Mike Sheahans End Of Season Top 50 Players

[year of the cat]

Would love to hear his explanation for leaving Bartel out of the top 50.

Selwood should have been a little lower. Harry Taylor likewise.

Daisy in the top 10? WTF.

 

[Scott Emberton]

where did Marc Murphy finish???

lets get real Daisy is much better

 

[Steele_resolve]

Why is Watson a blemish? His kicking skills is not close to AFL level. I actually could not count on one hand players with worse kicking skills than him.

I agree, Watson's kicking skills would be at best equivalent to that of a good/ solid 2nd divy EFL footballer...but hey the man can find the footy and handball it like no one else since Diesel! If he was playing in top 4 side with topline midfielders around him, everyone would be saying he's a freak.I went to both of Essendons games against the Hawks and Watto smashed it....whilst his kicking, athleticism & speed lacked, his ability to set up the play and find the pill stood out! For this, I think he should be in the top 50, as he did this week in and week out...maybe not at the top end, but at least featured somewhere. I think some people are getting carried away however with the stats. The game obviosuly isn't the same as it was 15-20 year ago, where huge numbers indicated huge performances. Dane Swan is a perfect example of that, whilst Watson played amazingly well in an average side did turn the ball over a lot by foot. This being the one thing that seperates him from being a good B grade footballer to that of an A grade star!...But it surely doesn't mean he should be excluded from the AFL's top 50, does it?

 

[Grumpy Bum]

Daisy was not better than Sandilands

Thomas' last half of the season plus finals was better then anything Sandliands strung together.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

If Daisy is at number 9, why is Griffen at 39? The stats that are listed there for both of them are pretty much identical, but Thomas takes 3 more marks a game, but Griffen kicked 15 more goals...

I know Thomas had a good 2 grand finals, but the 3 finals Griffen played this year he played great. Probably 2nd best on against Collingwood (behind Swan), when we got smashed by like 60 points. Was our best in all of them.

Griffen had poor efficency in that final against us. just because you get it a lot, doesnt make you great. You do to be constructive with it, in fact, some of his turnovers made him a liabilty at times. Good player, top 50 for sure, possibly top 25, but look at him in context of his use of the ball, not just how times he touches the damn thing.

 

[Bubba_5]

Its a shame he has to omit high achieving players and deserving players just to sell a few papers, kinda feel for Watson, what more does he have to do?

Also I honestly feel like i'm one of a select few that thought Cross had an awesome season, he never seems to get any praise. Am I wrong to think this was one of his better seasons?

You aren't wrong, imo this was Cross' best season, he started to hit targets by foot but also knew his limitations, when he got his hands to the ball something good nearly always came from it. He certainly played much better than Matthew Boyd and arguably Griffen also.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

You aren't wrong, imo this was Cross' best season, he started to hit targets by foot but also knew his limitations, when he got his hands to the ball something good nearly always came from it. He certainly played much better than Matthew Boyd and arguably Griffen also.

But still got outsprinted by leigh Brown

 

[Face_Plain]

Watson in front of goals this year: 10.1

Clearly he cannot kick at all.

 

[Hendolenko]

No idea who the top 8 was.

Had a fit of laughter over 9 & 10.

Dale Thomas you have to be kidding.

Might sneak in around 45 this year if you are serious.

 

[Bubba_5]

Griffen had poor efficency in that final against us. just because you get it a lot, doesnt make you great. You do to be constructive with it, in fact, some of his turnovers made him a liabilty at times. Good player, top 50 for sure, possibly top 25, but look at him in context of his use of the ball, not just how times he touches the damn thing.

Igloo has already replied to a comment of this sort. We were shocking in the QF and when Griffen got the ball in congestion he had no options - he just had to bomb forward and get the ball moving our way. When he had time to use the pill, he did so effectively. He remains our best player that night by a long way.

As for his general use of the ball, he's one of the competition's longest and more penetrating kicks, it's why he's so highly rated. His 23.9 average disposals per game don't compare to some of the other elite midfielder's efforts, but Griffen does a lot more with the ball. The QF was an exception to this rule because he had no one else supporting him.

So I agree with your sentiment that disposal>disposals, but you've got the wrong idea about Griffen if you think that he's a ball magnet who butchers the ball. Quite the opposite.

 

[Bubba_5]

But still got outsprinted by leigh Brown

But see he still neutralised the contest. Anyone who knew anything about both players knew that Brown would beat Cross in a sprint.

 

[Steele_resolve]

His field kicking is mediocre! 10.1 is quite irrelevant however, 8 of those goals could have come from 15m out directly in front, or maybe they came in the final term when Essendon were being belted and the pressure was off? Were they set shots or on the run? Stats don't always give a true indication mate!

 

[gravy1]

It just occured to me what a hypocrite Mike Sheahan is. He complained long and hard that Clint Jones wasn't selected in the AA team yet can't find space for him in his top 50.

 

[Hendolenko]

It just occured to me what a hypocrite Mike Sheahan is. He complained long and hard that Clint Jones wasn't selected in the AA team yet can't find space for him in his top 50.

Not a hypocrite just clueless, just look at who put at 9 for evidence.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

Igloo has already replied to a comment of this sort. We were shocking in the QF and when Griffen got the ball in congestion he had no options - he just had to bomb forward and get the ball moving our way. When he had time to use the pill, he did so effectively. He remains our best player that night by a long way.

As for his general use of the ball, he's one of the competition's longest and more penetrating kicks, it's why he's so highly rated. His 23.9 average disposals per game don't compare to some of the other elite midfielder's efforts, but Griffen does a lot more with the ball. The QF was an exception to this rule because he had no one else supporting him.

So I agree with your sentiment that disposal>disposals, but you've got the wrong idea about Griffen if you think that he's a ball magnet who butchers the ball. Quite the opposite.

Its no good being pretty when the pressure is off, its all about being effective in the crunch games at the critical moments. he is an outside player, that's cool, every club needs them, but he needs to kick goals that create momentum, not just goals that make him look better then the rest of his team.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

But see he still neutralised the contest. Anyone who knew anything about both players knew that Brown would beat Cross in a sprint.

anyone who knows anything about glaciers, would know about L Brown. If he can outsprint a medium sized mid, then that mid needs to go to running school.

 

[Face_Plain]

His field kicking is mediocre! 10.1 is quite irrelevant however, 8 of those goals could have come from 15m out directly in front, or maybe they came in the final term when Essendon were being belted and the pressure was off? Were they set shots or on the run? Stats don't always give a true indication mate!

I don't think any of them were cheapies right in front. He nailed every single set shot. His one behind came when he grabbed the ball in congestion from a ball up and banged it on the boot without looking. ( I remember because he was 10.0 before it)

I saw him every game this year. His field kicking is certainly not elite, but it is far better than some people make it out to be. He still has an obligatory woeful shank every week, and it seems that is what most people remember and not him putting it on a leading forward's tit or a nice 50m lob over the top to a ruckman's chest.

 

[RickSanchez]

Thomas' last half of the season plus finals was better then anything Sandliands strung together.

Thomas is a good player, great season of course. But so much relies on Sandilands for us, you saw when he went down we weren't doing so well. If Thomas was out you guys could definitely cover him to a degree.

Remember it's not a dig at Thomas, it's just Sandilands has got to be in the like top 5-7 players in the AFL. Didn't he come like top 5 for coaches award.

 

[Bubba_5]

Its no good being pretty when the pressure is off, its all about being effective in the crunch games at the critical moments. he is an outside player, that's cool, every club needs them, but he needs to kick goals that create momentum, not just goals that make him look better then the rest of his team.

He's an inside player, you should have realised that by the number of tackles he shakes a game - they don't have a stat for this but either he or David Rodan would be leading the count if they did.

He can't kick effectively if there's no one to kick to. Bottom line.

As for kicking goals that create momentum, what sort of goals do you think he kicks? The average Griffen goal is better than the average goal of any other elite midfielder. He consistently dobs them from outside fifty on the run, or snaps the goal from congestion.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

Thomas is a good player, great season of course. But so much relies on Sandilands for us, you saw when he went down we weren't doing so well. If Thomas was out you guys could definitely cover him to a degree.

Remember it's not a dig at Thomas, it's just Sandilands has got to be in the like top 5-7 players in the AFL. Didn't he come like top 5 for coaches award.

He might be essential for you, but that doesn't make him a better player. Different people will accord different criteria as to how they assess players worth. For mine Thomas last half of the season was as good as anyone's going round this year ( the one game where he was shut down, we lost against Hawthorn). His finals were exceptional and it may be argued that his 1st GF game is the reason we could come back the following week and have a second go, which puts into context his importance. His second GF wasn't too shabby either and there would be a multitude of critics having to eat their words about him being soft and all that crap, which was borne out of the fact he had blonde shaggy hair, was used as a medium for publicity and he dared play for Collingwood.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

He's an inside player, you should have realised that by the number of tackles he shakes a game - they don't have a stat for this but either he or David Rodan would be leading the count if they did.

He can't kick effectively if there's no one to kick to. Bottom line.

As for kicking goals that create momentum, what sort of goals do you think he kicks? The average Griffen goal is better than the average goal of any other elite midfielder. He consistently dobs them from outside fifty on the run, or snaps the goal from congestion.

He isn't one of your grunts. He doesn't turn games against the very best teams off his own boot. He doesn't do the Ablett type stuff or even the Judd type stuff. He is best outside where he can have time to execute his skills. You can classify him any way you want with stats, but the scraggers dont use him to turn games when the game is there to be won, they use him to finish the inside work of others. Not a criticism, just plainly what he is there to do. We have similar type players.

 

[Suspense]

I actually picked Thomas for my Norm Smith...
Not for his entire season, but because anyone can pull a rabbit on GF day and I think he has the ability to turn it up...
Doesn't indicate he isn't worthy of being one of Mike Sheahans top 50 players though.

the only measure of worth with regard to mike sheahan's top 50 is that mike sheahan reckons said player is in the top 50 players in the comp.

neither yours or mike sheahan's top 50 players would be more objectively right or wrong. aside from the makeup of each respective top 50, the only difference between either list is mike's top 50 is posted in newspapers around the nation and read by millions whereas chefmeister's would be posted on a footy website and scrolled over by most for tl:dr sake.

 

[AG]

Thomas was a top 20 player just based on the H & A season imo. Taking finals into consideration probably pushes him up to the top 15, so while 9 might seem a bit high it's not that outrageous.

 

[Frankie23]

Quite clearly his season would've ranked him at 15-25, no one can say he doesn't deserve to be around that mark.

However his finals series was outstanding, he kept us in the first Grand Final and was a key architect of the victory.

I rate, as does Mike, finals performances (why is Jacobs commanding so much at the trade table eh?). Thomas was second to none in the finals series and hence is top 10.

 

[pieman123]

lol at carlton supporters complaining about thomas at 9, pendles should be where selwood is if it counts finals as pendles was very good in finals and selwood was crap