Player Watch Oscar Steene

Remove this Banner Ad

pz5151 said:
I tend to agree with the general sentiment of this one. I don’t think it’s worth drafting speculative long term ruck picks like this. You can pick them up later once they’re developed usually without much difficulty. It’s a spot on the list that could’ve been used in the mid season draft this year or for another potential young player in the National Draft
Click to expand...

The smart clubs do a bit of both. We have a good ( not perfect but good) mix of ruckmen on our list. Begg would have been the first go-to depth option this year but he too was injured at the same time as Cameron and Cox. In an ideal world Begg would have a few more years under his belt by now for a better demographic mix, but time will fix that. On top of that we have kpps who can ruck including frampton Johnson and mcstay. It’s a good mix and has proven successful this year, with Steene the long term strategy.

It’s a complete waste of a pick listing an emergency backup like Naismith, who would have denied frampton and Johnson the opportunity to show their versatility. It would be especially a waste given our talls are all returning soon.

Last year we had too many “ best 23” ruckmen and only the injury to Grundy saved Cox’s career from possibly fading into obscurity.

Edit…. We also have Kreuger who in theory at least is also another ruck option. It’s not as is we don’t have enough…. We have more than enough….. but all of Cameron cox mcstay frampton begg and Kreuger have had lengthy spells in the injury room. Even Steene has missed a few games lately
 
Last edited:
ipswichpies said:
I remember you were very anti Steene to start with and I see you have not changed your tune, I would say we survived very well without our 2 1st choice rucks because Frampton was than adequate as a ruck and did not have call on Oscar.

I am glad about because he would have been smash in the ruck and you would have been leading the charge about picking a developing ruck.forgive me also I do not see the point of another mature ruck when we have 3 already at a high standard. How many do we need 10 or every 2nd player to be a ruck.
Click to expand...

We shouldn’t have to rely on Frampton because we lack the KPD depth… if Dean and Kreuger were fit and available… then you might have a point. But there’s a chance neither of them will be able to contribute to a finals series this year

Just cause we got by and still managed to win those games with Frampton as ruck doesn’t mean we should want to enter a prelim with Frampton as ruck vs say Melbourne or Geelong… where we’d definitely need the two talls down back

And finally… I’ve got nothing against the kid Steene… so your powers of recollection are clearly fuzzy. I’m just saying they should’ve taken a mature ruck first… THEN used say a MSD pick on a kid like Steene
 
Last edited:
The thing that actually confuses me is how McMahon was deemed to be a lost cause despite looking like he had heaps of potential and having a completely undeveloped body yet Steene is seen as having more potential. Nothing against Steene but McMahon looked very impressive. Not sure if there was more to that story but all our smalls got more than 2 years despite showing less also
 

Log in to remove this ad.

whiskeytown said:
We shouldn’t have to rely on Frampton because we lack the KPD depth… if Dean and Kreuger were fit and available… then you might have a point. But there’s a chance neither of them will be able to contribute to a finals series this year

Just cause we got by and still managed to win those games with Frampton as ruck doesn’t mean we should want to enter a prelim with Frampton as ruck vs say Melbourne or Geelong… where we’d definitely need the two talls down back

And finally… I’ve got nothing against the kid Steene… so your powers of recollection are clearly fuzzy. I’m just saying they should’ve taken a mature ruck first… THEN used say a MSD pick on a kid like Steene
Click to expand...
I am certain that neither Dean or Krueger will be fit enough to compete in a finals series and the more I think about it I am not certain either will ever be but that,s bye the bye. L also agree that we need Frampton as 1 of our 2 talls against teams with 2 power forwards eg Carlton Geelong ect,

I think it was misfortune to be missing our 2 1st choice rucks plus the bloke we probably brought in to give either a chop out in the ruck but as it happened we were able to find a bloke who does it better than him anyway.

I think I am right in surmising you never wanted Steene, anyway I could tell that from your posting when we drafted him that never wanted him I saw his highlights and I wanted to draft him from the word go,I know he has had a chequered start but I still feel he was the right one to draft.

I have more faith in Oscar becoming 1st ruck than Aiden I think with his extra height he is more suited to ruck than Begg, thank you for the reply and have a good day.
 
pz5151 said:
The thing that actually confuses me is how McMahon was deemed to be a lost cause despite looking like he had heaps of potential and having a completely undeveloped body yet Steene is seen as having more potential. Nothing against Steene but McMahon looked very impressive. Not sure if there was more to that story but all our smalls got more than 2 years despite showing less also
Click to expand...
You are right we should of kept McMahon but not at the expense of not drafting Steene who is proper 1st ruck sized or will be when his body fills out as he has the height already and the leap.

I thought we made the error in keeping Kelly over Liam that was where we went wrong not in drafting Oscar.
 
Aussie pie said:
Good to hear, still it’s strange how there’s always 1 a year that the club doesn’t say anything about. Last year I think it was Tyler who the club just ignored saying anything about. I’m actually curious from a players privacy point of view whether the club has to get permission to publish if they are sick or injured, it is after all their health records.
Just curious
Click to expand...
I see where you're coming from but I do think illness falls into a different category. I don't really expect Wade to be saying "this player has been pissing out of his backside with gastro, we expect him to be right to go on the weekend though."

On a more serious note - imagine if a player takes leave due to mental health. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable if the club was providing a weekly update to the masses on my progress.

On SM-G981B using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
pz5151 said:
The thing that actually confuses me is how McMahon was deemed to be a lost cause despite looking like he had heaps of potential and having a completely undeveloped body yet Steene is seen as having more potential. Nothing against Steene but McMahon looked very impressive. Not sure if there was more to that story but all our smalls got more than 2 years despite showing less also
Click to expand...

McMahon was drafted under the old regime and Steene added under GW. I think it’s as simple as that; the players fill roles and bring attributes that fit the vision of those in charge at the time.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
McMahon was drafted under the old regime and Steene added under GW. I think it’s as simple as that; the players fill roles and bring attributes that fit the vision of those in charge at the time.
Click to expand...
I know what you are saying is correct but to be true what position do you see Kelly filling as he was also recruited under the old regime.
 
ipswichpies said:
I know what you are saying is correct but to be true what position do you see Kelly filling as he was also recruited under the old regime.
Click to expand...

I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter if he fits my vision, only GWs.

Personally I have always thought he’s a defender or bust. Given his dislike of physical contact, I would try Begg in that role as his likely only chance for success at AFL level, and move on from Kelly.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter if he fits my vision, only GWs.

Personally I have always thought he’s a defender or bust. Given his dislike of physical contact, I would try Begg in that role as his likely only chance for success at AFL level, and move on from Kelly.
Click to expand...
Agree about Begg too small for 1 st ruck and Key back is where they need to trial him,Kelly I think has had enough time to either come good or thanked for his service and I agree with the other bloke Liam over Kelly.
 
pz5151 said:
The thing that actually confuses me is how McMahon was deemed to be a lost cause despite looking like he had heaps of potential and having a completely undeveloped body yet Steene is seen as having more potential. Nothing against Steene but McMahon looked very impressive. Not sure if there was more to that story but all our smalls got more than 2 years despite showing less also
Click to expand...

We don't see what happens in the Inner Sanctum
 
The Royal Sampler said:
McMahon was drafted under the old regime and Steene added under GW. I think it’s as simple as that; the players fill roles and bring attributes that fit the vision of those in charge at the time.
Click to expand...

Same with Poulter.

He Suited Bucks Gameplan but not Fly's
 
ipswichpies said:
You are right we should of kept McMahon but not at the expense of not drafting Steene who is proper 1st ruck sized or will be when his body fills out as he has the height already and the leap.

I thought we made the error in keeping Kelly over Liam that was where we went wrong not in drafting Oscar.
Click to expand...

Or Dean over Liam for that matter.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ipswichpies said:
I know what you are saying is correct but to be true what position do you see Kelly filling as he was also recruited under the old regime.
Click to expand...

The problem we have now is that nobody at Collingwood has in their job description “Person who tells the CEO that his son who has only played 5 senior games in 5 seasons of footy, has been shuffled around pretty much every position on the field without success, really needs to be delisted”
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter if he fits my vision, only GWs.

Personally I have always thought he’s a defender or bust. Given his dislike of physical contact, I would try Begg in that role as his likely only chance for success at AFL level, and move on from Kelly.
Click to expand...
It's nice to think this, and ignore the likelihood that at least a certain amount of nepotism isn't at play at this point.
 
76woodenspooners said:
The problem we have now is that nobody at Collingwood has in their job description “Person who tells the CEO that his son who has only played 5 senior games in 5 seasons of footy, has been shuffled around pretty much every position on the field without success, really needs to be delisted”
Click to expand...

I’ve liked his move to the wing. Been playing the most consistent footy of his tenure. Just not sure if it’s enough to elevate his game to senior quality, regular senior selection, or earn him another year. Look forward to the remainder of 2023 and seeing which way it goes.
 
76woodenspooners said:
The problem we have now is that nobody at Collingwood has in their job description “Person who tells the CEO that his son who has only played 5 senior games in 5 seasons of footy, has been shuffled around pretty much every position on the field without success, really needs to be delisted”
Click to expand...
Josh Fraser can tell him. He's big enough.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
McMahon was drafted under the old regime and Steene added under GW. I think it’s as simple as that; the players fill roles and bring attributes that fit the vision of those in charge at the time.
Click to expand...
I thought McMahon was a natural forward w really good hands
Would love to know how the club saw him - was he going to take too long to develop as a true KPF? Did he lack defensive pressure?
 
ipswichpies said:
You are right we should of kept McMahon but not at the expense of not drafting Steene who is proper 1st ruck sized or will be when his body fills out as he has the height already and the leap.

I thought we made the error in keeping Kelly over Liam that was where we went wrong not in drafting Oscar.
Click to expand...
I think it's pretty clear why they delisted McMahon. The club aren't interested in non-physical talls. He wasn't competitive enough
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Oscar Steene

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top