Player Watch Mason Cox

[Gone Critical]

It's clear as day that he is not up to it as a forward so why persist? We need to end this experiment of trying to make him a forward settle him in the ruck where he belongs

It's an interesting idea that we can already say he wont make it as a forward. I take the alternate view and reckon the signs are good. If we reckon kicking goals is one way of looking at forward productivity Cox stands up very well. Of the top of my head I pick out Collingwoods recent best goalkickers and compared their average goals per game and their output in their 1st 16 games.


Cox 16 games 22 goals

Jamie Elliott 6 goals
Alex Fasolo 21 goals
Darcy Moore 19 goals
Alan Didak 17 goals
Travis Cloke 11 goals
Anthony Rocca 9 goals

So Mason has everyone covered especially the big forwards. If you look at their career goals per game average then even after 16 games Cox already compares pretty well with what the others could do over a much longer period of time.

Cox 1.4 goals per game currently. Career wise

Jamie Elliott 1.5 goals per game
Alex Fasolo 1.3 goals per game
Darcy Moore 1.3 goals per game
Alan Didak 1.4 goals per game
Travis Cloke 1.8 goals per game
Anthony Rocca 1.7 goals per game

Reckon it would be fair to wait a little longer before deciding Cox cant cut it as a forward.

 

[Kappa]

It's an interesting idea that we can already say he wont make it as a forward. I take the alternate view and reckon the signs are good. If we reckon kicking goals is one way of looking at forward productivity Cox stands up very well. Of the top of my head I pick out Collingwoods recent best goalkickers and compared their average goals per game and their output in their 1st 16 games.


Cox 16 games 22 goals

Jamie Elliott 6 goals
Alex Fasolo 21 goals
Darcy Moore 19 goals
Alan Didak 17 goals
Travis Cloke 11 goals
Anthony Rocca 9 goals

So Mason has everyone covered especially the big forwards. If you look at their career goals per game average then even after 16 games Cox already compares pretty well with what the others could do over a much longer period of time.

Cox 1.4 goals per game currently. Career wise

Jamie Elliott 1.5 goals per game
Alex Fasolo 1.3 goals per game
Darcy Moore 1.3 goals per game
Alan Didak 1.4 goals per game
Travis Cloke 1.8 goals per game
Anthony Rocca 1.7 goals per game

Reckon it would be fair to wait a little longer before deciding Cox cant cut it as a forward.

Bringing out stats and facts just makes the argument unfair GC...

 

[Sasuke]

If he wasnt american, how excited would we be about a new guy taking 3 big contested marks and kicking straight? Not to mention how underutilised he was with delivery yesterday!

 

[Seedsfan]

It's an interesting idea that we can already say he wont make it as a forward. I take the alternate view and reckon the signs are good. If we reckon kicking goals is one way of looking at forward productivity Cox stands up very well. Of the top of my head I pick out Collingwoods recent best goalkickers and compared their average goals per game and their output in their 1st 16 games.


Cox 16 games 22 goals

Jamie Elliott 6 goals
Alex Fasolo 21 goals
Darcy Moore 19 goals
Alan Didak 17 goals
Travis Cloke 11 goals
Anthony Rocca 9 goals

So Mason has everyone covered especially the big forwards. If you look at their career goals per game average then even after 16 games Cox already compares pretty well with what the others could do over a much longer period of time.

Cox 1.4 goals per game currently. Career wise

Jamie Elliott 1.5 goals per game
Alex Fasolo 1.3 goals per game
Darcy Moore 1.3 goals per game
Alan Didak 1.4 goals per game
Travis Cloke 1.8 goals per game
Anthony Rocca 1.7 goals per game

Reckon it would be fair to wait a little longer before deciding Cox cant cut it as a forward.

Yet Jack Anthony had 33 goals in 16 games and once he was found out as a one trick pony struggled from there on in.

 

[Seedsfan]

If he wasnt american, how excited would we be about a new guy taking 3 big contested marks and kicking straight? Not to mention how underutilised he was with delivery yesterday!

Three big contested marks?
Let's not get carried away

 

[Gone Critical]

Yet Jack Anthony had 33 goals in 16 games and once he was found out as a one trick pony struggled from there on in.

Of course that's true and stats can be made to make all kinds of cases. Still in this instance it's you that is making the definitive statement.

"It's clear as day he is not up to it as a forward so why persist"

As such your argument would be better if you could explain why Cox's goal scoring rate compared to other recent top Collingwood frowards is an anomaly and shouldn't be considered rather than quoting a single case of a player who started well but didn't make it. You need to make the case for why the Cox forward experiment is over despite him scoring well.

 

[Seedsfan]

Of course that's true and stats can be made to make all kinds of cases. Still in this instance it's you that is making the definitive statement.

"It's clear as day he is not up to it as a forward so why persist"

As such your argument would be better if you could explain why Cox's goal scoring rate compared to other recent top Collingwood frowards is an anomaly and shouldn't be considered rather than quoting a single case of a player who started well but didn't make it. You need to make the case for why the Cox forward experiment is over despite him scoring well.

He is as slow as a wet weekend, not a strong mark and is useless when the ball hits the deck. He gets lost in the forward line and he doesn't hit up at the ball carrier

 

[Kappa]

He is as slow as a wet weekend, not a strong mark and is useless when the ball hits the deck. He gets lost in the forward line and he doesn't hit up at the ball carrier

If you think Cox is slow for a tall you clearly have never watched him.

 

[Gone Critical]

He is as slow as a wet weekend, not a strong mark and is useless when the ball hits the deck. He gets lost in the forward line and he doesn't hit up at the ball carrier

I can see some of where you are coming from. Still I see differences. He doesn't have great endurance and at 211 cm will struggle with agility. But he is not slow. 3.0 sec for 20 m on testing and can be effective on the lead. Defensively he is poor on the ground but offensively he does some nice things and I think that stems from good ball and game awareness especially for someone new to the game. He is not a strong mark in the pack setting but contested he takes a good mark. Think the Essendon pre season over Goddard, the pluck over the top 2 out against Carlton. Its why his contested mark numbers are so good for an inexperienced player. For an inexperienced player as big as he is I think he is developing his leading patterns and sense of where to go fine. We differ but I see him as having potential that you don't. Cases for both sides I guess, wait and see.

 

[Piestration]

It's an interesting idea that we can already say he wont make it as a forward. I take the alternate view and reckon the signs are good. If we reckon kicking goals is one way of looking at forward productivity Cox stands up very well. Of the top of my head I pick out Collingwoods recent best goalkickers and compared their average goals per game and their output in their 1st 16 games.


Cox 16 games 22 goals

Jamie Elliott 6 goals
Alex Fasolo 21 goals
Darcy Moore 19 goals
Alan Didak 17 goals
Travis Cloke 11 goals
Anthony Rocca 9 goals

So Mason has everyone covered especially the big forwards. If you look at their career goals per game average then even after 16 games Cox already compares pretty well with what the others could do over a much longer period of time.

Cox 1.4 goals per game currently. Career wise

Jamie Elliott 1.5 goals per game
Alex Fasolo 1.3 goals per game
Darcy Moore 1.3 goals per game
Alan Didak 1.4 goals per game
Travis Cloke 1.8 goals per game
Anthony Rocca 1.7 goals per game

Reckon it would be fair to wait a little longer before deciding Cox cant cut it as a forward.

Jack Anthony says hello

 

[Chameleon75]

It's an interesting idea that we can already say he wont make it as a forward. I take the alternate view and reckon the signs are good. If we reckon kicking goals is one way of looking at forward productivity Cox stands up very well. Of the top of my head I pick out Collingwoods recent best goalkickers and compared their average goals per game and their output in their 1st 16 games.


Cox 16 games 22 goals

Jamie Elliott 6 goals
Alex Fasolo 21 goals
Darcy Moore 19 goals
Alan Didak 17 goals
Travis Cloke 11 goals
Anthony Rocca 9 goals

So Mason has everyone covered especially the big forwards. If you look at their career goals per game average then even after 16 games Cox already compares pretty well with what the others could do over a much longer period of time.

Cox 1.4 goals per game currently. Career wise

Jamie Elliott 1.5 goals per game
Alex Fasolo 1.3 goals per game
Darcy Moore 1.3 goals per game
Alan Didak 1.4 goals per game
Travis Cloke 1.8 goals per game
Anthony Rocca 1.7 goals per game

Reckon it would be fair to wait a little longer before deciding Cox cant cut it as a forward.

Interesting comparison but your not really comparing like with like, of the 3 talls you listed, they spent most of their time at half forward working up the field, and the other three are medium size that also work up the field and provide a fair bit more inside the 50 than just goal scoring.

I think a more like for like comparison would be sav, who like cox played his first 16 games primarily as a stay at home forward who's primary role was goal kicking with the occasional ruck duties, in that case sav's first 16 games yielded 51 goals at an average of 3.2 per game, he too was a late comer to afl albeit nowhere near as late as cox.

 

[Piestration]

Of course that's true and stats can be made to make all kinds of cases. Still in this instance it's you that is making the definitive statement.

"It's clear as day he is not up to it as a forward so why persist"

As such your argument would be better if you could explain why Cox's goal scoring rate compared to other recent top Collingwood frowards is an anomaly and shouldn't be considered rather than quoting a single case of a player who started well but didn't make it. You need to make the case for why the Cox forward experiment is over despite him scoring well.

His conversion rate is working because he has kicked most of his goals from 25m. He has a very basic ball drop and just eases the ball through the sticks which gives him the results from close range. I can't see him kicking many from 40m+.

The way the game evolves I don't think we can persist with a player that doesn't have the agility to move around or bang them from the arc. He is the stay at home forward and that's it.

Playing him as a sole Ruckman is possibly a different argument. (like Sandilands)

 

[Seedsfan]

If you think Cox is slow for a tall you clearly have never watched him.

It's a cop out saying for someone his size he is quick because he is still slow, he takes longer to get going than small opponents. The game is getting quicker we need to move with it

 

[Seedsfan]

I can see some of where you are coming from. Still I see differences. He doesn't have great endurance and at 211 cm will struggle with agility. But he is not slow. 3.0 sec for 20 m on testing and can be effective on the lead. Defensively he is poor on the ground but offensively he does some nice things and I think that stems from good ball and game awareness especially for someone new to the game. He is not a strong mark in the pack setting but contested he takes a good mark. Think the Essendon pre season over Goddard, the pluck over the top 2 out against Carlton. Its why his contested mark numbers are so good for an inexperienced player. For an inexperienced player as big as he is I think he is developing his leading patterns and sense of where to go fine. We differ but I see him as having potential that you don't. Cases for both sides I guess, wait and see.

We are never going to agree on this, probably the best course of action is we both sit back and see who turns out to be right

 

[Gone Critical]

Interesting comparison but your not really comparing like with like, of the 3 talls you listed, they spent most of their time at half forward working up the field, and the other three are medium size that also work up the field and provide a fair bit more inside the 50 than just goal scoring.

I think a more like for like comparison would be sav, who like cox played his first 16 games primarily as a stay at home forward who's primary role was goal kicking with the occasional ruck duties, in that case sav's first 16 games yielded 51 goals at an average of 3.2 per game, he too was a late comer to afl albeit nowhere near as late as cox.

Some truth in that. Still I can remember at the end of last season doing a similar comparison of all the current gun KPFs and their 1st 11 games. Off the top of my head included Hawkins, Daniher, Moore, Walker, Cameron, Cloke, Lynch, Reiwoldt, Kennedy, Franklin etc. He was ahead of all bar Cameron, Buddy and maybe Lynch and Walker. Doesn't prove he makes it but for me there is enough shown to suggest the experiment is worth continuing with.

 

[Gone Critical]

I think a more like for like comparison would be sav, who like cox played his first 16 games primarily as a stay at home forward who's primary role was goal kicking with the occasional ruck duties, in that case sav's first 16 games yielded 51 goals at an average of 3.2 per game, he too was a late comer to afl albeit nowhere near as late as cox.

Sav isnt a great comparison. The full forwards kicked many more goals in those days, in 1992 Savs 1st year Dunstall got 145 and Lockett 132, in 93 Ablett Lockett and Dunstall all went 120+ and 12 players went 60+. In 2016 only 5 players went 60+. None of the current top KPFs come anywhere near the totals Sav kicked in his 1st 16 games. Early 90's was a very different game for KPFs.

 

[ZEV]

It's a cop out saying for someone his size he is quick because he is still slow, he takes longer to get going than small opponents. The game is getting quicker we need to move with it

He ran a 20 metre sprint in 3.0 seconds prior to coming to our club.... Pendlebury has never cracked a sub 3 second time.

I'm surprised not that many people have noticed how poor his endurance is though. thats what takes him out of games and why we can't ruck him at afl level yet

 

[ZEV]

Sav isnt a great comparison. The full forwards kicked many more goals in those days, in 1992 Savs 1st year Dunstall got 145 and Lockett 132, in 93 Ablett Lockett and Dunstall all went 120+ and 12 players went 60+. In 2016 only 5 players went 60+. None of the current top KPFs come anywhere near the totals Sav kicked in his 1st 16 games. Early 90's was a very different game for KPFs.

Exactly, look at Mark Richardson's first seven games as well.... better start than plugger

 

[Chameleon75]

Sav isnt a great comparison. The full forwards kicked many more goals in those days, in 1992 Savs 1st year Dunstall got 145 and Lockett 132, in 93 Ablett Lockett and Dunstall all went 120+ and 12 players went 60+. In 2016 only 5 players went 60+. None of the current top KPFs come anywhere near the totals Sav kicked in his 1st 16 games. Early 90's was a very different game for KPFs.

I aknowledge that, but you used Anthony rocca as an example and him and sav started and finished only 3 years apart.

Nonetheless today's kpf's do more than just kick goals, and that's the challenge for cox, he really is the type of player that would've thrived in the 90's, in today's game he needs to kick 3 just to break even with the lack of defensive side.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

He ran a 20 metre sprint in 3.0 seconds prior to coming to our club.... Pendlebury has never cracked a sub 3 second time.

I'm surprised not that many people have noticed how poor his endurance is though. thats what takes him out of games and why we can't ruck him at afl level yet

Our players are recorded at draft camp when they're 17-18 years old, Mason was tested as a 23-24 year old which is also why his vertical leap seemed impressive, big difference being 24 compared to 17.

 

[legendstatus]

If only he didn't have to play with a football?


Sent from my warped mind

 

[ZEV]

Our players are recorded at draft camp when they're 17-18 years old, Mason was tested as a 23-24 year old which is also why his vertical leap seemed impressive, big difference being 24 compared to 17.

Most 24 year olds would test much poorer than a 17 year old who has been in an elite sporting program. Key position and rucks would test slower after seven years of footy i would imagine - (ben reid, nathan brown, josh fraser for example)

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Most 24 year olds would test much poorer than a 17 year old who has been in an elite sporting program. Key position and rucks would test slower after seven years of footy i would imagine - (ben reid, nathan brown, josh fraser for example)

But he didn't have 7 years of footy, a 24 year old is approaching his physical prime.

 

[Prestige Presti]

I think Pendles said in a podcast that he expects at some point in his career Cox will kick 8 goals in a game, or a huge bag.

We can sometimes forget just how far he has come in the few years of him being a footballer, his development has been unbelievable and has personally exceeded my expectations by some margin. The fact that he still has room for development has me believing that he will be a very handy footballer, the fact that he's kicked 11 goals out of his last 10 quarters played (VFL included) I believe is a glimpse as to what he's capable of.

 

[leon123]

He is as slow as a wet weekend, not a strong mark and is useless when the ball hits the deck. He gets lost in the forward line and he doesn't hit up at the ball carrier

but was one of our best goal scorers.

Im an outcome person and that was the outcome.

Sometimes best not to over-analyse... he done good