2005: 20 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.
2006: 23 Disposals p/game, 11 goals.
2007: 27 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.


Yep "devastatingly" elite.



As I said, style over substance.

by your logic matt priddis is a better player than kerr.

just stop.

 

[Scotland]

2005: 20 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.
2006: 23 Disposals p/game, 11 goals.
2007: 27 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.


Yep "devastatingly" elite.



As I said, style over substance.

It's settled then.

Dane Swan is the greatest midfielder of all time.

 

[Clay Davis]

by your logic matt priddis is a better player than kerr.

just stop.

By your logic, Scott West was a better player than Wayne Carey.

 

[ndot]

By your logic, Scott West was a better player than Wayne Carey.

huh?

 

[Quinz]

2005: 20 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.
2006: 23 Disposals p/game, 11 goals.
2007: 27 Disposals p/game, 8 goals.

Not particularly useful stats, when Kerr's best features were his clearance work, tackling, hardball gets, inside 50s, and superb work by hand especially out of congestion. But you already knew that.

He was never an accumulator, but per possession he was extremely damaging. Elite in close and when running with the ball.

Bell was an accumulator, a very effective one. I don't think his best was as good as Kerr. I don't see any point in arguing this any more.

 

[Clay Davis]

huh?

Placing highly in Brownlow doesn't really mean that the player is top quality. Scott West did it multiple times. From 93-95, Garry Hocking was second, second and third in the Brownlow. He was also third in the Brownlow in 1991. Quality player, but equal of the greats of that era? Don't really think so.

 

[ndot]

Placing highly in Brownlow doesn't really mean that the player is top quality. Scott West did it multiple times. From 93-95, Garry Hocking was second, second and third in the Brownlow. He was also third in the Brownlow in 1991. Quality player, but equal of the greats of that era? Don't really think so.

oh i see.

you're right, placing in the brownlow doesn't mean a player is top quality.

being top quality means they are top quality.

jesus ****ing christ, what is the average IQ on here?

kerr got robbed of the rising star award (lol kosi), the norm smith and at least two AAs, so excuse us eagles fans for mentioning his brownlow medal placings.

 

[Clay Davis]

Which Norm Smith was he robbed of?