Mitch Clark v Tyrone Vickery (Most Goals 2012)

[Heisenberg_]

He's mad that Clark jumped ship

Why would I care, don't barrack for Brisbane so why should I care that he jumped ship?

Pretty self explanatory anyway, Clark was recruited to be the number 1 target up forward, Vickery is out number 2 forward, if Vickery kicks more goals as a second forward then Clark, no way known will Clark have had the better year unless they work out that Clark isn't a very good forward and make him play as a ruck.

 

[Monkey King]

All good Monkey, I think Ron's only joking

Oh sure, I took it as him having a friendly jab in a truthful kind of way. I hope my reply wasn't taken the wrong way, but re-reading it I can see how it could be. I really like a couple of the Richmond boys, but just wanted to have a poke back at the end there

 

[Bazzar]

He's mad that Clark jumped ship

Jumped ship? Took the money and run more like it. It will come back to bite Melbourne paying over the top money for an average player.

 

[lamaros]

Very tall players usually lack the pace to get out on a lead, the really strong hands to consistently take contested marks in the forward line, and the mobility to create opportunities for themselves when the ball hits the ground. As they get older and fill out, they also tend to lose what spring they have. They become predictable and easily planned against, except when pinch-hitting. Sandilands is an example; a monster of a man and a quality player, his height should theoretically make him hard to stop up forward. But nearing 30 and after ~170 matches, he is yet to score more than two goals in a game.

I watched Mark Lee swap ruck duties with Michael Roach and kick 9 goals at full forward. Once.

Of the 45 bags of 6 or more goals by 200cm+ players, Paul Salmon has 25, Everitt 6, Matt Rendell 4, Tippett, Ilija Grgic and Michael Byrne 2 each. For all his precocious talent and copybook kicking style, Brad Ottens posted 6 goals once in his career, despite starting many games up front.

Correlation is not causation, sure, but I formed this opinion long ago after watching various super-talls lose what effectiveness they had in front of goal. The observation/theorising came first, and the figures were researched merely to confirm them, which is the correct way to use statistics.

As for Clark, well yes, we are essentially saying the same thing. He can take a startling grab on occasion, and I've seen him evade smaller players on the gather and turn, but he hasn't shown an ability to score goals consistently. No surprise that his standout season to date was spent on the ball.



You're twisting my contention there. All I'm suggesting is that very tall players rarely make very good forwards, Clark or no Clark.

Fair enough. It will be interesting to see how Vickery and Tippett, who are better natural forwards, go in the future. There's still plenty of room for exceptions!

 

[00Stinger]

Why would I care, don't barrack for Brisbane so why should I care that he jumped ship?

Sorry, I was responding to the Brisbane supporter, not you.

Jumped ship? Took the money and run more like it. It will come back to bite Melbourne paying over the top money for an average player.

Why?

Last year it was quite obvious that we needed a big bodied forward. Come the off season there was only one avaliable and we got him. I don't see the problem.

Players who are out of contract and want to move are always worth more on the open market. Especially when they are big blokes, such as Clark. Had it been Richmond or anyother team for that matter in our position I am quite sure the supporters of that team would be OK with the signing.

Did we pay overs for him? YES
Do we need a player of his type? YES

 

[Bazzar]

Why?

Last year it was quite obvious that we needed a big bodied forward. Come the off season there was only one avaliable and we got him. I don't see the problem.

Players who are out of contract and want to move are always worth more on the open market. Especially when they are big blokes, such as Clark. Had it been Richmond or anyother team for that matter in our position I am quite sure the supporters of that team would be OK with the signing.

Did we pay overs for him? YES
Do we need a player of his type? YES

You were to premature in getting rid of Miller if it was only a big bodied forward you needed. Yes Clarke is the better player, but the dollars you paid for a player who averaged an extra 3 disposals, 0.5 marks and 0.4 goals and 0.4 fewer tackles wasnt worth it. You needed the foresight to have developed a quality key forward in the Bailey years.

And you are wrong, Richmond supporters would have been cranky if we paid his fee for him as a key forward when he clearly isnt one.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Oh sure, I took it as him having a friendly jab in a truthful kind of way. I hope my reply wasn't taken the wrong way, but re-reading it I can see how it could be. I really like a couple of the Richmond boys, but just wanted to have a poke back at the end there

No offence meant or taken. Maybe I was getting your posts confused with Blues Man. A Richmond supporter must've run over his dog.

Had it been Richmond or anyother team for that matter in our position I am quite sure the supporters of that team would be OK with the signing.

I really wanted Richmond to make a play for Clark, which we did, but cooled when I heard he only wanted to play forward.

Maybe Neeld's strategy is for Clark to take the heat off Watts.

 

[00Stinger]

You were to premature in getting rid of Miller if it was only a big bodied forward you needed. Yes Clarke is the better player, but the dollars you paid for a player who averaged an extra 3 disposals, 0.5 marks and 0.4 goals wasnt worth it. You needed the foresight to have developed a quality key forward in the Bailey years.

And you are wrong, Richmond supporters would have been cranky if we paid his fee for him as a key forward when he clearly isnt one.

Bullshit you would be on here spruiking Clark as a Messiah if Richmond got him. Don't try to fool yourself.


As for Miller, he was shocking for Melbourne for many years. It doesn't matter if he kicked 50 goals for Richmond last year, no Melbourne supporter would be disappointed he was given the ass.

 

[Bazzar]

Bullshit you would be on here spruiking Clark as a Messiah if Richmond got him. Don't try to fool yourself.


As for Miller, he was shocking for Melbourne for many years. It doesn't matter if he kicked 50 goals for Richmond last year, no Melbourne supporter would be disappointed he was given the ass.

Rubbish. Go back when Clark was spruiking for the highest bidder and check the comments on the Tiger board. We would have taken him only if he was 200k cheaper.

And as for Miller, thanks, he is the perfect big bodied foil for Jack and Big Vick.

 

[Groupie_]

Got to love the eternal optimism of Tiges supporters, look forward to it being dented when they get smashed by 10 goals+ by us in round 1.

Clark should get more goals being the focal point at Melbourne, Vickery's rubbish.

Jarrod Waite is better

 

[Heisenberg_]

Jarrod Waite is better

One Day Waite will live up to his potential, been hearing it for years and yet to see much still

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Pretty self explanatory anyway...

It's not self explanatory at all, in fact its counter-intuitive.

You're essentially saying that forwards that kick more goals are necessarily more valuable players. It's completely rubbish and has been proven time and time again as erroneous.

Clark was recruited to be the number 1 target up forward, Vickery is out number 2 forward

This is completely irrelevant. Does Carlton just cut Henderson because we recruited him to replace our #1 forward - but he has decidedly played poorly in the F50?

If Vickery kicks more goals as a second forward then Clark, no way known will Clark have had the better year

But why? Did Walker have a better year than Goodes? If JR kicks more goals than Buddy this year will it make him the better player?

Again you're assuming Clark is the primary forward. This can only be discovered by the rather obscure stats throughout the year.

Clark will play a similar role (in the team) to Vickery - take heat off of the forward w/ greater expectations (Watts / Riewoldt).

If that fails for either, they'll rotate through the ruck.

...Unless they work out that Clark isn't a very good forward and make him play as a ruck.

You've back-flipped.

if Vickery kicks more goals he has had a better season then Clark, simple as that.

 

[Monkey King]

No offence meant or taken. Maybe I was getting your posts confused with Blues Man. A Richmond supporter must've run over his dog.

My best mate is a Tigers supporter and I used to go to a couple of games a season way back when. Have a soft spot for them when they're down; hate them when they're up and about though, naturally. So safe to say, given my join date, that you must have me confused with the poor bastard who lost his dog.

 

[Waltz17]

Never liked Clark and he lost more respect from me with the whole "I'm homesick need to be with family" facade he created to leave Brisbane. Breifly wanted him at Richmond as primarily a ruck, and glad we got Maric instead

Clark has had one good season (playing ruck, which he now wont do) and I think he has never kicked more goals than Vickery did last year.

IMO Vickery will kick more goals than Clark (and Waite, who is just as overrated)

 

[Faz 2000]

I reckon Clark will kick more this year, Vickery considerably more over his career, and Waite will top both of them, but only on a "per game" basis, cos the idiot can't play more than about 16 games a year. If he played 22 per, he wouldn't be over-rated.

 

[cotter101]

Got to love the eternal optimism of Tiges supporters, look forward to it being dented when they get smashed by 10 goals+ by us in round 1.

Clark should get more goals being the focal point at Melbourne, Vickery's rubbish.

He was the focal point at Brisbane for a while. Had one or two good games but apart from that he was dreadful. Vickery is better than any KPF Carlton have.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Blatantly wrong on Vickery. You're so very bitter!

Wouldn't mind having him, though!

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Who knows

Clark I reckon is a bit like Ryder, a ruckman who has been played out of position and hit with the "versatile" tag, truth is he's a ruckman who gets lost anywhere else.

Vickery I reckon will be a player, but a few years off yet as with most blokes his size.

I reckon either team using them as the key target up forward in 2012 is gonna be very disappointed. Richmond have Reiwoldt though. Melbourne... Will Watts step up yet?

 

[Richo83]

This doesn't make sense to me. Care to explain?

True, it doesn't. I will say this though: Clark is a good two and a half years older than Vickery. He is also Melbourne's most senior KPP forward and currently, I'd say their best forward. So they'd be hoping Clark kicks a fair amount of goals and take the heat off Watts not only defender wise, but expectation wise. However, if say Clark kicks 30 goals, I'm not sure that takes the heat off Watts sufficiently enough. So I think Melbourne will more focused on Clark's performance than say Richmond are on Vickery's. If say Vickery kicks 30 goals, it's a step back, but he's still learning the game and Riewoldt has already established himself as the dominant forward of the team anyway. So I think if Vickery kicks 5-10 goals more than Clark, and say they're 30 to say 35-40, Melbourne will be disappointed. If it's say 40 to say 45-50, Melbourne wont be disappointed, but they wont be over the moon like Richmond would be. And regardless, when Maric retires, I expect Vickery to step up into the ruck anyway. Whereas I think Melbourne expect that job to be done by someone like say Gawn.

Ron, it'd be interesting to hear your thoughts about Vickery as a very tall forward. Do you think he'll cope, or do you think he might get figured out or struggle in future seasons?

 

[Richo83]

Who knows

Clark I reckon is a bit like Ryder, a ruckman who has been played out of position and hit with the "versatile" tag, truth is he's a ruckman who gets lost anywhere else.

Is it true that Ryder's natural position is CHB? If so, that is intriguing given they have two other capable ruckmen yet they suffered injuries to key backs last year, yet Ryder still played ruck regularly.

 

[Astro Bomber]

This has probably been mentioned before but, it depends on who has the better mid field and has better efficiency delivering into the forward 50. Being the secondary focus of the opposition defenders will also help. So Vickey for me.
i.e Who will kick more goals and who is the better forward is two different questions.

 

[LC_15]

Bullshit you would be on here spruiking Clark as a Messiah if Richmond got him. Don't try to fool yourself.


As for Miller, he was shocking for Melbourne for many years. It doesn't matter if he kicked 50 goals for Richmond last year, no Melbourne supporter would be disappointed he was given the ass.

Having half my family and some of my friends who are Melbourne supporters, they have said different. The only reason you're saying it is because you're the football equivalent of a biggot and as such completely anti richmond in every way. Whether you like it or not, there are Melbourne supporters who regret the decision, get your head out of your clacker.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Ron, it'd be interesting to hear your thoughts about Vickery as a very tall forward. Do you think he'll cope, or do you think he might get figured out or struggle in future seasons?

As with Ottens (remember "Leave him alone...all of you!"), always felt he was destined for the ruck and wouldn't make a career forward. He'll cope for a while, but I don't see him improving markedly on the 36 he kicked last year or ever being dominant up front. However the longer he does a serviceable job and we can delay the transition to full-time ruck, the better for him and us.

But if he shows the same improvement as he did in 2011, I'll have to eat my words.

Re Melbourne...viewed individually, they have a talented forward line and Clark may be used as a long target to bring the ball to ground for the likes of Davey, Green and Sylvia, with Watts being the preferred option only when he's advantaged.

 

[Bazzar]

True, it doesn't. I will say this though: Clark is a good two and a half years older than Vickery. He is also Melbourne's most senior KPP forward and currently, I'd say their best forward. So they'd be hoping Clark kicks a fair amount of goals and take the heat off Watts not only defender wise, but expectation wise. However, if say Clark kicks 30 goals, I'm not sure that takes the heat off Watts sufficiently enough. So I think Melbourne will more focused on Clark's performance than say Richmond are on Vickery's. If say Vickery kicks 30 goals, it's a step back, but he's still learning the game and Riewoldt has already established himself as the dominant forward of the team anyway. So I think if Vickery kicks 5-10 goals more than Clark, and say they're 30 to say 35-40, Melbourne will be disappointed. If it's say 40 to say 45-50, Melbourne wont be disappointed, but they wont be over the moon like Richmond would be. And regardless, when Maric retires, I expect Vickery to step up into the ruck anyway. Whereas I think Melbourne expect that job to be done by someone like say Gawn.

Clarke being Melbournes number one key forward (do the Dees supporters agree?) then its Clarke v Reiwoldt, then its Vickery v Watts? and Miller v who?

 

[00Stinger]

And as for Miller, thanks, he is the perfect big bodied foil for Jack and Big Vick.

I hope Miller does well. I always liked him, but how long can you wait for a guy to turn it around. Plus I think he is better suited to a team where he is the 3rd tall, not the number 1

Having half my family and some of my friends who are Melbourne supporters, they have said different. The only reason you're saying it is because you're the football equivalent of a biggot and as such completely anti richmond in every way. Whether you like it or not, there are Melbourne supporters who regret the decision, get your head out of your clacker.

Please go through my posts and re read them, carefully.

All I said was 'We needed a big bodied KPF and he was the only one avaliable'. What was wrong with that statement? Please enlighten me.

As for your family, how about waiting until the bloke has played for us before they write him off. How many KP players have been written off over the years before turning it around.

Clarke being Melbournes number one key forward (do the Dees supporters agree?) then its Clarke v Reiwoldt, then its Vickery v Watts? and Miller v who?

Jurrah