Who are the second to third year players to watch?

Remove this Banner Ad

Suban and Neale certainly do hit the scoreboard with regularity as subs coulda, but you must be conveniently forgetting Sutty has kicked some important goals too (match winner vs Adelaide, put it beyond doubt against WC in the second derby).

I'd like to see him getting full games this year, will acknowledge that competition is very tough but he has made some decent footholds the last couple of years and is ready to do so IMO.
 
Sutcliffe was the sub in a number of games and his ability to run out games became evident when we lost a player early in a game . His ability to keep running from contest to contest showed it self
Suban and Neile were better subs however because they have explosive pace and impacted on the score board as well as having the ability to expose tied opposition players .
There is a point of difference but all these players compiment the RTB game plan.

Yes Neale and Suban has been good as the sub no body is disputing that. Sutty has been a good sub too, why do you think Ross often has him as the sub more often than not?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Yes Neale and Suban has been good as the sub no body is disputing that. Sutty has been a good sub too, why do you think Ross often has him as the sub more often than not?
I thought I said that but I also said Suban and Neale had more impact on the scoreboard
Using Sutcliffe as the Sub wouldn't have been to get him some game time as an introduction to a full time position in the team by any chance or is that too simple .
I mean you have to start your AFL career somewhere I suppose .
Just by the by, I also believe that soreness doesn't become too big an issue for the young ones if they don't have to play whole games in the beginning of their career .

RTB also rotated the sub position as well which gave Sheridan , Crozier some exposure as well .Train hard ,put in the effort and the rewards will come
Fremantle under RTB have made the sub a bonus for the team in that players have been told (I Think) to go as hard as they can to have impact and then when there is no petrol left in the tank they have been subbed and fresh explosive legs have come onto the ground .
Silvagni for 1 of note

But then I have been wrong before .:)
 
Pencil in a future leader.
Neale gave us a glimpse of how he deals with pressure in the finals series .
Not out of his depth at all and slotted goals like a vet .

The leadership group has been improved with the inclusion of Lee Spurr IMHO .
He brings heart and bravery to the table .

Just an observation ,something to think about .

The funny thing here is that other Clubs and our club in the past had to offer a Captaincy , Vice Captaincy , leadership position and\or team spokesman to keep retain or attract players to come or stay playing for Fremantle now finally we have come of age .

So what has changed

I have my beliefs and it goes along the lines that Most of us have I think would agree with .
Finally we have created the perfect storm .
The appointment of the 2 Steve's was the start .
They raised the bar in the managing of the Club .We got two guys that made decisions for the right reasons and laid the foundation for the future by getting the finances right and with the finance came the ability to find a coach , Harvey first now RTB .

The direction given to the football department of recruiting youth and footballers first rather than just athletes .
The recruitment of coaching staff and going with best practises across all areas .

The way they got Ross ,not everyone liked but the business men when the opportunity arose did the deal .

The support they have given to the coaching staff and the professional way they have raised the profile of the Club
As the saying goes" Let the cobblers do the cobbling " is very fitting because our list is the strongest it has ever been , the players are playing for each other and they have a coach with a game plan that works week in week out .
Success breeds success and we the fans have been blown away with last season and can't wait for this one to start
Nerves in check and groins in good shape
" BRING IT ON "
 
Neale is the one I reckon. Will be an superstar for us very soon. Ball magnet who is super clean by hand and makes very smart decisions under pressure.

So, Lachie Neale is a "ball magnet" with 19.8 disposals per game, but Stephen Hill "offers nothing more than mere glimpses" with 19.2 disposals per game?

Huh? :confused:
 
So, Lachie Neale is a "ball magnet" with 19.8 disposals per game, but Stephen Hill "offers nothing more than mere glimpses" with 19.2 disposals per game?

Huh? :confused:

i don't think it is right but i think hilly is judged more harshly to other players because
  1. when hilly goes missing, it is more obvious
  2. high draft pick vs low draft pick
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Neale averages 66% game time compared to Hills 84%.
So despite 20% time on ground, Neale averages the same amount of possessions as Hill.

If you extrapolate that game time to be the same as Hill's, Neale averages 24 possessions per game. Which is the same as if you remove the outliers where Neale was sub.

So I think one could claim that Neale is a ball magnet, while asserting that Hill is not.
 
So despite 20% time on ground, Neale averages the same amount of possessions as Hill.

If you extrapolate that game time to be the same as Hill's, Neale averages 24 possessions per game. Which is the same as if you remove the outliers where Neale was sub.

So I think one could claim that Neale is a ball magnet, while asserting that Hill is not.

Well, personally, I don't think one disposal per quarter is a massive difference. Particularly when you gain the amount of territory that Stephen Hill does.

But Yakkaman's assertion was not that Hill is not a ball-magnet. The assertion was the he only shows rare glimpses of his talent. 19 disposals a game at 77% effectiveness seems to contradict that. Particularly when the same disposal count infers ball-magnet status on Neale.
 
If Neale was 4 inches taller he would have been a top fifteen pick, his ability isn't questioned, his ability to mark the high ball when out of position was.

That was a mistake, he is a very good footballer, he and Sutty are some of our most value picks since Barlow.

Re-Hill - I'd like to see what his metres gained per disposal stats are. I imagine they are quite high.
 
So despite 20% time on ground, Neale averages the same amount of possessions as Hill.

If you extrapolate that game time to be the same as Hill's, Neale averages 24 possessions per game. Which is the same as if you remove the outliers where Neale was sub.

So I think one could claim that Neale is a ball magnet, while asserting that Hill is not.

Who would you rather delivering the ball in to the forward 50? I would have Hill every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
 
If you are going to compare Hill and Neale, look at metres gained, score involvements, inside 50's and rebound 50's. Those would be the metrics that matter for the role Hill plays.
 
Well, personally, I don't think one disposal per quarter is a massive difference. Particularly when you gain the amount of territory that Stephen Hill does.
Well when you break it down like that, Michael Barlow is no more a ball magnet than Danyle Pearce.

But I don't think you would say that, would you?

All things considered, Hill has three years on Neale, and has not improved much since his second year. Bit better able to break tags, the gap between best and worst has shortened, but he's no game breaker. He has scope for improvement but every year that passes he is getting closer to his ceiling. On the other hand, we're still finding out what Neale can do.
 
All things considered, Hill has three years on Neale, and has not improved much since his second year. Bit better able to break tags, the gap between best and worst has shortened, but he's no game breaker. He has scope for improvement but every year that passes he is getting closer to his ceiling. On the other hand, we're still finding out what Neale can do.

Hill's second year was outstanding. If Neale had had that kind of impact in 2013, he'd have been tagged too.

Neale might reach the level of Stephen Hill. He might surpass it. But he ain't there yet.
 
Neale is the one I reckon. Will be an superstar for us very soon. Ball magnet who is super clean by hand and makes very smart decisions under pressure.
I agree. Liked him from the time I first saw him play. A steal in the draft. Reminds me of Ben Cousins


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Who are the second to third year players to watch?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top