Problem. No club greats in current team.

[Eagle87]

Lewis was one of Malthouse's failures as coach imo. Chris was arguably our most naturally creative midfielders but lacked the defensive side to his game that Mick demanded, as a result he was played more as a half forward / forward pocket which allowed sides to lock down on him more than they would have been able to had he been running through the middle.

Maybe. Personally, for probably very good reasons, I don't think Lewis had the mental make-up to be THE guy. It's interesting that he's rated so highly, his best was outstanding and I loved watching him but his output v Talent was that of a guy who didn't realise his full potential... or maybe he did given he couldn't quite cope with some (unreasonable) pressures.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Once again you fail to grasp actual football and just see stats...

Fido was great in home & away games when we were either really poor (Judge years) or struggling to scrape into the 8. When the real pressure was applied in 6 finals, he was completely and utterly hopeless.

If you rate volume over quality and impact then, well it explains a lot of things including your inability to really put the boot into Matt.

He's a Brownlow medallist, must be a walk up....

Fido was a flat track bully. A good one. Many poor sides have guys who track up stats/goals/whatever... I wanted Fido in the 2005 Grand Final but I know why Woosh wasnt fussed or prepared to take the risk. And it wasn't cos Fido was a great goal scorer. He just looked at his record. When it mattered.

Very good player, not a champion. Heady was. Heady also gave you flexibility. He could play tall, small and midfield. Better player ....

If you rate quality and impact over volume then why not have Glendinning at CHF and Rob Wiley in the midfield? They're two of the best footballers to have pulled on an Eagles jumper.

I'm not questioning Heady's ability. He would be a lock for all time in that team if injuries hadn't cost him about 100 extra games. But Turley would be in there if he hadn't gone walkabout in 1993 and never fully come back. Lee Walker would probably be at CHF if his body wasn't made of crepe paper.

The bottom line is we're just using different criteria. Not sure why you feel the need to make it into a personal attack. Except that you're basically unable to have a discussion without attempting to belittle the other person...

 

[Keys]

Maybe. Personally, for probably very good reasons, I don't think Lewis had the mental make-up to be THE guy. It's interesting that he's rated so highly, his best was outstanding and I loved watching him but his output v Talent was that of a guy who didn't realise his full potential... or maybe he did given he couldn't quite cope with some (unreasonable) pressures.

Agree that he didn't reach his full potential - that 1990 finals series he was electric but he never really got to that level again in part I believe because Malthouse left him forward too much, remembering back then forwards didn't push into the midfield as regularly as they do now and would spend more time inside the F50

 

[Natho]

Hurn, Darling, Lecca, Easy and Nic are all big chances

 

[ronpingwins]

If you rate quality and impact over volume then why not have Glendinning at CHF and Rob Wiley in the midfield? They're two of the best footballers to have pulled on an Eagles jumper.

I'm not questioning Heady's ability. He would be a lock for all time in that team if injuries hadn't cost him about 100 extra games. But Turley would be in there if he hadn't gone walkabout in 1993 and never fully come back. Lee Walker would probably be at CHF if his body wasn't made of crepe paper.

The bottom line is we're just using different criteria. Not sure why you feel the need to make it into a personal attack. Except that you're basically unable to have a discussion without attempting to belittle the other person...

This is the answer. Heady probably should have won the Norm Smith, but this isn't the complete criteria, otherwise you'd just mix the 92 and 06 side. Heady was great, but inconsistent. He played 156 games for 237 goals. LeCras has played 130 for 294 goals. LeCras has played significant midfield time, as much as Heady did. Heady had more opportunity to impact big games, which he did, but judging solely from overall achievement across their career, LeCras has, or at least will soon overtake Heady and hasn't embarrassed himself in finals like fido.

 

[jod23]

I'd doubt your older, there's no doubt your struggling in this matter.

Heady was better than Phil Matera, Heady was better than Lecca. So if Darling threatens someone it's more likely Lecca.

In fact once Mick decided Lewis was a more or less permanent half forward, you could argue Heady was better than Lewis. Don't get me wrong, I love Lewis, but the young guy that was going to take the world by storm in 1990 never fully delivered on that and he became a very very good half forward primarily without Jobbys marking. Lewis was great ahs certainly some of that early stuff was ahead but as half forwards I'd probably be more confident trusting Heady when the game needed someone to take over.

He was the player who turned the tide in the 1992 flag, arguably the Norm Smith could have gone to him. Mick moving him into the middle turned the game and Jobby never quite understand why he didn't get more midfield time across his career.

So for clarity, Heady is ahead of Phil Matera, Lecca, White and Evans. Fido was a very good player but if I was picking between the 2, I know who would stand up in the biggest games and create a matchup problem due to his marking strength coupled with ground level play and then could turn a game in the middle.... Matera was a very good small forward who was

Matera played 6 finals for 1 goal and was awful in all of them.

Your username suggests im easily older than you.

Anyways I rate Heady, I really do. Heady wasnt a better player than Lewis though. Lewis was supremely gifted even though he never managed to show that consistently, Lewis' best though far outweighs Heady's.

You go on about who was better in finals but Heady played in some great teams and played in a lot of finals. Lecca and Darling havent really had the chance. Phil Matera too was never in sides good enough to compete in finals. He was reaching the end just as we were getting really good in 05 through 07.

Besides, you are arguing my point. Im with you on this. This is why I created the thread. I originally said that no current players would crack into our all time team and that is the problem. We have no top line players.

I said the closest would Naitanui, Kennedy, LeCras and Darling and none of those are locks. It's a massive concern. We have no top end talent.

 

[Dark Sharks]

Your username suggests im easily older than you.

Nah Eagle87 is an old kent.

 

[Eagle87]

If you rate quality and impact over volume then why not have Glendinning at CHF and Rob Wiley in the midfield? They're two of the best footballers to have pulled on an Eagles jumper.

I'm not questioning Heady's ability. He would be a lock for all time in that team if injuries hadn't cost him about 100 extra games. But Turley would be in there if he hadn't gone walkabout in 1993 and never fully come back. Lee Walker would probably be at CHF if his body wasn't made of crepe paper.

The bottom line is we're just using different criteria. Not sure why you feel the need to make it into a personal attack. Except that you're basically unable to have a discussion without attempting to belittle the other person...

The personal attack is on your ability to grasp football... so it's in context ... I honestly reckon you're borderline clueless in various areas as illustrated by the strawmen you've thrown into this response. Actually check that, they actually show an inability for critical thought and logic, which given your chosen career is funny...

Heady is better than the players I listed, not just based on what he might have been, but what he actually did, for us, particularly when it mattered.

If you want to get hard about blokes who filed up a stats sheet and have no record at all at doing it when it counts you further emphasise your cluelessness. Calling it different criteria is nonsense. The criteria is actual performances for our club leading to actual success. Not too hard I'd have thought.

Sco? Wiley? Walker? FFS fivey, lift or just give up - as you've needed to do almost as long as your beloved Matt.

By the way, perpetually taking shots at a bloke because you perceive he takes shots is hypocritical. You're out of your depth talking footy with me, and we both know it

 

[Eagle87]

This is the answer. Heady probably should have won the Norm Smith, but this isn't the complete criteria, otherwise you'd just mix the 92 and 06 side. Heady was great, but inconsistent. He played 156 games for 237 goals. LeCras has played 130 for 294 goals. LeCras has played significant midfield time, as much as Heady did. Heady had more opportunity to impact big games, which he did, but judging solely from overall achievement across their career, LeCras has, or at least will soon overtake Heady and hasn't embarrassed himself in finals like fido.

Nonsense. Lecca has copped loss of criticism for inconsistency, an unwillingness to chase ore be defensive at times and, until this year an inability to federally impact games from midfield.

Heady was very good in all those areas. He also played in a different era in a different role. If you reckon he didn't impact games any more than Lecca through midfield you're either young or you have a faulty memory.

And you can't so easily discount the big games thing. I mean that's silly. There isn't a significant member of the team from 1990-2003 that would choose Lecca. Heady was arguably our toughest player in that era AND he routinely stood up when it mattered. AND he basically turned a GF for us. Those count way more than no finals form and 0.7 goals a game (or whatever) from a guy who wasn't paying alongside a Sumich. Kicking an extra half goal when you are often the main target in a poor side is nothing at all to hang your hat on....

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

If you want to get hard about blokes who filed up a stats sheet and have no record at all at doing it when it counts you further emphasise your cluelessness. Calling it different criteria is nonsense. The criteria is actual performances for our club leading to actual success. Not too hard I'd have thought.

Sorry, who exactly am I "getting hard" about? All I'm doing is suggesting Phil Matera might last a bit longer in this hypothetical side than Heady.

And you've apparently decided on the "leading to actual success" part of the criteria. I would have thought the "actual performances for our club" part would be the dominating factor. Performances in finals should have some weighting but you're making it a prerequisite.

 

[Eagle87]

Your username suggests im easily older than you.

Anyways I rate Heady, I really do. Heady wasnt a better player than Lewis though. Lewis was supremely gifted even though he never managed to show that consistently, Lewis' best though far outweighs Heady's.

You go on about who was better in finals but Heady played in some great teams and played in a lot of finals. Lecca and Darling havent really had the chance. Phil Matera too was never in sides good enough to compete in finals. He was reaching the end just as we were getting really good in 05 through 07.

Besides, you are arguing my point. Im with you on this. This is why I created the thread. I originally said that no current players would crack into our all time team and that is the problem. We have no top line players.

I said the closest would Naitanui, Kennedy, LeCras and Darling and none of those are locks. It's a massive concern. We have no top end talent.

Mate I'm Eagle87 cos I was there at the first game as a note holder. Let's just say I'd have been in Dermies draft year if there was a draft back then

 

[SpaceClef]

. Calling it different criteria is nonsense. The criteria is actual performances for our club leading to actual success. Not too hard I'd have thought.

How does one measure actual performance leading to actual success? Sounds like pretty ambiguous criteria to me.

 

[Eagle87]

Sorry, who exactly am I "getting hard" about? All I'm doing is suggesting Phil Matera might last a bit longer in this hypothetical side than Heady.

And you've apparently decided on the "leading to actual success" part of the criteria. I would have thought the "actual performances for our club" part would be the dominating factor. Performances in finals should have some weighting but you're making it a prerequisite.

I'm saying that it gets a significant weighting. That's an underlying criteria in my assessment of every sportsman in any sport. How did they perform when it counted.

Phil Matera gets a huge markdown on that criteria. He was genuinely awful.

Heady played his best at the biggest moments in the biggest games almost routinely.

I always remember a stat comparing Larry Bird v Tom Chambers in about 1990 when they had similar stats .. Chambers was a decent to good player... But stats were a flawed basis for a comparison. One is one of the best of all time, the other a decent player largely forgotten once his era passed. The difference was what they did when it counted, did they make others better, did they win.

Actual performances that don't take account of such things result in blokes like Priddis looking half decent based on all manner of statistical measures. But one needs the eye test and the balls test. They are tougher to measure but more important IMO.

You are "getting hard" about Fido and Lecca by elevating stats as THE measure of "actually performances for our club".

 

[Eagle87]

How does one measure actual performance leading to actual success? Sounds like pretty ambiguous criteria to me.

You watch and you notice.

Hence the fundamental flaw in stats.

EDIT: I mean Lecca kicking a lovely 5 v GWS isn't quite the same as Heady kicking 4 in an away final in our 5th road game in about 7 weeks....

Statistically though Lecca has him covered.

It's like in 1989 when statistically Dermie had a limited GF. Arguably his effort in that game lifted his teammates to the win. But hey, those stats, let's kill actual judgement...

 

[SpaceClef]

You watch and you notice.

Hence the fundamental flaw in stats.

So it's just an argument over the validity of stats. But surely putting team success into the criteria sways it toward players who were in stronger sides

 

[Eagle87]

So it's just an argument over the validity of stats. But surely putting team success into the criteria sways it toward players who were in stronger sides

Yes & No.

I'm not arguing for Steven Armstrong over Fido

But in looking at players from different eras, playing different roles under different systems, stats are flawed.

I mean Roo only had 17 possessions in 1992 GF ... not much for a wingman in a dominant side ... defensively he wasn't great given the amount of ball and shots on goal Bairstow had....

But sometimes stats don't quite provide context.

When you're a good side, you play more big games. More games when the opposition is doing everything they can to stop you. Middling or poor sides get IMO more games where teams give you stuff, cos they've got you covered anyway....

In those biggest games Heady stood up routinely. Lecca?-who knows. Fido? Hopeless.

That has to count.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I'm saying that it gets a significant weighting. That's an underlying criteria in my assessment of every sportsman in any sport. How did they perform when it counted.

Phil Matera gets a huge markdown on that criteria. He was genuinely awful.

Heady played his best at the biggest moments in the biggest games almost routinely.

I always remember a stat comparing Larry Bird v Tom Chambers in about 1990 when they had similar stats .. Chambers was a decent to good player... But stats were a beneficial basis for a comparison. One is one of the best of all time, the other a decent player largely forgotten one his era passed. The difference was what they did when it counted, did they make others better, did they win.

Actual performances that don't take account of such things result in blokes like Priddis looking half decent based on all manner of statistical measures. But one needs the eye test and the balls test. They are tougher to measure but more important IMO.

You are "getting hard" about Fido and Lecca by elevating stats as THE measure of "actually performances for our club".

I'm not elevating stats as "THE measure". I'm just giving "big game performance" less of a weighting than you. Which is why I said I'd have LeCras in a pocket ahead of Tony Evans, which notably you haven't said a peep about despite Evans also being a big-time finals performer.

Which leads me to assume you've clearly got some personal connection to Heady which is causing you to see red at my obviously heinous suggestion that he may possibly get squeezed out of a hypothetical all-time best 22 at some point in the future. Clearly that prospect is totally impossible and he is immovable due to his clear superiority based on your chosen criteria and weighting, which is of course the only possible method of assessment that can be countenanced as you are the suppository of all wisdom...

 

[Eagle87]

I'm not elevating stats as "THE measure". I'm just giving "big game performance" less of a weighting than you. Which is why I said I'd have LeCras in a pocket ahead of Tony Evans, which notably you haven't said a peep about despite Evans also being a big-time finals performer.

Which leads me to assume you've clearly got some personal connection to Heady which is causing you to see red at my obviously heinous suggestion that he may possibly get squeezed out of a hypothetical all-time best 22 at some point in the future. Clearly that prospect is totally impossible and he is immovable due to his clear superiority based on your chosen criteria and weighting, which is of course the only possible method of assessment that can be countenanced as you are the suppository of all wisdom...

I like Evans. And he was a good player who elevated in big games. But he wasn't at Headys level. He was just a good solid player. Like Stinger if he'd had a few big finals. So Evans was elevated from the pack by those games. Heady was a very good player, a borderline Top 20 just on talent, who elevated based on stellar big game performances.

I have no particular connection to Jobby, I know him but I know most of the side from that era. It's entirely possible that he could eventually not be in our best 22 side. But if it's at the hands of Phil Matera it'll be because blokes like you, who don't grasp the game properly, have let stats trump actual performance....

Nice sledge at the end. Very non mod of you. Time to hang em up Fivey

 

[eaglesnutcase]

Once again you fail to grasp actual football and just see stats...

Fido was great in home & away games when we were either really poor (Judge years) or struggling to scrape into the 8. When the real pressure was applied in 6 finals, he was completely and utterly hopeless.

If you rate volume over quality and impact then, well it explains a lot of things including your inability to really put the boot into Matt.

He's a Brownlow medallist, must be a walk up....

Fido was a flat track bully. A good one. Many poor sides have guys who track up stats/goals/whatever... I wanted Fido in the 2005 Grand Final but I know why Woosh wasnt fussed or prepared to take the risk. And it wasn't cos Fido was a great goal scorer. He just looked at his record. When it mattered.

Very good player, not a champion. Heady was. Heady also gave you flexibility. He could play tall, small and midfield. Better player ....

Phil Matera was close to the best forward pocket ive ever seen.

 

[Eagle87]

Phil Matera was close to the best forward pocket ive ever seen.

How was he in those 6 finals?

 

[eaglesnutcase]

Phil Matera was close to the best forward pocket ive ever seen.

Heady was tough and brave but not particularly quick and generally had to be kicking from well in side 50 to make the distance. chris Lewis was insanely talented,and tough;he had to be with all the shit he copped,Evans was tough and a big game player,Lecca/lazy ,but if Phil Matera could play now at the feet of Kennedy,Darling,Lycett and Nicnat instead of being a 3ft 11 full forward,he would be unstoppable.Only weakness was the distance factor.Speed ,left foot and defensive pressure were superb.

 

[Eagle87]

Heady was tough and brave but not particularly quick and generally had to be kicking from well in side 50 to make the distance. chris Lewis was insanely talented,and tough;he had to be with all the shit he copped,Evans was tough and a big game player,Lecca/lazy ,but if Phil Matera could play now at the feet of Kennedy,Darling,Lycett and Nicnat instead of being a 3ft 11 full forward,he would be unstoppable.Only weakness was the distance factor.Speed ,left foot and defensive pressure were superb.

Heady had decent pace and good kicking until the last couple of years. So I'll assume you're young.

Phil Matera was way less effective in pressure games where space is routinely closed down. He benefited enormously from Subi oval and from 2 separate issues. Being the focal point and a couple of years where Woosh focused on a running offensive style - his first couple of years.

He had no impact in midfield and was absolutely a one position player. Heady played half forward, lead up forward, midfield, wing and half back at different times. His ball use in space was fantastic and his marking was better than any non KP forward that's played for us to date - that comes to mind anyway.

Comparing them as forward pockets undersells Heady.

Phil could play, but was flawed.

 

[Reminiscence]

No greats are in the current team because:
no.1 Cox retired
and No.2 Embley retired.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

No greats are in the current team because:
no.1 Cox retired
and No.2 Embley retired.

Glassy?

 

[eaglesnutcase]

Heady had decent pace and good kicking until the last couple of years. So I'll assume you're young.

Phil Matera was way less effective in pressure games where space is routinely closed down. He benefited enormously from Subi oval and from 2 separate issues. Being the focal point and a couple of years where Woosh focused on a running offensive style - his first couple of years.

He had no impact in midfield and was absolutely a one position player. Heady played half forward, lead up forward, midfield, wing and half back at different times. His ball use in space was fantastic and his marking was better than any non KP forward that's played for us to date - that comes to mind anyway.

Comparing them as forward pockets undersells Heady.

Phil could play, but was flawed.

He may have been a one position player but i did say he was the best forward pocket id seen.That in my book is one position.Im no spring chicken,but i do know Heady was not great on the pace. brave as they come sometimes to the point of stupidity. keep in mind my other point;Heady was surrounded by a team of stars,who surrounded Matera?the fact that he was virtually a defacto fullforward speaks for itself.