Vogels to CHB

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by mocaholic
The Pitura deal, we got Teaser and Whale.

I'm pretty sure we received those two plus Jackson.

[mocaholic]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I'm pretty sure we received those two plus Jackson.

Yes, absolutely. Sorry, I thought the Jackson part of this deal was already covered.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Sanecow
In future, when recounting extreme attitudes on RWO, I request that posters write "Bon Bon" or "Footyhead" instead of "some people".

I think there were a few others but I get your point.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by barry
Schniederman, you my friend, are a LRT hater.

Only the twisted bitter mind filled with vengful hate would contemplate moving a young player who is performing, and needed on the forward line, to the backline to oust a player who is holding his own, but you dont like.

LOL. The last thing I am is a hater of anything related to the Swans. I am meant to be a blind optimist.

And if you watch the games where Luke has played more closely, you may realise he is not being used exclusively in the forward line. In fact he has done some fantastic things in defence around the 50m arc. He had a great pickup and delivery against Essendon for example, and two nice gathers and kicks on the weekend too. Plus he won the B&F in the Hampden League playing as a KPP in defence, so he knows what to do.

This is less about LRT and more about Vogels. Who would do a better job at CHB? I think the latter.

As for all of those arguments about "putting a young kid" into the CHB role... is that not what we are doing with LRT at the moment? Who has played more senior games? Who has more real experience. If anything, LRT is being pushed too fast into a critical role.

Alternate the two for all I care, during a game even if you want. I just reckon Luke is a better candidate for CHB in the immediate future, and quite probably over the long term.

Here is the real litmus for their worth: which one would other clubs be willing to pick up at the end of the season?

[barry]

Originally posted by Schneiderman


Here is the real litmus for their worth: which one would other clubs be willing to pick up at the end of the season?

LRT, because there is more upside than Vogels.
Vogels has played about 2 hours of footy at AFL level. No one is going to trade anything for that.

[Schneiderman]

Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Sean
Remember back to when Leo was 21 - did you think he would become one of the best defenders in the AFL? Even more surprisingly a KPP defender? What about Kirk? When you saw him as a 21 year old did you think he would become an AA midfielder?

Actually yes to both. Always had a real soft spot for both of them. Bazza has surprised me because I thought he was pretty ordinary at St Kilda (although so was Spida when compared to now).

I agree that LRT probably will not become a dominating CHB in the Leppitsch mold but he can become a Wakelin/Presti type player - they've played in GFs too.

Yes but if you had a choice between having a dominating CHB player or not. I say we may be being presented with that sort of choice.

Why do all LRT or Vogels threads become a competition between the two? They can both stay in the team.

Never said they cant be in the same team. But they cant play the same role at the same time. And currently Luke is not playing there at all, which IMO is unfortunate.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by barry
Vogels has played about 2 hours of footy at AFL level. No one is going to trade anything for that.

They dont have to trade barry. He is a Rookie. So in terms of raw worth, do LRTs 30 AFL games make him more valuable than a gifted and experienced (compare him to most other Rookies) player? Which one shows the greater potential ATM? Who looks like they are more in control of their game, more capable of making an impact in a KPP?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by barry
LRT, because there is more upside than Vogels.
Vogels has played about 2 hours of footy at AFL level. No one is going to trade anything for that.

Ummm... draft picks? They haven't played any football yet they're traded, so that's not a particularly good basis for an argument.

There is nothing to suggest that LRT has more upside than Vogels - I would suggest most observers think the opposite. Indeed Bobby Skilton is a big rap for Vogels.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by barry
Schniederman, you my friend, are a LRT hater.

Only the twisted bitter mind filled with vengful hate would contemplate moving a young player who is performing, and needed on the forward line, to the backline to oust a player who is holding his own, but you dont like.

This is rather tragic - it seems like you'll be bashing your fists on the keyboard next and sobbing and yelling that they're all out to get you and Lew!

[Newbie]

Why we have to pick one out of them. There are room for both of them in the team. A spine of LRT/Vogels/Hall looks better than a spine of LRT/Hall/Mol or Vogels/Hall/Mol. Schauble should be considered as a bonus. I dont think he will last much longer. People should realize that apart from these, we have NO developing key position players in the list except from Grundy.

[Sean]

Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Schneiderman Actually yes to both. Always had a real soft spot for both of them. Bazza has surprised me because I thought he was pretty ordinary at St Kilda (although so was Spida when compared to now). [/B]

At 21 you thought that Leo would become a KP defender? Sorry but I find that very hard to believe. If that's true then you should be tested for psychic abilities.

Yes but if you had a choice between having a dominating CHB player or not. I say we may be being presented with that sort of choice.

Our team is very good defensively - third best in the league. So, given the choice between what you suggested and another tall forward option I would definitely choose the tall forward.

Never said they cant be in the same team. But they cant play the same role at the same time. And currently Luke is not playing there at all, which IMO is unfortunate.

But he's doing very well as a forward. Why do you feel the need to move him to a position that is not currently a problem? I can only see it making our team weaker. Wait until LRT starts getting towelled - then bring it up again.

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Schneiderman



Yes but if you had a choice between having a dominating CHB player or not. I say we may be being presented with that sort of choice.
[/B]

Please tell me you are not of the belief that Vogels is the next Leppa based on 2 hours of playing time ?

This nonsense is got to stop. You are putting far too much pressure on him.

[NMWBloods]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by Sean
Our team is very good defensively - third best in the league. So, given the choice between what you suggested and another tall forward option I would definitely choose the tall forward.

I still think this is a little misleading wrt the ability of our backline. As well as they've done, much of the credit goes to our scrambling, lockdown style of play.

If we opened the game up more, such that the ball came into the D50 more often or with better delivery or with more space, then I think some of our defenders and our overall backline might be found wanting.

With a couple of better KP defenders, we might be able to open the game up more and thus try more to win by kicking more goals rather than stopping our opponents. Of course, the ability of our midfield to execute this strategy becomes an issue too.

[barry]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
This is rather tragic - it seems like you'll be bashing your fists on the keyboard next and sobbing and yelling that they're all out to get you and Lew!

Stop sooking bloods.

I was merely using dramatic language to quantify what Schneiderman was suggesting to make him realise what he was actually suggesting we do.

[barry]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vogels to CHB

Originally posted by NMWBloods

With a couple of better KP defenders, we might be able to open the game up more and thus try more to win by kicking more goals rather than stopping our opponents. Of course, the ability of our midfield to execute this strategy becomes an issue too.

Thats drawing a long bow.

In general you play your better KPP up forward, and lesser ones down back. Its easier to learn disaplin (sp?) than flair.

St Kilda probably play the most open attacking style of game in the comp, and their defense is ordinary.

If Vogels turns out to be as good as you believe (or just better than LRT) then he belongs up forward. Thats our key weakness at the moment IMO. With O'keefe doing nothing, we are one forward down at the moment.