Was Luke Ball a Waste of a pick for Collingwood?

[FuManchu]

LOL....I caught her in a lie a while ago. She had accused me of lying and making things up. When I showed her the proof of her own words and asked her for an apology....she put me on ignore.

I don't know why anyone bothers corresponding with her. Clearly a piece of the puzzle is missing there.

because she entertains us.

I love reading her long winded posts, without a semblance of nuance to any of them. She has made 'bland' an art form. They are works of art in the area of self delusion. The world is richer for the likes of KS.

 

[ULTIMATE_WARRIOR]

Luke Ball was definitely better than both Armitage and Peake in Round 1. It was a different story last weekend though because Melbourne had targeted Ball from the start of the match. He was dead set in their sights after refusing to talk to them leading up to the National Draft, and almost every possession he got was under extreme pressure. He was pushed and bumped and tackled by more than one player all day which severely effected his output. He kept trying though, and the lesson that Collingwood learned is not to allow that to happen so easily again.

Heaven forbid a player be put under pressure in a game of football!! There are 18 players on the field and to be bumped, pushed or most importantly tackled by more than one is just an outrage!!

Don't use this as an excuse when this pressure is applied to all good players. Luke Ball was poor on the weekend and if he can't handle allegedly 'extreme pressure' from the worst side of the past 3-4 seasons I shudder to think how he will go against a side like Geelong or St. Kilda who are trademarked by that pressure style football. The fact is he was poor and this has been pointed out by numerous football commentators and his kicking efficiency and penetration was low. However this performance is not a reflection of his overall qualities as a player nor his importance to the Collingwood set-up. He is a good footballer, the bloke just had a stinker.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

I'm sure KS is just waiting to slam me.
She wouldn't have baited me without some prior knowledge.
Such is the insipid style of such a poster.

The gauntlet's down KS - Where are those posts of mine?

 

[Ricmel]

They are works of art in the area of self delusion. The world is richer for the likes of KS.

That is one way to look at it I guess.

 

[HoldenMCaulfield]

gee, I hope we'll see a failed trade between C'wood and Hawthorn this year - KissStephanie v Hodgepodge, now that would be entertainment !

 

[ULTIMATE_WARRIOR]

Maybe Collingwood did rate Wellingham at last years trade week and were not prepared to off load him to another top 4 side in the same premiership window as them?? This may explain them willing to trade with North Melbourne reluctantly but not at all with St. Kilda in regards to Wellingham. This is all assumptions however, but since it's ok for KS to speculate and assume truth, I may aswell.

 

[Warren Buckley]

KissStephanie is God.

When Luke Ball is dropped after Round 4, it wont make any difference to her story that he is the greatest players of all time.

 

[ULTIMATE_WARRIOR]

Wellingham and pick #30 was available to whichever club was going to help Luke Ball get to Collingwood. At the time Collingwood did not feel that trading Wellingham to another top-4 side would hurt them. It was stupid of Collingwood to shop Wellingham around, but thankfully it didn't hurt them.

Source please.....

 

[Falchoon]

KissStephanie is God.

When Luke Ball is dropped after Round 4, it wont make any difference to her story that he is the greatest players of all time.

Wellingham has had a good start to the season, Peake has had a good start to the season.

Conclusion, laugh at St Kilda for not taking Wellingham, (who hasn't even been mentioned at all in six months).
Laugh at St Kilda for taking Peake.

She's never been very good with her geese and gander.

 

[KissStephanie]

Are you a hypocrite when it suits you, or are you a flip-flopper?

Neither. There isn't any evidence that Collingwood offered Wellingham and pick #30 to St.Kilda of course. It still happened though.

Maybe Collingwood did rate Wellingham at last years trade week and were not prepared to off load him to another top 4 side in the same premiership window as them??

No, that wasn't it. Collingwood offered Wellingham and pick #30 to St.Kilda, but they were not interested in another midfielder. They were after a tall defender or no deal.

This may explain them willing to trade with North Melbourne reluctantly but not at all with St. Kilda in regards to Wellingham. This is all assumptions however, but since it's ok for KS to speculate and assume truth, I may aswell.

Wellingham and pick #30 was available to whichever club was going to help Luke Ball get to Collingwood. At the time Collingwood did not feel that trading Wellingham to another top-4 side would hurt them. It was stupid of Collingwood to shop Wellingham around, but thankfully it didn't hurt them.

 

[Ricmel]

Re: Was Luke Ball a Waste of a pick for Collingwood?

They were after a tall defender or no deal.

That is crap. They WERE offered Leigh Brown early in trade week...said no. They also off loaded Matt Maguire.

You can read Saints Twitter during draft week concerning this trade. There is no mention of Wellingham, just the offers Brown and Goldsack. The only statement Saints make during draft week about the type of player the wanted was "a quality" player.

In fact Lyon later said over lunch that the only thing he was looking for during trade week was pace, pace and more pace.

 

[Falchoon]

Re: Was Luke Ball a Waste of a pick for Collingwood?



That is crap. They WERE offered Leigh Brown early in trade week...said no. .

Really?

No wonder we wouldn't deal with them

 

[}>-DEMON-<{]

Collingwood have stuffed up massively with their recruiting in the last few years IMO.

2007 - pick 31 first kid drafted
2008 - pick 11 sidebottom, pick 28 beams
2009 - pick 62 their first kid drafted
2010 - after finishing about 5th they will get pick 20 or something
2011 - see above

so in a 5 year drafting period they will have picked a total of ONE first rounder.. and it's at 11, it's not like its top 5. Compare that to Melbourne who in the same time have got Morton, Grimes, Watts, Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Strauss and Maric all in the top 21 plus Jurrah in the PSD. That's 11-1! Other sides obviously have similar numbers in this group namely WCE and Carlton, of course we traded McLean and Johnstone for 2 extra ones. You can talk til you are blue in the face about them getting the most out of players etc but taking 1 kid high in the draft when other sides are getting up to 11 obviously places you in a very risky spot in the future.

Whatever way you look at it, that is one day going to create a gaping hole in their list. Lockyer, Presti, O'Bree, Davis even Didak these guys are all very important to them and in about 4 years they will either be gone or in the twilight zone. Personally I don't think they have the cattle to get a flag in this time, especially since Jolly and Ball look to be erroneous decisions thus far. There are too many other better teams in the way and in 4 years Melbourne, WCE and Carlton will be right up there too, maybe even the new sides. Then in addition to losing these older players they will have a huge gap in the talent stock for blokes aged 21-26 due to not drafting any between '07 and '11. They will be strong in the 27-30 department but have absolutely nothing anywhere else

 

[ULTIMATE_WARRIOR]

No, that wasn't it. Collingwood offered Wellingham and pick #30 to St.Kilda, but they were not interested in another midfielder. They were after a tall defender or no deal.Wellingham and pick #30 was available to whichever club was going to help Luke Ball get to Collingwood. At the time Collingwood did not feel that trading Wellingham to another top-4 side would hurt them. It was stupid of Collingwood to shop Wellingham around, but thankfully it didn't hurt them.

Unless you were sitting with Collingwood and St. Kilda officials during trade week you cannot claim that. What is to say my random theory about not dealing with a top 4 side isn't any more justifiable? It's not, its just specualtion and opinion, not fact and you can't claim 'yes or no' without any sources or proof. This is just your opinion. Much like your opinion on Luke Ball's performance on saturday, which is debatable.

I find it an interesting thought that St. Kilda were wanting a tall defender when ready-made club favourite Matt Maguire was sitting the sidelines all of 2009. It was evident that St. Kilda wanted pace and got that in the Lovett and Peake deals. Lovett is a different story and Peake has certainly been a solid contributer for the first 2 rounds.

Wellingham has had a better start to the season. He is a better player

This too is an opinion, neither right or wrong.

I haven't laughed at St.Kilda for taking Peake either. I just don't think he is the type of player that will take any club to a premiership. He may have some fair home and away matches at times as long as there isn't a lot of pressure applied, and at least my opinion of him is not as bad as Leigh Matthews' opinion of him.

This is an unfair judgement. He played at Fremantle. A club who has hardly made a habit of making finals series. So where else can he have fair games? You also are forgetting St. Kilda's and alot of other clubs success rate with traded players prospering in new environments.

 

[John Bonney]

Add in 2006 they took Ben Reid instead of Armitage.

 

[Kram]

Add in 2006 they took Ben Reid instead of Armitage.

Ouch.

 

[KissStephanie]

Collingwood have stuffed up massively with their recruiting in the last few years IMO.

That's your examples? Come on now.

2007 - pick 31 first kid drafted

Cameron Wood traded using pick #14, and he is only 23 years old now, while pick #31 was used on John McCarthy who is highly rated at the club, while Thoolen and Barham should be handy players.

2008 - pick 11 sidebottom, pick 28 beams

Is this an example of poor recruiting? Unbelievable.

2009 - pick 62 their first kid drafted

Ben Sinclair was selected at pick #62, and the very same player Collingwood were going to use pick #30 on if Luke Ball wasn't available.

2010 - after finishing about 5th they will get pick 20 or something

I think Collingwood will be Grand Finalists in 2010, but most teams are stuffed as far as the 2010 and 2011 drafts go.

so in a 5 year drafting period they will have picked a total of ONE first rounder.

Since 2007, Collingwood has done quite well for a team that continually makes the finals. Not every team tanks like Carlton and Melbourne you know. St.Kilda and Geelong will be suffering before Collingwood does.

Ouch.

Ouch? Over David Armitage? He has done very little in 21 matches in three seasons and has yet to play two good games in a row. Big men take longer to develop, and Ben Reid is still only 20 years old now.

Unless you were sitting with Collingwood and St. Kilda officials during trade week you cannot claim that.

Who says? I trust my information. I believe that Wellingham and pick #30 was available to St.Kilda but they weren't interested in another midfielder due to Lovett and Peake. They wanted a tall defender, and the players they mentioned were Ben Reid, Nathan Brown, Tyson Goldsack, but Reid and Brown were not up for trade. They settled on Goldsack before changing their mind and going after Andrejs Everitt from the Western Bulldogs.

What is to say my random theory about not dealing with a top 4 side isn't any more justifiable?

Why are you going on about this? I believe that Wellingham and pick #30 were available for St.Kilda. Nothing is going to change my mind regarding that because I trust that information. It seems that you're not going to believe that though, so what is going to be gained from going around and around over something that cannot be proven?

 

[omit]

so what/who is the source of this much trusted information regarding trade week?

 

[}>-DEMON-<{]

That's your examples? Come on now.Cameron Wood traded using pick #14, and he is only 23 years old now, while pick #31 was used on John McCarthy who is highly rated at the club, while Thoolen and Barham should be handy players.Is this an example of poor recruiting? Unbelievable.Ben Sinclair was selected at pick #62, and the very same player Collingwood were going to use pick #30 on if Luke Ball wasn't available.

Yes wood is 23. That means he will not be part of that 5 year gap you have made for yourselves.

I already said you can talk about how good some guy is who was taken later until you are blue in the face (I knew you would) but every club says the same... Thoolen is taken at 47 and you rate him, well so what we took Cheney 6 picks later and I rate him. The fact is, first rounders are the ones most likely to become stars (durr) you will have one first rounder in a 5 year period.

 

[Kram]

Ouch? Over David Armitage? He has done very little in 21 matches in three seasons and has yet to play two good games in a row. Big men take longer to develop, and Ben Reid is still only 20 years old now.

He's was also picked in the first round and now into his fourth season.. He's a potato. Armitage is actually good player.

 

[KissStephanie]

so what/who is the source of this much trusted information regarding trade week?

The same reason that I was exactly spot on about how Luke Ball would get to Collingwood when nobody felt that he would enter the National Draft, and that nobody felt he would still be available at pick # 30. And how everybody felt he would either stay at St.Kilda or enter the Pre-Season draft and then be selected by Melbourne. Luke Ball was always still going to get to Collingwood once that trade collapsed, but St.Kilda didn't think it was possible because they were unaware of the rules. Sharrod Wellingham and pick #30 was available to St.Kilda, as stupid as that was by Collingwood.

Armitage is actually good player.

He is not! He is an average player! That is because he has failed to play two good games in a row in 21 matches and he is into his fourth season now. In some of his 'good' games he has turned the ball over more than any other player on the ground.

The fact is, first rounders are the ones most likely to become stars (durr) you will have one first rounder in a 5 year period.

There are planty of first round flops. Dayne Beams is ahead of a number of current first rounders, and he is a third rounder. Ben Reid is 20, and Nathan Brown is 21, and they are both first rounders as are Scott Pendlebury and Dale Thomas. Your theory is flawed.

 

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

Not every team tanks like Carlton and Melbourne you know.

Josh Fraser and Dale Thomas were taken with priority picks, if I recall. What's that saying about throwing stones and glass houses?

 

[omit]

you didn't answer my question

 

[}>-DEMON-<{]

.There are planty of first round flops. Dayne Beams is ahead of a number of current first rounders, and he is a third rounder. Ben Reid is 20, and Nathan Brown is 21, and they are both first rounders as are Scott Pendlebury and Dale Thomas. Your theory is flawed.

Like Cam Wood, none of those players are in the 5 year window I mentioned are they? Did I really have to type that?

Are you actually debating me on whether first round picks are generally more successful than non-first round picks? Surely you realise how stupid that is. Roughly one-third of last year's AA squad was from the top 10 in the draft... when you consider the draft goes into the 80s and there are also rookie and PSD drafts that is a huge strike rate. Obviously it is a group that doesn't include the likes of Kruezer, Gibbs, Morton, Cotchin, Grimes etc players who are obviously going to be awesome but are still young. If you look at the top10 players taken in the last few drafts there is hardly a dud among them.

Have you noticed Pendlebury is your best player? What pick did you get him at?

 

[jasonwilde]

Yes wood is 23. That means he will not be part of that 5 year gap you have made for yourselves.

I already said you can talk about how good some guy is who was taken later until you are blue in the face (I knew you would) but every club says the same... Thoolen is taken at 47 and you rate him, well so what we took Cheney 6 picks later and I rate him. The fact is, first rounders are the ones most likely to become stars (durr) you will have one first rounder in a 5 year period.

How many first round picks were in Geelong's Premiership sides? Yes, Melbourne have had a lot of first round draft picks of late, simply because you have been on the bottom or near the bottom the last 3-4 years. That's nothing to sing home about really, is it? But if you think that will win you a flag then good luck to you. Personally, I'd prefer my coach to teach my side how to win at all costs, rather than tanking for early draft picks.