Opinion Walsh or Rankine?

[WalshistheGOAT]

No Doubt Walsh is a gun. The Best young midfielder since Judd? I think thats the point. There have been quite a few since Walsh that have claims to be as good or nearly as good. So walsh could be replaced (arguably) with players such as Rowell, anderson, Serong Green, Daicos, Ashcroft, Sheezel etc .
Is Sam totally irreplaceable? I would argue no.
With Rankine, IMO he is a totally unique player mercurial in the Toby Green shai bolton , Dusty mold potentially (I think he is at a team that will get the best out of him, in a way that the Suns were not going to)

I am not saying SW is vanilla, far from it, he is an elite player with leadership written all over him. But leadership comes in different forms (compare toby green vs coniglio) . Sam is a vital cog in our midfield and team structure. But we could still have a great midfield without him

Firstly, Sheezel and Daicos are half backs as it stands and Walsh has made a career of towelling up the rest of them with players like Serong being tasked with tagging him such was his influence when healthy.

Secondly... Rachelle, Weightman and Pickett are equally as excellent as Rankine. Pickett in fact is a far better player to date and in my opinion always will be. Then you've got Sheezel who was actually a small forward in his draft year and a more proven player than Rankine at the same age. Nick Watson in this years draft has had better performances than both of them, we could look at picking him up come end of year who knows?

The main crux of the issue though, is that a small forward relies on his team to perform their role to the best of their ability. An A grade midfielder can move the dial for a teams' success no matter their supporting cast, or atleast more than other positions on the field. If Rankine was at Carlton without Walsh there's no guarantee he'd be anywhere near as damaging as we're seeing at Adelaide - As we saw with his time at GC where he was consistently being frozen out of the game, if the midfield and players up the field are no good, there's not much he can do to turn the tables in their favour.

 

[BlueGum]

show your working............

 

[Jimmae]

The simple discussion - which no one has cared to take up was my challenge: Name any of the 'imaginary' 2 listed that back then would have had the impact that Walsh has already had...for Carlton and where Carlton was before Walsh....

The list management and team discussion could be further enhanced by team dynamics...

eg You don't think that Cerra and Hewett would have liked the idea of playing alongside Cripps and Walsh - or maybe Harry and Charlie decisions to stay might be influenced at the margin if no more by the midfield that is going to feed them?


Rankin V Walsh - ask any list manager or coach who they'd rather have...please.

My comments back in the day, and here, and even to your first question here are the same: I would have loved to be in a position to take Rankine and Smith instead of Walsh. Not one or the other: both.

Rankine and one of the King brothers would have also been fantastic if we had the ability to pivot. The raw value in that draft was immense, but yes Walsh was the best player.

My comments at the time were also very clear on the way in which Walsh would change the style of our play, particularly if he wasn't used on a wing given our list structure. I likened him in some respect to Buckley, while having some differing athletic attrbitutes (Buckley's burst and flat passes, versus Walsh's sheer endurance).

Here were are, 4 seasons on, and we're in the middle of a 2 year exodus of our midfield depth. This is why - subject to what else we would have had to have given up - I would have entertained a trade with Gold Coast for two of 2, 3 & 6. I think it would have been an incredible trade for us, no matter what Walsh would have done season 1.

 

[CCurnow3votes]

If you offered Rochelle & Rankine - it would still feel dirty…

 

[CCurnow3votes]

what a superstar - I remember watching him spoil , gather and run through the backline like mercury.

 

[Sin City]

Rankine has had two very good games in a row. Great to watch, like most small forwards he stands out when his team is on top and looks like a passenger when his midfield is being beaten.

Walsh hasn’t had a bad game in the entire time he came into the league no matter how bad the team was travelling.

 

[JustaBattler]

My comments back in the day, and here, and even to your first question here are the same: I would have loved to be in a position to take Rankine and Smith instead of Walsh. Not one or the other: both.

Rankine and one of the King brothers would have also been fantastic if we had the ability to pivot. The raw value in that draft was immense, but yes Walsh was the best player.

My comments at the time were also very clear on the way in which Walsh would change the style of our play, particularly if he wasn't used on a wing given our list structure. I likened him in some respect to Buckley, while having some differing athletic attrbitutes (Buckley's burst and flat passes, versus Walsh's sheer endurance).

Here were are, 4 seasons on, and we're in the middle of a 2 year exodus of our midfield depth. This is why - subject to what else we would have had to have given up - I would have entertained a trade with Gold Coast for two of 2, 3 & 6. I think it would have been an incredible trade for us, no matter what Walsh would have done season 1.

I'm not into hypotheticals Jimmae - and I stand by the value proposition(s) that Walsh brings stated previously

As for exodus of midfield depth - I would say that the Club has replaced fails with a finals quality midfield - I haven't written off Carroll or Cuningham and a couple of the lads are showing signs that they can start rotating through there if required in the next little while - there is always the draft and trade to make up for the inevitable but unfortunate - blokes that just aren't up to it or don't fit...

We can now start watching games now and thinking the team has a chance of winning more often than not.

 

[coryne]

B.King as 3rd tall would be a ridiculous luxury in our forwardline...but I think the marginal benefit would not be worth it and would cause us cap issues.

You mean until we have to start paying him premium KPF wages and he is squeezed out......


On topic, Walsh was always seen as the premium (if somewhat 'vanilla') midfielder, which he has shown he is much more than. Noone could have expected more from him abd there is no way you would even consider going for Rankine instead imo.

 

[therubbernub]

So you are saying we could do without Walsh nubby.

More accurately that if we had a another quality mid instead of SW and also had rankine, we would be better off

 

[therubbernub]

Firstly, Sheezel and Daicos are half backs as it stands and Walsh has made a career of towelling up the rest of them with players like Serong being tasked with tagging him such was his influence when healthy.

Secondly... Rachelle, Weightman and Pickett are equally as excellent as Rankine. Pickett in fact is a far better player to date and in my opinion always will be. Then you've got Sheezel who was actually a small forward in his draft year and a more proven player than Rankine at the same age. Nick Watson in this years draft has had better performances than both of them, we could look at picking him up come end of year who knows?

The main crux of the issue though, is that a small forward relies on his team to perform their role to the best of their ability. An A grade midfielder can move the dial for a teams' success no matter their supporting cast, or atleast more than other positions on the field. If Rankine was at Carlton without Walsh there's no guarantee he'd be anywhere near as damaging as we're seeing at Adelaide - As we saw with his time at GC where he was consistently being frozen out of the game, if the midfield and players up the field are no good, there's not much he can do to turn the tables in their favour.

Lets see what everyone thinks of rankine after today.
Go Blues!

 

[Jimmae]

I'm not into hypotheticals Jimmae - and I stand by the value proposition(s) that Walsh brings stated previously

As for exodus of midfield depth - I would say that the Club has replaced fails with a finals quality midfield - I haven't written off Carroll or Cuningham and a couple of the lads are showing signs that they can start rotating through there if required in the next little while - there is always the draft and trade to make up for the inevitable but unfortunate - blokes that just aren't up to it or don't fit...

We can now start watching games now and thinking the team has a chance of winning more often than not.

Cuningham is the same kind of longshot as Marchbank now. Carroll's inability to improve his fitness is horrific, far worse than any issue Dow has had. Kennedy and Cerra are too one-paced, leaving Cripps and Hewett to somehow do the physical work and the sprint work. Cottrell is robbing Peter to pay Paul in terms of getting pace into the team.

Fisher is not a mid, and Honey is currently nothing resembling an AFL footballer. Our run from defence is rubbish without two of Saad, McGovern and Williams, regardless of Boyd's status.

If we lose Ed, Dow and O'Brien this off-season and we don't flip Kemp and two of Motlop, Durdin, and Owies into something resembling midfielders, we're in big trouble.

 

[JustaBattler]

Cuningham is the same kind of longshot as Marchbank now. Carroll's inability to improve his fitness is horrific, far worse than any issue Dow has had. Kennedy and Cerra are too one-paced, leaving Cripps and Hewett to somehow do the physical work and the sprint work. Cottrell is robbing Peter to pay Paul in terms of getting pace into the team.

Fisher is not a mid, and Honey is currently nothing resembling an AFL footballer. Our run from defence is rubbish without two of Saad, McGovern and Williams, regardless of Boyd's status.

If we lose Ed, Dow and O'Brien this off-season and we don't flip Kemp and two of Motlop, Durdin, and Owies into something resembling midfielders, we're in big trouble.

I'm not disagreeing ith a lot of what you say Jimmae...get back later - I'm looking at the game and wondering why we arent manning up one on one because the setups being run with have been picked apart - but losing McGovern/Pittonet at teh start of the game hasn't helped tonight...

 

[Jimmae]

I'm not disagreeing ith a lot of what you say Jimmae...get back later - I'm looking at the game and wondering why we arent manning up one on one because the setups being run with have been picked apart - but losing McGovern/Pittonet at teh start of the game hasn't helped tonight...

The two ruck system was being completely exploited by a quick team. We compounded it with our stoppage structure, alongside Walsh and Kennedy being a bit ginger and sluggish on return.

 

[JustaBattler]

The two ruck system was being completely exploited by a quick team. We compounded it with our stoppage structure, alongside Walsh and Kennedy being a bit ginger and sluggish on return.

Kennedy was played in defense all night ...

 

[Jimmae]

Kennedy was played in defense all night ...

Not quite, but I'm talking about his minutes and his run and spread. He's underdone.

 

[Aphrodite]

Thread is about Walsh & Rankine.

Stay on topic & don’t turn it into another List Management thread.

 

[Davey33]

Couldn't we have picked up both?

 

[SurreyBlue]

Couldn't we have picked up both?

Don’t worry we have. vanilla m2 is playing on a wing for us currently.
Oh sorry - you meant Rankin....

 

[Forty3]

Walsh.