Player Watch Tom Langdon (Retired 2020)

[Bird on a wire]

Sure, but while players who can play forward and back are marginally more valuable;
a) you’ll be paying a premium for a swing man
b) you’ll be using more draft capital for a player who may become a swing man
c) you can compromise a player’s development by trying to turn him into a swing man instead of letting him lock down one role

In some countries, a swing man can find himself on the wrong side of the law.

 

[FadeAway]

People on this board are obsessed with swing men.

You only swing players when your original plan isn’t working. I’d rather have a rock solid plan A in a defender who can do his job week in, week out.

This guy makes a lot of sense! Trust me

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Sure, but while players who can play forward and back are marginally more valuable;
a) you’ll be paying a premium for a swing man
b) you’ll be using more draft capital for a player who may become a swing man
c) you can compromise a player’s development by trying to turn him into a swing man instead of letting him lock down one role

But that's why I said "everything else being equal".

Btw - I agree with you, but I'm being a little facetious. If you have two players who are the same price, and are exactly the same at everything else, but one can play 2 positions - then you choose the guy who can play 2 positions.
But obviously you have to take all those other things into account.

 

[Bad Horse]

...

Keep that up and you will need to make Goddard your avatar.

 

[sr36]

Sure, but while players who can play forward and back are marginally more valuable;
a) you’ll be paying a premium for a swing man
b) you’ll be using more draft capital for a player who may become a swing man
c) you can compromise a player’s development by trying to turn him into a swing man instead of letting him lock down one role

Can anyone think of anyone who successfully impacts games in a variety of roles without having firstly well and truly established themselves in a role to begin with.

 

[CFC2010]

Can anyone think of anyone who successfully impacts games in a variety of roles without having firstly well and truly established themselves in a role to begin with.

Jack Gunston maybe

 

[sr36]

Jack Gunston maybe

I'd argue that he'd well and truly established himself as a forward.

 

[CFC2010]

I'd argue that he'd well and truly established himself as a forward.

Definitely but he has been a Mr Fix it the last few years.

 

[sr36]

Definitely but he has been a Mr Fix it the last few years.

Agreed.

It's nice for a club to have a bloke they can use in that way - a bloke they can swing around to change the dynamic when it's needed or to hold up the defence when they need to change the momentum, but it's the upper echelon who can do it - Hird, Burgoyne, Goddard, at his peak, type of players. Silly to contemplate it for guys who aren't yet established as being top notch in any role.

 

[MarkT2]

GWS having a fire sale atm due to cap pressure.

Might of been able to secure Patton and Scully instead of Beams imo overall that improves us much more.

The word around the boards is May is most likely set for Dees.
Beams vs Scully is very diff footballers but both guns imo. Scully much harder worker both ways but Beams better offensively.
Hawks looking at Scully for pick 53...fair dinkum.

Patton is a limited player with bad knees. Good enough as a stay at home target but nothing else IMO. I'm not interested. Scully is a good runner and decent player. Phillips is probably a similar type. I don't see Scully adding a lot. Beams is a different player as you pointed out and importantly a different type to our mids. He would add something meaningful.

Of the GWS players on the market I would have liked to have had a crack at Setterfield

 

[MarkT2]

I'm not sure Langdon is definaite best 22 if we had a quality KP FB & CHB. Howe take the role he played in the finals and he's a much better kick. He'll be competing with a few, including an up and coming Murphy and hopefully Scharenberg. That said, it is good to see players who want to stay and sign for what would have to be substantially less than he was offered if the reported offer was accurate.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I'd argue that he'd well and truly established himself as a forward.

Tyson Goldsack? Leigh Brown? I dunno...

 

[sr36]

Tyson Goldsack? Leigh Brown? I dunno...

I'd argue that Goldsack has had one genuinely good year - last year, when they finally settled him in the one position.

Leigh Brown's excellence is mythological, but you're right, these days those poor second rucks have to do two roles before they've mastered one. It's a bloody tough gig and there aren't many good ones.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I'd argue that Goldsack has had one genuinely good year - last year, when they finally settled him in the one position.

Leigh Brown's excellence is mythological, but you're right, these days those poor second rucks have to do two roles before they've mastered one. It's a bloody tough gig and there aren't many good ones.

It was only because you stated “successfully impacts games” rather than anything about excellence or consistency that I mentioned those guys.

 

[Soups]

I'm not sure Langdon is definaite best 22 if we had a quality KP FB & CHB. Howe take the role he played in the finals and he's a much better kick. He'll be competing with a few, including an up and coming Murphy and hopefully Scharenberg. That said, it is good to see players who want to stay and sign for what would have to be substantially less than he was offered if the reported offer was accurate.

Howe and Langdon can play in tandum. TL is easy best 22 even with players coming back.

 

[Bird on a wire]

Howe and Langdon can play in tandum. TL is easy best 22 even with players coming back.

It's laughable to entertain the thought that Langdon might play VFL next year because he is squeezed from the side by everyone returning from injury. Just not going to happen, unless his form falls away sharply and we have an injury free year and players like Scharenburg resume ahead of time. If he does languish in the VFL next season, we will almost certainly have a team capable of winning a premiership.

 

[MarkT2]

Howe and Langdon can play in tandum. TL is easy best 22 even with players coming back.

Round 1 yes. If Scharenberg comes back well it's one of then IMO. If Murray develops it's harder again. Murray has a fair way to go as it stands but hopefully he improves steadily. Given we will probably want to play a real runner like Sidebottom from half back t's getting tight for spots. 4 no KP backline spots with Howe the only definite for one and a running ball user required for 1 other spot. If possession is 9 tenths then it's Langdon's spot to lose at present and after his final series he deserves that.

 

[left at home]

Round 1 yes. If Scharenberg comes back well it's one of then IMO. If Murray develops it's harder again. Murray has a fair way to go as it stands but hopefully he improves steadily. Given we will probably want to play a real runner like Sidebottom from half back t's getting tight for spots. 4 no KP backline spots with Howe the only definite for one and a running ball user required for 1 other spot. If possession is 9 tenths then it's Langdon's spot to lose at present and after his final series he deserves that.

Murray will waiting two-fours years if his b sample is wrong before another game he gets to play

 

[Kick It 2 Me]

Never understood the hate for Langdon. His first two years were superb in an under siege backline, his next two were injury riddled. And in 2018 he was our standout medium sized defender. Love the guy to bits.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I remember all the talk about whether Nick Maxwell was best 22.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Patton is a limited player with bad knees. Good enough as a stay at home target but nothing else IMO. I'm not interested. Scully is a good runner and decent player. Phillips is probably a similar type. I don't see Scully adding a lot. Beams is a different player as you pointed out and importantly a different type to our mids. He would add something meaningful.

Of the GWS players on the market I would have liked to have had a crack at Setterfield

I think that its extremely interesting that despite the interest from all clubs in feeding off the GWS carcass during this cap related fire sale..........................that nobody has shown any appetite for Patton.

Agree, avoid.

Also agree re Scully. Although with the new 6-6-6 rules, hard running wingers will come back into fashion as a little understood part of this rule is that the wingers must start ON THE WING and not behind or forward of the ball. So Scully's value increases. We already have Phillips Sidebottom and probably Stephenson for this sort of position so are well placed for gut runners but I cant see why HAwthorn are going to get Scully so cheap. He should be just what every club needs.

 

[jackcass]

But by that stage we will also be having to pay for new contracts/extensions to:
JDG
Grundy
Stephensen
Moore (if he gets healthy)
Sier
Phillips
Maynard
...
Who will all be commanding significantly more money on their next contracts. (JDG and Grundy could easily command $1m+ on their next deals, as could Stepho once he reaches his peak and also Moore if he ever gets consistently healthy and performs at the level we hope he could)
With the likes of Wells, Mayney, Pendles, and to a lesser extent Sidey, coming off their bigger deals.

This all goes in cycles. But any decision we make has to have one eye on our (potential) cap position going forward and requires a balance between putting us in the right position now and being discipilined enough to not screw us in the medium-to-long term. (See GWS's current stocktake sale)

Yes but in addition to Wells we'll likely have several other players who'll be departing. It's the same juggling act every year at every club. You never really free up a lot of TPP space unless a recognised star departs. The difference between 95-105% is about $1.2m.

 

[jackcass]

...

Not sure the point you're trying to make.

 

[left at home]

...

Not enough points made to me to support your argument.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Not sure the point you're trying to make.

Never mind him, he’s got his period.