Trade Stanton !!!

[Ben the Gooner]

That's what Richmond said with Matthew Richardson. A good player pumped up as a champion because his side was more often than not average to woeful. Now Essendon are getting some mojo about them, one must ask themselves whether a premiership team can have Stanton as their second or third best midfielder.

Who said he had to be second or third best?

If we trade him and a pick for Murphy (for example, neither side would do that in reality), are we much better off?

Watson
Stanton
Hocking
Howlett
Melksham
Lonergan
etc.

v

Watson
Murphy
Hocking
Howlett
Melksham
Lonergan

Not a huge difference.

Once guys like Melksham and Zaharakis take the next step and we have Stanton at 4th, 5th best, we'll have a bloody brilliant midfield.

 

[TheDon35]

Well of course you would consider a trade if the right option presented. History tells us this is rarely the case.

Also you don't trade away guys that are an integral part of the side and highly respected. The club must value him as he was given the No. 5.

Hark your mind back a few years ago and so many idiotic posters on this board were saying Prismall is a better player than Stanton and we have done well... yadda, yadda, yadda.

Stanton made less mistakes than our Captain and our new wonderkid in Heppel.

He lost a contest to Toovey in exactly the same fashion as Leigh Brown lost out to Heppel and Cloke lost out to one of our other guys. Sometimes when you are bent over and trying to get the ball it's quite easy to get pushed over and you lose your feet.

So back to my point. There's a cultural issue in the AFL which is to the games detriment. Any half established player ie, Stanton - Solid B grade footballer that many think will become an A grader is 99% of the time not considered for trade for a variety of reasons. I think footy looses as a result.

If you want to go down the line of comparing Jobe's game to Stanton's, you're barking up the wrong tree. Watson has been in the top in the top 10 players in the competition this year and made some skill errors on Saturday. So did Stanton... But Stanton hasn't been in the top 100 players in the competition this year.

Stanton made several errors, a few of which were unrelated to skill which was the concern for me. In saying that, the way he responded in the 3rd term was first class.

Stanton made less mistakes than Heppell??? Firstly this is untrue. Secondly, if you're in any way dissapointed with the game of Heppell, an 18yo kid playing his 5th game on Anzac day well god help us.

Go back and watch the tape. Stanton was embarrassing in the first half which rightly or wrongly, is the reason for some in here getting their back up.

 

[Yoda_]

Who said he had to be second or third best?

If we trade him and a pick for Murphy (for example, neither side would do that in reality), are we much better off?

Watson
Stanton
Hocking
Howlett
Melksham
Lonergan
etc.

v

Watson
Murphy
Hocking
Howlett
Melksham
Lonergan

Not a huge difference.

Once guys like Melksham and Zaharakis take the next step and we have Stanton at 4th, 5th best, we'll have a bloody brilliant midfield.

How about we look at it like this Ben

(Same lists)

Watson 9/10
Stanton 7/10
Hocking 6/10
Howlett 5/10
Melksham 4/10
Lonergan 5/10
etc.

v

Watson 9/10
Murphy 9/10
Hocking 6/10
Howlett 5/10
Melksham 4/10
Lonergan 5/10

All of a sudden, our midfield has improved with the loss of Stanton, but have upgraded from Stanton to Murphy.

Stanton may not neccesarily be traded to Carlton, but someone would take him.. most teams would look at him surely.

Oh well, as much as I would like him to be traded, I dont think he will be traded.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Wow.

Way to completely miss the point.

 

[Yoda_]

Wow.

Way to completely miss the point.

Or you failing to see my point?

 

[DVD Player]

Mod fight! Grrrrrr

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Or you failing to see my point?

My entire post was addressing your point.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

If we swapped Heppel's game yesterday with Stanton's I think this thread would have still existed. People are just getting carried away by having a good kid on our list and can't make objective observations.

Here are some of Heppel's mistake I can recall now. If Stanton made these there'd be an uproar like there already is:

- Beams first goal, outmarks Heppel who doesn't have body contact
- Heppel runs out of defence with no pressure and kicks it to Maxwell who sends it back for a goal
- Blair marks ouside 50..stutters, stutters and then clean baulks Heppel to get to 50 and shank a kick to Pendlebury who marks then goals
- Watson dodges 2 while Heppel is watching and then the third player gets him - wheres the block
- Heppel tries to baulk and opponent gets caught, ball stripped, Collingwood possession.
- Heppel blazes away from 60 on the angle for a point when he should have pumped it to the top of the goalsquare for our big men in the third I think.

fwiw I rated both their games at 5.5/10

 

[Yoda_]

My entire post was addressing your point.

Hm..

OK

 

[Smyth94]

If we swapped Heppel's game yesterday with Stanton's I think this thread would have still existed. People are just getting carried away by having a good kid on our list and can't make objective observations.

Here are some of Heppel's mistake I can recall now. If Stanton made these there'd be an uproar like there already is:

- Beams first goal, outmarks Heppel who doesn't have body contact
- Heppel runs out of defence with no pressure and kicks it to Maxwell who sends it back for a goal
- Blair marks ouside 50..stutters, stutters and then clean baulks Heppel to get to 50 and shank a kick to Pendlebury who marks then goals
- Watson dodges 2 while Heppel is watching and then the third player gets him - wheres the block
- Heppel tries to baulk and opponent gets caught, ball stripped, Collingwood possession.
- Heppel blazes away from 60 on the angle for a point when he should have pumped it to the top of the goalsquare for our big men in the third I think.

fwiw I rated both their games at 5.5/10

I would agree with your post wholeheartedly if Heppell was a 100+ gamer. He isn't. Therefore it is ludicrous to mark him to the same scale as Stanton.

It's not done in any profession. Heppell's game was close to a 9/10 based on experience, occasion and opponent IMO.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

I would agree with your post wholeheartedly if Heppell was a 100+ gamer. He isn't. Therefore it is ludicrous to mark him to the same scale as Stanton.

It's not done in any profession. Heppell's game was close to a 9/10 based on experience, occasion and opponent IMO.

You can't mark players differently in a team sport.

What the hell? This is not horse racing. The teams aren't handicapped. You step out on the park and you are judged exactly like the next player.

Imagine having 20 Heppels like GC, losing by 120 and then marking the players performance as 9/10. Ludicrous.

 

[Slattery_20]

Not a huge difference.

Once guys like Melksham and Zaharakis take the next step and we have Stanton at 4th, 5th best, we'll have a bloody brilliant midfield.

Pretty much.

Stanton's a good player; he's not a great player; if the right trade came along you'd look at it (in the same way you'd look at a solid 2/3s of the list) but you'd hardly go shopping him around.

 

[Eleven 38]

maybe if we changed his number from 5 to 41 or something everyone would stop expecting him to be james hird, and realise he isnt ever going to be an A grade mid but as a 4-5th midfielder which he will be in a few years he will be great...

 

[fairlight_cmi]

Spoke to a mate at uni yesterday (who barely pays attention to footy, but watched ANZAC day). Said something along the lines of "Gee that Stanton guy really knows how to drag your team down, doesn't he?".

Sticks out like a sore thumb, even neutral supporters can see it. I want to know what Jim is thinking up in that box when he makes these fundamental errors?

So frustrating, I can see why you'd want him traded.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

Spoke to a mate at uni yesterday (who barely pays attention to footy, but watched ANZAC day). Said something along the lines of "Gee that Stanton guy really knows how to drag your team down, doesn't he?".

Geez, now there's some credible information and analysis.

How can one argue with that.

 

[Nasty Penguin]

Talking trades just 5 rounds in is pretty bloody stupid. I think Stanton is starting to play more consistent footy as apposed to previous years. He's improved and doesn't go missing as much as he used to. His tank is great which will be vital with the inclusion of the sub rule. This year is more a development year and we are already reaping the benefits. By years end we'll know a lot more as to where the list is at and what we really need to make that next step forward.

Hille is one of the most important players we have. Big body that moves forward and is extremely dangerous when in form. He's a touch out at the moment but so are a handful of other players. The club is doing the right thing playing all three ruckmen right now as games into T.Bell are important to future proof the side.

There are a lot of under developed younger players right now but they need game time. Stants isn't the greatest midfielder going around but he does provide that valuable rest time for other players. He'll end up being a good 4th or 5th midfielder with Milky, Zaka and Heppell all overtaking him.

A little bit of perspective as to where the team was last year to 5 rounds in needs to be adhered to otherwise half the team from week to week will be up on the trade table come years end.

 

[SirJimi05]

Despite making a few shocking errors that you would expect from a 5 game player I thought Stanton wasn't bad.

Seriously though, anyone that really thinks that Murphy would not be a massive upgrade on Stanton clearly needs to take thier red and black glasses off.

Murphy would instantly improve our midfield by a fair margin.

 

[Kong]

He seems to miss more targets by foot, though.

Critiquing one of your club's players can have two effects:

1) You instinctively believe they're better than most opposition counterparts, or at least have the ability to
2) You see them week after week, meaning you see every mistake that they make, and remember them.

Ryder seems to suffer from #1, whereas Stanton or Slattery from #2.

I rate the ability of Patrick Dangerfield as being able to be one of the best players in the comp. I've probably only seen 10 games of his though, and I've been surprised to see Adelaide supporters mark him so harshly, mostly for his hit and miss kicking.

If Murphy came to Essendon, we'd be wrapt, but I suspect it wouldn't take long for people to lament his tendancy to miss targets by foot.

 

[SirJimi05]

I guess Carrazzo does look a bit like Murphy.

 

[Kong]

Yeah he kind of does I guess, nice little piece of trivia.

But as I said:

He seems to miss more targets by foot, though.

Critiquing one of your club's players can have two effects:

1) You instinctively believe they're better than most opposition counterparts, or at least have the ability to
2) You see them week after week, meaning you see every mistake that they make, and remember them.

Ryder seems to suffer from #1, whereas Stanton or Slattery from #2.

I rate the ability of Patrick Dangerfield as being able to be one of the best players in the comp. I've probably only seen 10 games of his though, and I've been surprised to see Adelaide supporters mark him so harshly, mostly for his hit and miss kicking.

If Murphy came to Essendon, we'd be wrapt, but I suspect it wouldn't take long for people to lament his tendancy to miss targets by foot.

 

[fairlight_cmi]

Geez, now there's some credible information and analysis.

How can one argue with that.

Err i'm obviously making the point that even non-followers can spot out his detrimental effect on the team, not whether the bloke thought he should be traded.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Maybe the only ones who don't rate Stanton are the uninformed ones...

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

Err i'm obviously making the point that even non-followers can spot out his detrimental effect on the team, not whether the bloke thought he should be traded.

My mum is a non follower also and barely watches the game but she was over on Anzac day and watching it with me and the mrs. She reckons Stanton was the best player on the park.

Go figure.

 

[fairlight_cmi]

My mum is a non follower also and barely watches the game but she was over on Anzac day and watching it with me and the mrs. She reckons Stanton was the best player on the park.

Go figure.

Well then we've reached a juncture where it's down to he said-she said.

This thread cannot end well until we either a) Trade him, or b) He wins a Brownlow for us.

Unfortunately people's opinions are ingrained, and they rarely change; much like mine

 

[coleman10]

My mum is a non follower also and barely watches the game but she was over on Anzac day and watching it with me and the mrs. She reckons Stanton was the best player on the park.

Go figure.

I was watching the game with my wife, who never watches footy (with me anyway) and even she was going on about how much Stanton was costing us in turning the ball over! The one on one contest when he shat himself when he saw Steele Sidebottom closing in from 20 metres away when he had the ball on a string was typical of Stanton throughout his entire career. And what was he thinking at the stoppage when Beams wandered in and soccered that goal at such a crucial time? He was ball watching again! I have never been a fan or rated Brent Stanton since day one, and his performance on Anzac Day just went further to consolidate my opinion of him. Maybe the #5 feels heavier on Anzac day due to its lofty tradition on the occasion? If we couldn't trade him two years ago, then why bother trading him now? Lets just give him another guernsey number because when I am old and grey, I don't want my cherished memories of the #5 tarnished by images of cowardess and trepidation. He should take a leaf out of Matthew Primus book and publicaly apologize to firstly Jimmy Hird, and then to all the kids out there who still have the #5 on their backs from the Hird era, or "kids" like me who have it on our backs from the TD days, for disgracing the jumper. I dont care what anyone else thinks about Stanton, this is my opinion and thats what this thread is for.