Please Take Cotchin!!!!!!!

[Dk#1]

I so hope carlton take cotchin!!!
I have faith in aiske and hampson so i hope we take cotchin and have the best midfield in the league. Matthew seems to be more one of those players we dont need as he will not really fit in as i think 200 cm is to small these days to ruck. I would rather another freak mid and have judd, stevens , murphy , gibbs and cotchin in the mid dominating.!!!!

 

[jj1978]

The media have started their spin for the week in an attempt to sell papers... they've now cast doubt in people's minds where a week ago it was a fate accompli Kreuzer would be a Blue.

Oh well gives us something to talk about for the week.

 

[bloods01]

I so hope carlton take cotchin!!!
I have faith in aiske and hampson so i hope we take cotchin and have the best midfield in the league. Matthew seems to be more one of those players we dont need as he will not really fit in as i think 200 cm is to small these days to ruck. I would rather another freak mid and have judd, stevens , murphy , gibbs and cotchin in the mid dominating.!!!!

I think you might be in the minority with that view. Kruezer will go at number one. It's difficult distinguishing between players. One is a tall ruckman / forward whilst the other is a gun midfielder. Tought choice to make but as I said I think that Kruezer is a monty to go at one.

 

[lou73]

I so hope carlton take cotchin!!!
I have faith in aiske and hampson so i hope we take cotchin and have the best midfield in the league. Matthew seems to be more one of those players we dont need as he will not really fit in as i think 200 cm is to small these days to ruck. I would rather another freak mid and have judd, stevens , murphy , gibbs and cotchin in the mid dominating.!!!!

You cant pass up on a kid who is 199cm and can PLAY at CHF, CHB, any position.

 

[Marc Shmurf 3]

You cant pass up on a kid who is 199cm and can PLAY at CHF, CHB, any position.

Kosi Board

 

[XXX KINGS]

I hope we take Megan Gale

 

[Donstuie]

I so hope carlton take cotchin!!!
I have faith in aiske and hampson so i hope we take cotchin and have the best midfield in the league. Matthew seems to be more one of those players we dont need as he will not really fit in as i think 200 cm is to small these days to ruck. I would rather another freak mid and have judd, stevens , murphy , gibbs and cotchin in the mid dominating.!!!!

a)
Question: We have a midfield consisting of
Judd
Stevens
Murphy
Gibbs
Carazzo
Simpson
Hadley
Walker
Scotland
Bentick
Grigg
Russell
Jackson
Wiggins/Bannister (for special occasions)

In which position would you place Cotchin?

b)
Another question: There's a guy in the draft who is 2 meters tall, great vertical leap, can run as fast and as long as most midfielders, and can essentially play anywhere on the field and thus fill any gap that we may have from week to week. Now where would we put this guy? How about Ruck, or CHF, or CHB, or ruck-rover, or HFF.

Tell me then why option a) is better.

 

[Marc Shmurf 3]

a)
Question: We have a midfield consisting of
Judd
Stevens
Murphy
Gibbs
Carazzo
Simpson
Hadley
Walker
Scotland
Bentick
Grigg
Russell
Jackson
Wiggins/Bannister (for special occasions)

In which position would you place Cotchin?

b)
Another question: There's a guy in the draft who is 2 meters tall, great vertical leap, can run as fast and as long as most midfielders, and can essentially play anywhere on the field and thus fill any gap that we may have from week to week. Now where would we put this guy? How about Ruck, or CHF, or CHB, or ruck-rover, or HFF.

Tell me then why option a) is better.

a) use west coast as an example, their midfield won them a GF with a rubbish forward line and not so bad backline

b) he has never played CHF, CHB, HFF, he was a ruckman 1st and a resting FP 2nd. Dont assume that because he can run all day, speed like a midfielder and is 200 he can play anywhere.

 

[Donstuie]

a) use west coast as an example, their midfield won them a GF with a rubbish forward line and not so bad backline

b) he has never played CHF, CHB, HFF, he was a ruckman 1st and a resting FP 2nd. Dont assume that because he can run all day, speed like a midfielder and is 200 he can play anywhere.

a) West Coast also have the best ruckman in the league to give those guys first use of the ball. We have hAckland and a couple of kids who are VERY raw and have only been playing the game a short time. They also have a good balance of small midfield types and strong bodies to rotate through the middle, whereas we don't have those same resources in the strong-bodies department. But what we do have is more than enough midfielders to have a similar rotation. I don't recall WC having 13-14 small midfielders on the field every week.

Which brings me onto the Bulldogs. A team that has invested heavily on speed, but have left themselves in the cold through no KPPs (even players like Gilbee and Murphy aren't really KPPs), and thus getting caught out by stronger teams in 07. They thought that they could just recruit speedy athletes and run the opposition off their feet every week, and only now are they really doing anything about it (getting Hudson and going after Welsh). We need balance.

b) Who's to say he can't be developed to play other positions? The potential is certainly there, and with the right conditioning and training who knows what he can produce.

But again, my question stands. Why go for another small midfielder when we have them in ample supply when there is a standout big man who is regarded as the best player in the draft, and ticks all the boxes for exactly what we're looking for as a team? If we could have a second crack at Gumbleton or Leunberger, should we pass it up?

Why is Cotchin better in general terms, and more importantly, why is he better for our team?

 

[Silvagnis]

I hope we take Megan Gale

Is Megan Gale part Capybara?

 

[XXX KINGS]

Is Megan Gale part Capybara?

No - I'm not into inbreeding

 

[rota69]

No - I'm not into inbreeding

What is a capybara?

 

[XXX KINGS]

What is a capybara?

Gomez

 

[windows]

You cant pass up on a kid who is 199cm and can PLAY at CHF, CHB, any position.

He can play CHB? That's not accurate. And he is a long way from a proven CHF IMO. A long way.

 

[windows]

a)
Question: We have a midfield consisting of
Judd
Stevens
Murphy
Gibbs
Carazzo
Simpson
Hadley
Walker
Scotland
Bentick
Grigg
Russell
Jackson
Wiggins/Bannister (for special occasions)

In which position would you place Cotchin?

b)
Another question: There's a guy in the draft who is 2 meters tall, great vertical leap, can run as fast and as long as most midfielders, and can essentially play anywhere on the field and thus fill any gap that we may have from week to week. Now where would we put this guy? How about Ruck, or CHF, or CHB, or ruck-rover, or HFF.

Tell me then why option a) is better.

That is no more insightful than saying "we have a ruck division of Hampson, Acland, Cloke, and the 2 O'Hailipins, where do you see Kreuzer playing?"

Fact is, of your list above, we have 2 proven A Grade midfielders (Judd and Stevens) 2 we hope become A graders (Gibbs and Murphy), some very very solid contributors (Walker, Simpson, Carrazzo) and then a group of untried or risky (eg: Hadley) players. Nice mix. Not yet outstanding. Might be. Might not be. Thinking differently Stevens will probably drop to B grade within 3 years. Which will leave us with 1 certain top shelfer and 2 hopefully top shelfers. Chances are we will have 2 top shelfers (are we that sure BOTH Gibbs and Murph will be All-Australian? I'm not). And 5 very solid contributors (ie: I expect at least one of the untried/risky group to step up).

I'd like to take Cotchin. I think he will increase the probably we have 3 All Australian style midfielders. He also kicks goals (we don't have a great group of goal kicking midfielders) and he has better skills than all of them. IMO.

 

[windows]

a) West Coast also have the best ruckman in the league to give those guys first use of the ball. We have hAckland and a couple of kids who are VERY raw and have only been playing the game a short time. They also have a good balance of small midfield types and strong bodies to rotate through the middle, whereas we don't have those same resources in the strong-bodies department. But what we do have is more than enough midfielders to have a similar rotation. I don't recall WC having 13-14 small midfielders on the field every week.

Which brings me onto the Bulldogs. A team that has invested heavily on speed, but have left themselves in the cold through no KPPs (even players like Gilbee and Murphy aren't really KPPs), and thus getting caught out by stronger teams in 07. They thought that they could just recruit speedy athletes and run the opposition off their feet every week, and only now are they really doing anything about it (getting Hudson and going after Welsh). We need balance.

b) Who's to say he can't be developed to play other positions? The potential is certainly there, and with the right conditioning and training who knows what he can produce.

But again, my question stands. Why go for another small midfielder when we have them in ample supply when there is a standout big man who is regarded as the best player in the draft, and ticks all the boxes for exactly what we're looking for as a team? If we could have a second crack at Gumbleton or Leunberger, should we pass it up?

Why is Cotchin better in general terms, and more importantly, why is he better for our team?

Because he dominates games. He is a match winner. Kreuzer is not (IMO). Kreuzer is a wonderfully consistent highly competitive, go all day ruckman. Who can pinch hit out of a forward pocket. He can crumb his own ruck contest and run with the midfielders. BUT. I don't see him as a match winner.

I love this continual referal to Cox as if Judd etc rely on him. IF that logic is correct, then he is in for one god awful year regardless of whether we pick Kreuzer. Right? I don't think so. Stevens was terrific for us when he wasn't injured or being mauled by a tagger. He didn't need a ruckman for that. Ruckmen are more valuable if they can get the ball around the ground. They are useless if they get thrashed in ruck contests. That's all. But once you pit a 200cm jumper against another more often than not it is difficult to determine who is getting the upper hand in hitouts. Check the hitouts to advantage stats. Hitouts are often over-rated I think. The only time any side gets dominated in hitouts is if they have a midget (like we do) rucking. Those days are over. Hampson will not be dominated. At all. By anyone.

Cotchin is a match winner. That's why I'd prefer him.

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

That is no more insightful than saying "we have a ruck division of Hampson, Acland, Cloke, and the 2 O'Hailipins, where do you see Kreuzer playing?"

Fact is, of your list above, we have 2 proven A Grade midfielders (Judd and Stevens) 2 we hope become A graders (Gibbs and Murphy), some very very solid contributors (Walker, Simpson, Carrazzo) and then a group of untried or risky (eg: Hadley) players. Nice mix. Not yet outstanding. Might be. Might not be. Thinking differently Stevens will probably drop to B grade within 3 years. Which will leave us with 1 certain top shelfer and 2 hopefully top shelfers. Chances are we will have 2 top shelfers (are we that sure BOTH Gibbs and Murph will be All-Australian? I'm not). And 5 very solid contributors (ie: I expect at least one of the untried/risky group to step up).

I'd like to take Cotchin. I think he will increase the probably we have 3 All Australian style midfielders. He also kicks goals (we don't have a great group of goal kicking midfielders) and he has better skills than all of them. IMO.

Interesting comments Windows - i have been 50/50 for a while on these two, however I continue to lean in favour of Cotchin. I'd rather have Judd the 2nd, over a supposed Cox the 2nd

 

[bLuEbOy1984]

cotchin all the way

 

[blues4flag]

I so hope carlton take cotchin!!!
I have faith in aiske and hampson so i hope we take cotchin and have the best midfield in the league. Matthew seems to be more one of those players we dont need as he will not really fit in as i think 200 cm is to small these days to ruck. I would rather another freak mid and have judd, stevens , murphy , gibbs and cotchin in the mid dominating.!!!!

Ah well, I guess I'll go on the phone and inform the likes and Lade, White, Jolly and Charman that they should look at another occupation, as they're not tall enough to play ruck decently.

 

[Silvagnis]

Because he dominates games. He is a match winner. Kreuzer is not (IMO). Kreuzer is a wonderfully consistent highly competitive, go all day ruckman. Who can pinch hit out of a forward pocket. He can crumb his own ruck contest and run with the midfielders. BUT. I don't see him as a match winner.

Why was Blake dropped for King if ruckmen are not important?

That's an interesting argument when our only rucks are two projects in Aisake and Hampson.

Kreuzer is a lock.

I love this continual referal to Cox as if Judd etc rely on him. IF that logic is correct, then he is in for one god awful year regardless of whether we pick Kreuzer. Right? I don't think so. Stevens was terrific for us when he wasn't injured or being mauled by a tagger. He didn't need a ruckman for that. Ruckmen are more valuable if they can get the ball around the ground. They are useless if they get thrashed in ruck contests. That's all. But once you pit a 200cm jumper against another more often than not it is difficult to determine who is getting the upper hand in hitouts. Check the hitouts to advantage stats. Hitouts are often over-rated I think. The only time any side gets dominated in hitouts is if they have a midget (like we do) rucking. Those days are over. Hampson will not be dominated. At all. By anyone.

And you wouldn't take Leuenberger ahead of Cotchin in this draft?

Was Allan useless in his AA year when he constantly pushed forward to kick goals and pushed back to stop goals?

In the final when Kreuzer hurt himself, he ran from the centre to CHB in a blink of an eye to drop back into the hole to cut off a forward thrust.

He will do that at AFL level.

Cotchin is a match winner. That's why I'd prefer him.

Didn't Kreuzer carry them through a good part of the year because Cotchin only played seven games?

 

[T Rick]

a)
Question: We have a midfield consisting of
Judd
Stevens
Murphy
Gibbs
Carazzo
Simpson
Hadley
Walker
Scotland
Bentick
Grigg
Russell
Jackson
Wiggins/Bannister

I don't exactly see how you can talk about having

Bentick
Grigg
Russell
Jackson
Wiggins/Bannister

in your dominating midfield as these players would not make the best 22 in basically every other team

 

[micky_11]

Just my oppinion as a roos supporter.


Carlton cant afford to draft Cotchin, you have so many quality midfielders at your club: Judd, Stevens, Hadley, Scotland, Murphy, Gibbs, Grigg, Carazzo.

But your backline is shot, you have waite, but when ever your foward line is strugling he gets moved their.

You foward line has 2 decent players, Fev and Fisher, you got rid of your up and coming KP Foward to recieve Judd which is fine.

You are desperately in need of a Key Back, and Key Foward. I believe Hampson and Cloke can cope for a while.

If you draft Kruezuer it will be your best option out of him and cotchin, but really you needed a draft like last years where their were such good KPP like Gumbleton and Hansen and then Thorp, Reid and the Brown twins.

Hopefully a decent CHB falls to your 2nd pick

 

[windows]

Why was Blake dropped for King if ruckmen are not important?

That's an interesting argument when our only rucks are two projects in Aisake and Hampson.

Kreuzer is a lock.

And you wouldn't take Leuenberger ahead of Cotchin in this draft?

Was Allan useless in his AA year when he constantly pushed forward to kick goals and pushed back to stop goals?

In the final when Kreuzer hurt himself, he ran from the centre to CHB in a blink of an eye to drop back into the hole to cut off a forward thrust.

He will do that at AFL level.

Didn't Kreuzer carry them through a good part of the year because Cotchin only played seven games?

You bring up Allan as a good example? Really? Wow he is one of MY examples of why not to draft the ruckman if it is close between 2 players. He took a long time to develop, had a VERY short time at his peak, then became injury prone and dropped off badly. Allan's career was ordinary. You have his peak year as evidence. I cite his career. If Kreuzer's career maps Allan's and we draft him I will be MASSIVELY disappointed. You want me to wait 5 years for his 3 good years and then be annoyed with him when he starts dropping off? Josh Fraser anyone?

Your Blake vs. King argument is plain silly. That has nothing to do with draft selection. It has everything to do with picking the best team on the day. The same would apply for every position on the ground. But in King you give another example of a broken down ruckman. Keep ignoring the evidence at your peril. It just so happened that on GF day he was finally fit.

I think you have to be very careful taking a ruckman so early when other "lock" options are available. The game wears them down. You bring up King. Allan. Both had injury riddled careers. Both at Kreuzer's age were VERY promising. The game breaks them down.

You want to take a really good young ruckman when all the evidence suggests he will be no better as a player than Cotchin. If their TOP LEVEL output is the same then you can take this to the bank: Cotchin will have MORE TIME AT HIS TOP. You want to take Kreuzer because we need him. St. Kilda needed Kosi too. West Coast needed Gardiner. Bring up Lade as you may. Very average career as a ruckman until now. Cox? 3 great years. So far. Injuries are starting to creep in. Let's see how long he lasts at that peak. At his stage of career Gardiner was looking fantastic too. Primus? Knee after knee? Everitt is the only exception of recent times. Absolute top shelf and lasted a long time.

Those who choose to ignore history are doomed to repeat it. I am merely trying to point this out: many want to take Kreuzer purely because we need a ruckman (ie: the only reason why people prefer him to Cotchin). But then those same people ignore what often happens to ruckmen. It isn't random. It isn't bad luck. It isn't even frigging unlikely. Yes we need a ruckman. But I'd rather not over-capitalise on it by giving up number 1 when a gun like Cotchin is available.

 

[SS_Fury]

there are many more than handy midfielders every draft than there are QUALITY KPP players....it makes sense to take the latter

 

[gandaal]

there are many more than handy midfielders every draft than there are QUALITY KPP players....it makes sense to take the latter

Indeed. I'd take Luke Livingston over Daniel Kerr any day of the week.

The whole 'quality midfielders are a dime a dozen' argument is a complete myth.

Kruezer worries me. I'm no expert but to me his strengths in the U18s won't make get help make him a standout at AFL level while his weaknesses will be exploited if he's going to play as a AFL ruckman.