The Official Port Board Best 22: Results/discussion thread

[Valli]

I think Ben Jacobs is in our best 22. Well, close at least.

 

[*PAF]

The trouble is that many of us still select on the basis of a player's best possible form. For too many on our list that is pre-2010 and in many cases circa 2007.

On output in 2011, Banner merits a place in the 22 above Ebert.

Ebert had a knee reconstruction.

 

[Jonts]

How is Ben Jacobs Pre season coming along?

Last year he was impressing everyone b4 the glan fever, any word on him this year?

 

[FishingRick04]

The trouble is that many of us still select on the basis of a player's best possible form. For too many on our list that is pre-2010 and in many cases circa 2007.

On output in 2011, Banner merits a place in the 22 above Ebert.

I agree and Banner seems to be judged on 09 and 10 form not 11. Mitch had to work the hardest to get in the side when others were gifted a shot last year.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Logan for O'Shea? Rly?

If we're playing with an eye to the future, O'Shea. If we were playing in a Grand Final tomorrow, Logan. The guy did finish top 3 in our B&F.

I think Ben Jacobs is in our best 22. Well, close at least.

I really don't understand the Ben Jacobs love at all. If he was taken at pick 61 instead of pick 16 I doubt anyone would rate him. Of his 12 AFL games, 11 of them ranged from average to terrible.

 

[Portia]

I am pretty sure we've had this discussion before, gopower.

As a junior, Jacobs' style of play was very physical - not so much in terms of hitting people, but in terms of being able to pull off just-in-time disposal, and get an edge in a contest. Stepping up to AFL level, and a bout of glandular fever interrupting his season even more, are particularly difficult hurdles for an 18 year old trying to play that way.

More than most players, I think Jacobs will specifically benefit from the new focus on the players developing powerful frames, because that will hopefully get him to a position where he can use his junior style of play at AFL level.

Even off form, there weren't too many times in 2011 that Jacobs was on my list of `drop immediately'.

 

[Jonts]

I really don't understand the Ben Jacobs love at all. If he was taken at pick 61 instead of pick 16 I doubt anyone would rate him. Of his 12 AFL games, 11 of them ranged from average to terrible.

He was rushed in last year to his detrimet, and played out of position most of them. We saw what he could do at SANFL level we now just have to wait until he has the body to do that at AFL level

But does anyone know how he is going this pre season? Average? Great? Below par?

EDIT: Porthos jumped in before me, and explains it in more detail

 

[Schulzenfest]

I am pretty sure we've had this discussion before, gopower.

As a junior, Jacobs' style of play was very physical - not so much in terms of hitting people, but in terms of being able to pull off just-in-time disposal, and get an edge in a contest. Stepping up to AFL level, and a bout of glandular fever interrupting his season even more, are particularly difficult hurdles for an 18 year old trying to play that way.

More than most players, I think Jacobs will specifically benefit from the new focus on the players developing powerful frames, because that will hopefully get him to a position where he can use his junior style of play at AFL level.

That's fine, I'm not writing him off for the future or anything. But this isn't the 2017 best 22 we're talking about, it's the 2012 one. Until he actually does all of that, he shouldn't be anywhere near the best 22, because his exposed form at AFL level is very uninspiring. Hopefully he does it sooner rather than later and justifies the pick we used on him.

 

[Portia]

Like I was saying, his exposed form in 2011 wasn't bad enough to see him dropped from the side most weeks, and he was rarely in the `drop me IMMEDIATELY' category, unlike most players, which includes a lot of players in this `Best' 22.

I'll turn your assertion on you. If he was pick #61 and managed to play 12 AFL games, with over 15 disposals per game playing as a flanker, in his first AFL season, despite illness that dictated he play his non-preferred game style, would you really be looking to dump him from the side? I'd reckon you'd think he was a pretty tidy pickup, much like I'd say about Cam O'Shea.

 

[Schulzenfest]

It's lucky he's not a pick 61, because if I'd seen somebody taken at that pick come into the AFL and butcher the ball the way Jacobs did last year I'd probably assume he'd always been a spud and written him off. But I know he was a first rounder, and I know that one of the main reasons he was a first rounder was his excellent kicking at junior level, which is why I hold out hope that in time that kicking ability will transfer to senior level. Until he shows evidence that he's starting to get his kicking ability back in the NAB cup or in the SANFL, he shouldn't be under consideration for the best 22.

It doesn't matter how many disposals you get if you can't use them. I believe you've said the same thing about a certain member of the Cornes family many times.

 

[Portia]

Sure, but not about 18 year old Kane Cornes.

And I know for a fact we've also discussed how important a clear team structure is to disposal accuracy, particularly for non-senior players.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

It's lucky he's not a pick 61, because if I'd seen somebody taken at that pick come into the AFL and butcher the ball the way Jacobs did last year I'd probably assume he'd always been a spud and written him off. But I know he was a first rounder, and I know that one of the main reasons he was a first rounder was his excellent kicking at junior level, which is why I hold out hope that in time that kicking ability will transfer to senior level. Until he shows evidence that he's starting to get his kicking ability back in the NAB cup or in the SANFL, he shouldn't be under consideration for the best 22.

It doesn't matter how many disposals you get if you can't use them. I believe you've said the same thing about a certain member of the Cornes family many times.

You really think O'Shea had a better year than Jacobs? O'Shea butchered the ball just as much as Jacobs did, but he was given a free pass because it wasn't seen as the strong point to his game, whereas Jacobs was apparently known for his disposal, so we were all disappointed when he kept turning the ball over.

I think Jacobs' best games were better than O'Shea's, even if there were only a couple of them. Kid could find the ball, that's the first step.

 

[Schulzenfest]

You really think O'Shea had a better year than Jacobs?

You really think he didn't? Jacobs is barely fit to carry O'Shea's bags after their respective debut years as far as I'm concerned.

That said, Jacobs played 12 games whereas O'Shea played 18. O'Shea's first 10 or so games were also pretty average, and then he showed a heap of improvement in the second half of the year. If Jacobs shows as much improvement at this stage of his career as O'Shea did then he will be challenging for the 22 by the end of the year, which can only be a good thing.

 

[PJ Power]

Jacobs will be fine. We all got prematurely excited with the hype of his preseason this time 12 months ago and by a couple of prolific SANFL games when he first came back.

In addition to the setbacks he had with illness and deconditioning, it also would have been extremely hard to look good debuting as a loosish, creative HB flanker in a team that was getting beaten convincingly with a mass of inside 50s being conceded every game.

I don't quite have him in the first 22 for rd 1, but guys like him and Moore should be pushing hard in the NAB cup to keep the other guys very honest.

 

[tribey]

Yeah, we have to wait and see how he goes with an uninterrupted preseason under his belt + all the weight he lost + all the extra AFL muscle on top, but...

Gopey is right to be concerned.

I don't think I've ever seen a player perform the polar opposite of his purported strengths more than some of Jacobs' signature clangerfests of last year. It'd be like the equivalent of Redden debuting as a 5'5" forward pocket, or Trengove hearing footsteps at a little girl's tea party.

 

[Peck]

I thought Jacob's looked pretty good. Made a hell of a lot of mistakes, and got no help from the umpires but he seemed to have real potential in the midfield IMO. O'Shea obviously had a better year though.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

I thought Jacob's looked pretty good. Made a hell of a lot of mistakes, and got no help from the umpires but he seemed to have real potential in the midfield IMO. O'Shea obviously had a better year though.

What's so obvious about it? O'Shea's start to the year was woeful. His second half of the year he was turned into a run-with player because of his elite endurance, but when he had to set up his own attack or was forced to create, he again stunk it up. Luckily, he didn't have to do that often and he proved to be a very handy run-with player.

Ben Jacobs on the other hand, had the role of not only a defensive stopper (which wasn't his game in junior footy), but also a rebounding half back with stints in the middle. He also took kick outs sometimes. He had a much harder position to play than O'Shea and although he didn't set the world on fire, he had a couple of very admirable performances. I still maintain his best games were better than O'Shea's best, so I have full belief that with a proper preseason under his belt he will quite comfortably surpass O'Shea in line to the best 22.

 

[Peck]

O'Shea played every game when he wasn't injured, that is what makes it obvious.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

O'Shea played every game when he wasn't injured, that is what makes it obvious.

And the reason for that wasn't entirely on form. It was because of his endurance and our youth policy. It was because he could play a role in our team that others couldn't, and it didn't matter if he was a liability in other areas. Jacobs didn't have that luxury.

 

[Wargreymon90]

Jacobs will be a gun. Even when he has bad games you can still see his up side

 

[Peck]

And the reason for that wasn't entirely on form. It was because of his endurance and our youth policy. It was because he could play a role in our team that others couldn't, and it didn't matter if he was a liability in other areas. Jacobs didn't have that luxury.

Look, you can try and read deeper into it. But O'Shea simply had the better first year not only because he played more games but because he played better than Jacobs for the most part (Arguable either way if you like). If someone plays 12 fantastic games and someone else plays 24 good games then the guy who played 24 games has had a better year, its just how it is.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

Look, you can try and read deeper into it. But O'Shea simply had the better first year not only because he played more games but because he played better than Jacobs for the most part (Arguable either way if you like). If someone plays 12 fantastic games and someone else plays 24 good games then the guy who played 24 games has had a better year, its just how it is.

Except... O'Shea didn't play 24 good games. That's just not even the same comparison at all. 24 games vs 12 games is a big disparity. 18 games to 12 games isn't. Especially when the player who played 12 games was coming back from glandular fever and wasn't even available until Round 6.

And of course it's arguable that O'Shea played better. I'm arguing that he didn't. That's the most obvious statement of all time. I think O'Shea had a couple of great games, but mostly looked out of his depth at AFL level. I feel the same way about Jacobs. Except I feel Jacobs' best games were better than O'Shea's, therefore I believe he had the better year. It's not that hard to comprehend is it?

Your argument about the amount of games played doesn't compute with me.

How about this one, who had a better year, Troy Chaplin or Hamish Hartlett?

Chaplin: 21 games
Hartlett: 16 games

Obviously Chaplin, simply because he played 5 more games.

 

[S.Patrol.G]

Except... O'Shea didn't play 24 good games. That's just not even the same comparison at all. 24 games vs 12 games is a big disparity. 18 games to 12 games isn't. Especially when the player who played 12 games was coming back from glandular fever and wasn't even available until Round 6.

And of course it's arguable that O'Shea played better. I'm arguing that he didn't. That's the most obvious statement of all time. I think O'Shea had a couple of great games, but mostly looked out of his depth at AFL level. I feel the same way about Jacobs. Except I feel Jacobs' best games were better than O'Shea's, therefore I believe he had the better year. It's not that hard to comprehend is it?

Your argument about the amount of games played doesn't compute with me.

How about this one, who had a better year, Troy Chaplin or Hamish Hartlett?

Chaplin: 21 games
Hartlett: 16 games

Obviously Chaplin, simply because he played 5 more games.

I don't read Lurk's argument that way. He's not saying "you play more games than another bloke and automatically you've had a better year."

I reckon he's saying more games, played at a more consistent level are better than less games where some of those are at a higher level.

As for O'Shea and Jacobs- I'm confident both will become very good players.

 

[Peck]

Except... O'Shea didn't play 24 good games. That's just not even the same comparison at all. 24 games vs 12 games is a big disparity. 18 games to 12 games isn't. Especially when the player who played 12 games was coming back from glandular fever and wasn't even available until Round 6.

And of course it's arguable that O'Shea played better. I'm arguing that he didn't. That's the most obvious statement of all time. I think O'Shea had a couple of great games, but mostly looked out of his depth at AFL level. I feel the same way about Jacobs. Except I feel Jacobs' best games were better than O'Shea's, therefore I believe he had the better year. It's not that hard to comprehend is it?

Your argument about the amount of games played doesn't compute with me.

How about this one, who had a better year, Troy Chaplin or Hamish Hartlett?

Chaplin: 21 games
Hartlett: 16 games

Obviously Chaplin, simply because he played 5 more games.

I mean that because its arguable that O'Shea played better, then its apparent that he had a better year based on the number of games he played and the fact that he didn't play a single SANFL game.

If Jacobs was clearly better (IMO he wasn't as good as O'Shea) then sure, but he wasn't. S.Patrol.G is closer to my point

Also injuries dont make your year better, they make it worse. If Matthew Primus came out and played an amazing game after a hamstring injury then did his knee in the 3rd quarter and was out for the year - he had a bad year in 2004. I understand Jacobs didn't play one game, but he only played 12 and many of those weren't at a high standard at all, while O'Shea played 18 which were very consistent after the first few.

 

[zan5hin]

Is McCarthy in your best 22? I think he was unlucky not to have more game time to get midfield experience at AFL level, similar to Danny Stanley who moved to the Gold Coast and did well teaming up with Ablett.