Player Watch Rory Laird

[Mismatched]

Jaensch is not fulfilling the contract he's picked to do .....run the lines, use his pace off HB and deliver with good footskills to forwards.

Hasn't done it at all IIRC ......staying at home and then can't stop his opponent .....so what value is he delivering that Laird, Smith, Martin, or for that fact even Douglas off HB

He's been tried and found wanting

Unfortunately all our small defenders are poor defenders, except perhaps Brwon, but he's young and inexperienced. Jaensch, Mackay and Reilly are all ideally suited to playing loose, but are being forced to play shut down roles that do not suit them. We've done this in an attemp to cover the fact that our ability to bring the ball out of defence is embarrassing, but it just doesnt work as these guys are too busy trying, and largely failing, to defend to provide any meaningful run and drive. Hopefully Laird gets a chance to prove himself in such a role, I see him as a bit of a young Edwards clone, small back pocket player with the potential to develop himself into a quality midfielder. Perhaps without quite the flair that Edwards showed as a youngster. Obviously if he turns out half as good as Edwards we've done okay.

 

[craig crowing]

Unfortunately all our small defenders are poor defenders, except perhaps Brwon, but he's young and inexperienced. Jaensch, Mackay and Reilly are all ideally suited to playing loose, but are being forced to play shut down roles that do not suit them. We've done this in an attemp to cover the fact that our ability to bring the ball out of defence is embarrassing, but it just doesnt work as these guys are too busy trying, and largely failing, to defend to provide any meaningful run and drive. Hopefully Laird gets a chance to prove himself in such a role, I see him as a bit of a young Edwards clone, small back pocket player with the potential to develop himself into a quality midfielder. Perhaps without quite the flair that Edwards showed as a youngster. Obviously if he turns out half as good as Edwards we've done okay.

Last year the 3 or so games I saw Laird was more impressive than Crouch as seems more skilful once gets ball and damaging with probably more touches .

 

[Coopers]

Crows website had brown listed at 172 the other day... You can never tell!

Oh no! That's just as big as Boomer Harvey!

Woe! Anguish!

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Smith has been named for WWT, so presumably Laird will be replacing Jaensch.

I'd be okay with this. No way Laird could be any worse than Jaensch defensively. Its a pretty shaming indictment on MJ that his spot is likely to be taken by a 19 year old. Full credit to Laird though. He's been in great SANFL form for a while and deserves a chance. I was pretty impressed with him in the NAB cup. He looks like one of those Danger-esque sort of players who just goes at the ball like a madman.

 

[cmndstab]

if there is one thing that the Port loss showed us, it is that young defenders can produce

I think it showed something more subtle. Young defenders, who perhaps haven't produced so much in the past, suddenly are able to produce when your midfield is firing.

Our midfield has been pretty woeful so far this year, and the two ends of the ground have looked worse as a direct result. Between the two 50m arcs is where the problems currently lie. Too many players out of form, too much being left to Thompson, Dangerfield and Sloane.

I'll gamble and say ......the odds are better as a rookie selection than a 3rd or 4th round pick

Strange what sudden death 12 month contracts do for your motivation .....no other explanation i can think off ?

I have an alternative explanation - recruiters overrate the talent still available in the third and fourth round.

In the third round, recruiters are still trying to pick the "40th best" player. The best available, where best is usually defined as having the least amount of weaknesses.

By the rookie draft, recruiters are generally recruiting players who have a standout feature or two, but also some major deficiencies. Port's Kane Mitchell is a perfect example. Reads the ball very well and is fast as lightning, but cannot kick to save his life.

The result is two-fold. Firstly these kinds of players are often a mile too good for the league level, and so they become somewhat overrated. They're not playing AFL to have their deficiencies exposed, but they're absolutely ripping up the league comp, so everyone thinks they're the "next big thing".

Secondly, being in a super-professional training environment occasionally helps them to develop their weaknesses to the stage where they are no longer real weaknesses. Not strengths, but just not devastating flaws in their game at AFL level anymore. Then suddenly you get an above-average player out of a rookie pick.

Personally, if I was a recruiter, I'd be going down the rookie draft approach from the third round forward. By that point I reckon you're much more likely to get an above average player from recruiting on maximum strength rather than minimum weakness.

 

[Cap]

That is an interesting theory cmndstab. So realistically under that thought pattern Laird was a projectplayer

 

[betterthanu]

That is an interesting theory cmndstab. So realistically under that thought pattern Laird was a projectplayer

But its hard to improve your deficiency when its height

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Oh no! That's just as big as Boomer Harvey!

Woe! Anguish!

And he goes alright.

How tall was Tyson Edwards?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Crows website had brown listed at 172 the other day... You can never tell!

With or without longstops...

 

[BUTTON 92]

And he goes alright.

How tall was Tyson Edwards?

180 cms

 

[cammo6556]

With or without longstops...

Id say the Browndog is taller than that... Im gonna go stalk our players with a tape measure...

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Personally, if I was a recruiter, I'd be going down the rookie draft approach from the third round forward. By that point I reckon you're much more likely to get an above average player from recruiting on maximum strength rather than minimum weakness.

couldn't agree more .....I'd suggest we did that this year, particularly with Atkins

Atkins has obvious talent, blind freddy can see it .....but he has massive ? marks
Normally he would have gone as a rookie

To counter that ....why then didn't any club take the punt as a rookie with Dale Garlett

Given failure rate with rookies and late draft picks .....cannot for life of me understand that one

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Congratulations to Rory Laird for getting selected to make his AFL debut Sunday.

 

[Vader]

couldn't agree more .....I'd suggest we did that this year, particularly with Atkins

Atkins has obvious talent, blind freddy can see it .....but he has massive ? marks
Normally he would have gone as a rookie

To counter that ....why then didn't any club take the punt as a rookie with Dale Garlett

Given failure rate with rookies and late draft picks .....cannot for life of me understand that one

Because the risks far, far, far outweighed any likely return.

You can fix a player's technique. You can't fix what's ingrained into their character.

 

[OrdinaryJoel]

Congrats to Rory Laird, who'll be debuting on Sunday!!!

 

[1990crow]

Because the risks far, far, far outweighed any likely return.

You can fix a player's technique. You can't fix what's ingrained into their character.

I don't subscribe to that at all. I think people deserve the opportunity to change given the right environment.

 

[Vader]

I don't subscribe to that at all. I think people deserve the opportunity to change given the right environment.

If he can prove, as Krakouer did, that he is deserving of another chance - then sure. AFL clubs are not charity cases and it's not up to them to sort out the problems of players who aren't even on their team lists.

 

[BigLefty]

I don't subscribe to that at all. I think people deserve the opportunity to change given the right environment.

agreed.

i also think the "risk" is overrated too. whats the odds a 4th round pick makes it? stuff all anyway.
i think you can easily put a positive spin on the kid even if he does stuff up.

there's 2 outcomes.

1. he gets into the system and flourishes with the right guidance and becomes a gun.
2. he gets into trouble, you cut him loose and advertise the fact you gave a kid a chance that no-one else would.

i dont see the downside in picking a kid like that.

anyway. GO RORY!

 

[Vader]

agreed.

i also think the "risk" is overrated too. whats the odds a 4th round pick makes it? stuff all anyway.
i think you can easily put a positive spin on the kid even if he does stuff up.

there's 2 outcomes.

1. he gets into the system and flourishes with the right guidance and becomes a gun.
2. he gets into trouble, you cut him loose and advertise the fact you gave a kid a chance that no-one else would.

i dont see the downside in picking a kid like that.

anyway. GO RORY!

You don't see the downside in the club losing sponsors, when a kid they drafted - despite knowing he was trouble - does exactly what his reputation says he would?

 

[spenze]

I don't subscribe to that at all. I think people deserve the opportunity to change given the right environment.

There is a difference between being idealistic and realistic.

Garlett would have been a massive player for us but the fact that no team drafted him and no team rookie drafted him means that he needs to conform to standards.

I remember reading that even a rookie player cost a club 250k, hate to waste it on a drinking, smoking midfielder if that was the case.

I would also say ( without directing at you) those who complain about Vince and then want the club to risk it on Dale Garlett.....

 

[cmndstab]

That is an interesting theory cmndstab. So realistically under that thought pattern Laird was a projectplayer

Pretty much. The question with Laird was whether he could develop an AFL body without losing his strengths, or alternatively, if he could retain (roughly) his body-size and still have an impact at AFL level. I guess we're yet to see if it's successful, but I'd rather us have a crack at someone who has great footy smarts but is lacking size, or hell, someone with great size but lacking footy smarts, rather than going for someone who is just really average at both.

 

[Mismatched]

Last year the 3 or so games I saw Laird was more impressive than Crouch as seems more skilful once gets ball and damaging with probably more touches .

Crouch needs to use his kick more often as I think it's a massive weapon and he just doesn't realise it yet? Once he does he'll develop into an absolute gun.

 

[BigLefty]

You don't see the downside in the club losing sponsors, when a kid they drafted - despite knowing he was trouble - does exactly what his reputation says he would?

i have no evidence that supports this, but i think the loss of sponsors threat is way overstated.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Pretty much. The question with Laird was whether he could develop an AFL body without losing his strengths, or alternatively, if he could retain (roughly) his body-size and still have an impact at AFL level. I guess we're yet to see if it's successful, but I'd rather us have a crack at someone who has great footy smarts but is lacking size, or hell, someone with great size but lacking footy smarts, rather than going for someone who is just really average at both.

Chris Schmidt board. I like the strand of analysis and agree completely.

 

[Vader]

i have no evidence that supports this, but i think the loss of sponsors threat is way overstated.

It's happened before - and would be likely to happen to any club that drafted a serial offender like Garlett.