Player X vs. Player Y
- Thread starter Jurn Stern
- Start date
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,570
- Likes
- 1,373
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Kelly. Ball winner, good user and pushes forward to kick goals. GWS should also win more games then the Dogs. Bont could be pushed to FF if needed which is not ideal, although he seems to be playing more through the guts recently (how does Macrae possibly out affect him?). Don't think there is much splitting the two, just feel that Kelly also has a higher ceiling as he can get his possession count up past 30 consistently and a more defined role.
Tough one...given WestCoast's strong position, even if he's not injured NicNat may be rested for one or two games leading into the finals to make sure he's cherry ripe, especially with Lycett playing well, and Kreuzer is likely to miss a game or two with injury or just being put away towards the end of season. IMHO, on balance I'd suggest McEvoy 
I mean apart from the nature of the injury, there's no indication that Kelly isn't 100%.
Historically very durable, 21 and 22 games in the last 2 seasons. Had a whopping 6 weeks break and has averaged around 85% TOG in the last 2 rounds.
Now he's gonna get another week of rest. Human bodies do heal, and alot of time has certainly be given to Kelly. Groin injuries may not "heal in the season" if the player plays week in week out, but with such a long time off all the evidence is leading to Kelly being over his issue.
Historically very durable, 21 and 22 games in the last 2 seasons. Had a whopping 6 weeks break and has averaged around 85% TOG in the last 2 rounds.
Now he's gonna get another week of rest. Human bodies do heal, and alot of time has certainly be given to Kelly. Groin injuries may not "heal in the season" if the player plays week in week out, but with such a long time off all the evidence is leading to Kelly being over his issue.
Both are very role dependent for the scoring output in my observations, and both are playing for a team with a plethora of options who can rotate through the midfield at any given time or circumstance.
Has what we've seen from both these players the new norm or it is just a mirage to lure us coaches in...?
I don't really have a definitive answer either way. The way I see it, they are both important players as part of the forward setup and/or going through their respective midfield.
If pressed to take one or the other, I would favour De Goey...but only just due to his style of play which is contested by nature.
Has what we've seen from both these players the new norm or it is just a mirage to lure us coaches in...?
I don't really have a definitive answer either way. The way I see it, they are both important players as part of the forward setup and/or going through their respective midfield.
If pressed to take one or the other, I would favour De Goey...but only just due to his style of play which is contested by nature.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 4,202
- Likes
- 6,469
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Trading this round is for eleven games not one.
Don't know that McG goes straight to Buddy but he will probs spend some time on him though, not sure if Yeo tags parker either at least not from the get go.
They are imponderables as are my thoughts re second half of year scoring.
Am happy with the reasons I made my decision and will be happy if McG matches his 82 from round one tonight, although NOT if that is his average from here on, for what its worth SCG predicts 111 for him, 97 for Hurn and 101 for Yeo this week so at least someone agrees with me.
You are more than entitled to your opinion and I respect your right to it.
Not much difference POD wise between McG and Hurn at 7990 & 9026 respectively either is poddish against 57694 for Yeo.
Don't know that McG goes straight to Buddy but he will probs spend some time on him though, not sure if Yeo tags parker either at least not from the get go.
They are imponderables as are my thoughts re second half of year scoring.
Am happy with the reasons I made my decision and will be happy if McG matches his 82 from round one tonight, although NOT if that is his average from here on, for what its worth SCG predicts 111 for him, 97 for Hurn and 101 for Yeo this week so at least someone agrees with me.
You are more than entitled to your opinion and I respect your right to it.
Not much difference POD wise between McG and Hurn at 7990 & 9026 respectively either is poddish against 57694 for Yeo.
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 4,202
- Likes
- 6,469
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Trading this round is for eleven games not one.
Don't know that McG goes straight to Buddy but he will probs spend some time on him though, not sure if Yeo tags parker either at least not from the get go.
They are imponderables as are my thoughts re second half of year scoring.
Am happy with the reasons I made my decision and will be happy if McG matches his 82 from round one tonight, although NOT if that is his average from here on, for what its worth SCG predicts 111 for him, 97 for Hurn and 101 for Yeo this week so at least someone agrees with me.
You are more than entitled to your opinion and I respect your right to it.
Not much difference POD wise between McG and Hurn at 7990 & 9026 respectively either is poddish against 57694 for Yeo.
Don't know that McG goes straight to Buddy but he will probs spend some time on him though, not sure if Yeo tags parker either at least not from the get go.
They are imponderables as are my thoughts re second half of year scoring.
Am happy with the reasons I made my decision and will be happy if McG matches his 82 from round one tonight, although NOT if that is his average from here on, for what its worth SCG predicts 111 for him, 97 for Hurn and 101 for Yeo this week so at least someone agrees with me.
You are more than entitled to your opinion and I respect your right to it.
Not much difference POD wise between McG and Hurn at 7990 & 9026 respectively either is poddish against 57694 for Yeo.
I don't want to engage in an argument with you as I'm not an expert in this field. However, what I do know and what history has review is that certain injury can linger longer than you expect, sometimes never healing itself at all. Groin type injuries certainly falls into that category for mine, and there has been countless examples of how such an injury can linger/reoccur during the course of a season. The healing process is not as simple as just resting, regardless of how long the duration of that rest.
I'm not about wishing ill upon J Kelly, but simply just to point out the basis for my comment. Every player has an injury risk attached to them, some are new and unexpected whilst some are borne through history. The fact that J Kelly has that recent history makes him a higher risk in my opinion. I'm all for coaches taking risk versus reward type of selections, I started with a few 'risky' players myself so am not immune to it, as long as they're fully aware of the risks which they're buying into. To that end, I find your statement 'always take a player without any injury concerns' a little misleading.
I'm not about wishing ill upon J Kelly, but simply just to point out the basis for my comment. Every player has an injury risk attached to them, some are new and unexpected whilst some are borne through history. The fact that J Kelly has that recent history makes him a higher risk in my opinion. I'm all for coaches taking risk versus reward type of selections, I started with a few 'risky' players myself so am not immune to it, as long as they're fully aware of the risks which they're buying into. To that end, I find your statement 'always take a player without any injury concerns' a little misleading.
I didn’t read all of this but I roughly got the gist. So to simplify things:
1. Kelly is much more likely to play next week than bont, bont suffered a new injury whereas no indication kelly isn’t fit
2. Even if bont plays it’s almost certain that kelly will be in a better condition even if like you said, groin injuries can be long lasting
3. Kelly matches if not exceeds bont’s scoring ability
Hence for me at least kelly is an easy choice over bont, there is a chance bont turns out to be a better pick, but that reward is outweighed by him having more of an injury risk. Kelly not necessarily has no injury risk, it’s just that it’s less than the risk of bont.
1. Kelly is much more likely to play next week than bont, bont suffered a new injury whereas no indication kelly isn’t fit
2. Even if bont plays it’s almost certain that kelly will be in a better condition even if like you said, groin injuries can be long lasting
3. Kelly matches if not exceeds bont’s scoring ability
Hence for me at least kelly is an easy choice over bont, there is a chance bont turns out to be a better pick, but that reward is outweighed by him having more of an injury risk. Kelly not necessarily has no injury risk, it’s just that it’s less than the risk of bont.
