Roast Stephen Hill

Remove this Banner Ad

I tend to agree with Clay on this one. He's nowhere near the outside player people perceive him to be it seems. Like Judd or Abblett (I use the comparison loosely) he is explosive in the clinches and seems to thrive more on the contested ball more, slipping in and out of congestion with the ball, rather than standing flat footed on the outside not particularly wanting a handball out to him because his jumper's being held (so he doesn't bother).
 
He's not inside.

Not one bit. Completely disagree with Clay on this one.

He's learning the craft, what he is exceptional at is tagging, but when a player has that blistering pace and boot it's hard to drag yourself to use the player in their natural role.

He will benefit from Barlow and Mundy doing what he can't and feeding him the pill.

I'd still love to see Hill replace a spud like Crowley and be used as a run with player.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bengraham said:
He's not inside.

Not one bit. Completely disagree with Clay on this one.

He's learning the craft, what he is exceptional at is tagging, but when a player has that blistering pace and boot it's hard to drag yourself to use the player in their natural role.

He will benefit from Barlow and Mundy doing what he can't and feeding him the pill.

I'd still love to see Hill replace a spud like Crowley and be used as a run with player.
Click to expand...

I'd really like to see hilly go head-to-head with Marc Murphy in round 5.
 
Bengraham said:
He's not inside.

Not one bit. Completely disagree with Clay on this one.

He's learning the craft, what he is exceptional at is tagging, but when a player has that blistering pace and boot it's hard to drag yourself to use the player in their natural role.

He will benefit from Barlow and Mundy doing what he can't and feeding him the pill.

I'd still love to see Hill replace a spud like Crowley and be used as a run with player.
Click to expand...
12 contested possessions and 9 clearances in a half say otherwise.

Gary Ablett Jnr was a receiving half forward flanker for his first four years.

Hill as a run with player is utterly stupid, almost as dumb as your Tom Swift call.
 
Clay Davis said:
12 contested possessions and 9 clearances in a half say otherwise.

Gary Ablett Jnr was a receiving half forward flanker for his first four years.

Hill as a run with player is utterly stupid, almost as dumb as your Tom Swift call.
Click to expand...

Nice cheapshot at the end there, I happened to watch Tom play from the age of 14 and he was rightly identified as an elite talent.

Injuries have destroyed his confidence in his movements and have absolutely massacred his kicking action, the inability to properly extend one of your legs will do that to you.

Neither here nor there in this thread though.

Again, like Swift I happened to watch Hill as he came through at junior level.

His talents were obvious, he enjoys the challenge of stopping another player, he thrives on it, for whatever reason he doesnt seem to have the same application when he is given responsibility to simply hunt the ball.

Hill came through the ranks honing his craft as a tagger, at Colts level it is the boys who are either bigger or faster than the others who are guns.

Hill's kicking, surprisingly wasnt that flash in the underage levels, it's come along way, what he has always had is a pretty big tank and great acceleration.

He constantly hung off the best at Colts level, then carried that into WAFL senior ranks impressing our former assistant no end.

It was that ability to apply himself to a very specific task, with discipline and consistent intensity that made him stand out to our club.

Then he went to draft camp and his agility and sprinting results magically transformed into a certain outside star and the next Peter Matera.

Call me crazy, but I think players thrive when they are employed in their natural roles.
 
Bengraham said:
Nice cheapshot at the end there, I happened to watch Tom play from the age of 14 and he was rightly identified as an elite talent.

Injuries have destroyed his confidence in his movements and have absolutely massacred his kicking action, the inability to properly extend one of your legs will do that to you.

Neither here nor there in this thread though.

Again, like Swift I happened to watch Hill as he came through at junior level.

His talents were obvious, he enjoys the challenge of stopping another player, he thrives on it, for whatever reason he doesnt seem to have the same application when he is given responsibility to simply hunt the ball.

Hill came through the ranks honing his craft as a tagger, at Colts level it is the boys who are either bigger or faster than the others who are guns.

Hill's kicking, surprisingly wasnt that flash in the underage levels, it's come along way, what he has always had is a pretty big tank and great acceleration.

He constantly hung off the best at Colts level, then carried that into WAFL senior ranks impressing our former assistant no end.

It was that ability to apply himself to a very specific task, with discipline and consistent intensity that made him stand out to our club.

Then he went to draft camp and his agility and sprinting results magically transformed into a certain outside star and the next Peter Matera.

Call me crazy, but I think players thrive when they are employed in their natural roles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're on the ball

How you feeling about those Swift & Scully calls? Just give up. Players change from what they were like in junior grades, which you conveniently ignored until it was too late. Hill's efforts when on ball at AFL level are far more indicative than whatever you saw at Colts. Iif you even saw them at all. You're the Freo version of Embers.
 
A shame Black ain't playing, hilly could get a tagging job - front row seats at the contest and a football lesson from the best.
 
Clay Davis said:
Yeah, you're on the ball

How you feeling about those Swift & Scully calls? Just give up. Players change from what they were like in junior grades, which you conveniently ignored until it was too late. Hill's efforts when on ball at AFL level are far more indicative than whatever you saw at Colts. Iif you even saw them at all. You're the Freo version of Embers.
Click to expand...

Lol.

You're writing off Scully 32 games into his career coming back from a degenerative knee injury?

That takes guts.

It's ok, I'll continue to follow junior football, assess players on their strengths and weaknesses and try to extrapolate the influence they're likely to have over the course of their careers.

You keep being the bloke who waits for the chips to fall an then say I told you so.

I don't think Hill is a natural ball winner, I don't think he's a hunter.

I think he is better served playing to his strengths.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bengraham said:
Lol.

You're writing off Scully 32 games into his career coming back from a degenerative knee injury?

That takes guts.
Click to expand...

I'm not writing off anything. I just don't think he's the next Hird/Voss/Buckley.

It's ok, I'll continue to follow junior football, assess players on their strengths and weaknesses and try to extrapolate the influence they're likely to have over the course of their careers.

You keep being the bloke who waits for the chips to fall an then say I told you so.
Click to expand...

Cool, so if you're so studious on watching junior footy, why did you rate Scully ahead of Fyfe? Why was Fyfe not the next Hird of that triumvirate? Or do you just rate things on the current flavour of the month and go with the flow?

I don't Hill is a natural ball winner, I don't think he's a hunter.

I think he I better served playing to his strengths.
Click to expand...

You don't? So I guess you missed the weekend's match. If you think his strengths are being a rich man's Crowley then I think you need to get back to stroking Eagles players on the main board and should probably ask the mods about reviving your Trump alias.

I rate players on AFL level ability. What they did in juniors is meaningless come their debut.
 
Bengraham said:
Lol.

You're writing off Scully 32 games into his career coming back from a degenerative knee injury?

That takes guts.

It's ok, I'll continue to follow junior football, assess players on their strengths and weaknesses and try to extrapolate the influence they're likely to have over the course of their careers.

You keep being the bloke who waits for the chips to fall an then say I told you so.

I don't think Hill is a natural ball winner, I don't think he's a hunter.

I think he is better served playing to his strengths.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, he's a master at writing off players. Anyone who knows anything about Footy knows that Tom Scully will be a first class player.
 
yakka man said:
Don't worry, he's a master at writing off players. Anyone who knows anything about Footy knows that Tom Scully will be a first class player.
Click to expand...
As good as Hird, Voss, Buckley? Please. It's called perspective. Scully needs to do a lot to be considered even as good as Fyfe. To me he's on track to being the next Scott West.
 
Ok Clay, seems as though we can do away with the recruiters and just play whoever and if they do ok, keep them, if not cut them.

List turnover should be pretty healthy with that thinking.

Oh, and I've consistently stated that I believed Fyfe would be the best of our lot.

You seem to be itching for a biff, good luck to you.

I don't think Hill has ever consistently demonstrated the ability to hunt the ball and rack up the numbers inside mids of any quality are capable of.

Enjoy your teeth gnashing.
 
I remember surprising a mate by saying that Hill was a Brett Kirk type, but with explosive & silky skills.
Of course we haven't seen deeds comparable to Kirk, but the way Hill can work inside & on a target, reminded me of that great former player.
 
Bengraham said:
Ok Clay, seems as though we can do away with the recruiters and just play whoever and if they do ok, keep them, if not cut them.

List turnover should be pretty healthy with that thinking.

Oh, and I've consistently stated that I believed Fyfe would be the best of our lot.

You seem to be itching for a biff, good luck to you.

I don't think Hill has ever consistently demonstrated the ability to hunt the ball and rack up the numbers inside mids of any quality are capable of.

Enjoy your teeth gnashing.
Click to expand...
1. You're not a recruiter. You're a perennially banned Bigfooty poster who has made a fool of himself more times than he's had usernames (which is a fair number)
2. Recruiters rated Hill extremely highly. Taggers don't go at pick three in an extremely strong draft. You're contradicting yourself pulling out the recruiters card given Hill was so highly rated.

No gnashing of the teeth. I know what I've seen of Hill and he screams of a player best used on the inside. Just like Daisy Thomas was an 'outside' player. Just like Gary Ablett was an 'outside' player. Etc. Throw him inside, we'll win more games. Make him tag, we'll get trounced.
 
How would you know if I were a recruiter or not?

I seem to recall Hill becoming all the rage after draft camp.

A shock even, especially given Rich was available.

Anyway, have to agree to disagree.
 
Part of the issue for supporters is that Hill tends to be a bellwether for our side. When the team is playing shit, Hill isn't seeing much of the ball. When we're up and going, Hill is usually playing pretty well too. Happened again on the weekend. Shit first half, good second half. Does that make him a downhill skier? Maybe. But when it's time to get the knives out for the team, Hill becomes an easy target.
 
Bengraham said:
How would you know if I were a recruiter or not?

I seem to recall Hill becoming all the rage after draft camp.

A shock even, especially given Rich was available.

Anyway, have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
I don't agree to disagree. You are simply wrong.

And if you are a recruiter then it is no surprise Barlow was passed on three times.
 
Hill is 4th for contested possessions at the club. Not a huge stat given we've only played 2 games, but you may as well let him go win his own ball and see what happens. Ross alluded to his increased influence over the game coinciding with a shift from the outside role he was given in the first half against Sydney.
 
Ross Lyon came out on radio and admitted that Hill was being played in the wrong position. Up to Half time he had what 1 disposal playing on the fringe then he was put on-ball and 17 Disposals, 9 clearances. Hilly was looking great and we were back in the game. Ross also admitted that our players weren't sheparding/blocking to give him the space to move. I hope Ross plays Hill on-ball from the start against Brissy and then we can see if Hill can stand up and deliver on his potential.

I'm not making excuses for the guy it's just how i see it. Roasting him over a bad half of footy isn't fair. It's early in the season and i would rather have Hill get better throughout the season as he adapts to Rossco's game plan and begin to peak near finals.
 
Rob said:
Part of the issue for supporters is that Hill tends to be a bellwether for our side. When the team is playing shit, Hill isn't seeing much of the ball. When we're up and going, Hill is usually playing pretty well too. Happened again on the weekend. Shit first half, good second half. Does that make him a downhill skier? Maybe. But when it's time to get the knives out for the team, Hill becomes an easy target.
Click to expand...

Chicken or Egg?
When we were taking the comp by storm in 2010 Hill was flying. Carrying the ball and leading the comp for scores from his inside 50's.
It's because he's so destructive other teams have spent so much time trying to stop him.
He's getting bigger, stronger and more inside in his game. Will be a fine player for many years to come.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Stephen Hill

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top