Nick Malceski

[TheHood]

Re: heath james

Originally posted by lachlanc
changing the subject yet again, can any of you sages tell me what's happening with Heath James? I see he kicked six in the twos a few weeks ago and yet his name never comes up for selection. Personally i always thought he looked a bit out of his depth and would think that he is on borrowed time and heading for de-listing. as i'm new to RWO i'd be curious as to whether there's any inside goss.

by the way, i love this site. i've only just discovered it through my sister in law, who is also a mad swan fan. i'm originally from SA and grew up on Aussie rules but left before the Crows started to live in Sydney. The Swans are now my team in a big way.

Welcome to the site lachlan. Hope you enjoy all the crazy posts and threads this place can throw up.

It's a great vent for frustration and a nice way to celebrate the good moments too.

[giant]

Re: heath james

Originally posted by lachlanc
changing the subject yet again, can any of you sages tell me what's happening with Heath James? I see he kicked six in the twos a few weeks ago and yet his name never comes up for selection. Personally i always thought he looked a bit out of his depth and would think that he is on borrowed time and heading for de-listing. as i'm new to RWO i'd be curious as to whether there's any inside goss.

by the way, i love this site. i've only just discovered it through my sister in law, who is also a mad swan fan. i'm originally from SA and grew up on Aussie rules but left before the Crows started to live in Sydney. The Swans are now my team in a big way.

Can't tell you anuthing abt James but I'm fascinated about Bulahdelah - where the heck is that?

[lachlanc]

Re: Re: heath james

Originally posted by giant
Can't tell you anuthing abt James but I'm fascinated about Bulahdelah - where the heck is that?

2 and a half hours up the Pacific Highway and an hour north of Newcastle....Myall Lakes way

no aussie rules here sadly...my son has to play soccer but at least its not rugby league

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
Some predictions...

I rate you at 5/7.

Fixter - correct
Dempster - correct
Moore - correct
Malceski - correct
McVeigh - wrong. The kids only 20. If we (thankfully) gave Kirk till he was 26, why not McVeigh?
Vogels - wrong
LRT - correct

[lachlanc]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
I rate you at 5/7.

Fixter - correct
Dempster - correct
Moore - correct
Malceski - correct
McVeigh - wrong. The kids only 20. If we (thankfully) gave Kirk till he was 26, why not McVeigh?
Vogels - wrong
LRT - correct

personally i think malceski is being groomed as a midfield replacement for willo when he goes. we need players like this coming through and while he might play on a half back flank to start with i reckon midfield is the ultimate position for him. i think roos is smart in the way he's developing a few of these simultaneously - moore, vogels, bevan, dempster etc. - but i do think malceski looks like the best prospect in a while

[liz]

Originally posted by lachlanc
personally i think malceski is being groomed as a midfield replacement for willo when he goes.

I don't see Malceski as being a similar type of player to Willo. He doesn't have the same explosive pace, and I think the value in his field kicking is more his creativity than his outright penetration.

No doubt he has a chance to become an important part of the midfield though, and hopefully he can establish himself over the next year or two while we still have Willo as well.

[lachlanc]

Originally posted by liz
I don't see Malceski as being a similar type of player to Willo. He doesn't have the same explosive pace, and I think the value in his field kicking is more his creativity than his outright penetration.

No doubt he has a chance to become an important part of the midfield though, and hopefully he can establish himself over the next year or two while we still have Willo as well.

take your point on the pace factor. i'm not saying he's exactly the same as willo - i'm just worried for our midfield after he retires (he will play next season, won't he?) and am thinking about who we are grooming to play a role in there, and i see malceski in that space (although maybe playing across the half back line and kicking deep to the fifty might work well). regardless, i think he's a major talent.

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by liz
I don't see Malceski as being a similar type of player to Willo. He doesn't have the same explosive pace, and I think the value in his field kicking is more his creativity than his outright penetration.

No doubt he has a chance to become an important part of the midfield though, and hopefully he can establish himself over the next year or two while we still have Willo as well.

Willo Junior (Willoughby that is) is Willo's replacement.

[Legs Akimbo]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
I rate you at 5/7.

Fixter - correct
Dempster - correct
Moore - correct
Malceski - correct
McVeigh - wrong. The kids only 20. If we (thankfully) gave Kirk till he was 26, why not McVeigh?
Vogels - wrong
LRT - correct

If we gave every kid 8 years to develop into a decent player, then we'd finish last every year. Opportunity cost - every spot on the list is one potentially taken away from another player. Hence the return on older players diminishes because they are taking opportunity from a potential young star (or hack) with more poaying years. It's a balancing act, but '26' is unbalanced. Kirk is an exception, but does not change the laws of probability.

The club need to balance compassion with managing the list. I am not saying 'ditch Mcveigh', but my gut feeling is he is not going to be a force in the game because of the limits imposed by his physical development. If he was hugely skilled and a great athlete, maybe, but he is neither.

The club would be irresponsible to not to consider him as trade material. Essendon have given us such wonderful talents as Michael Werner and Ed Consodine, so let's return the favour.

[giant]

There'll be uproar about trading a Sydney boy just as there was when we traded Stafford. Which of course is no reason not to do it.

I think Roos is very equivocal about McVeigh as evidenced by dropping him this week after on of our best wins.

But yes let's take the draft pick from Essendon rather than end up with any more of their up & coming "stars" like Werner & Considine!! [Nice memory there Legs!]

[stellation]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
If he was hugely skilled and a great athlete, maybe, but he is neither.

I thought he was viewed as a great athlete and (normally) has pretty decent skills.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Legs Akimbo
If we gave every kid 8 years to develop into a decent player, then we'd finish last every year.

We'd also finish last if we traded every 20 year old who hadn't yet reached their peak. Talk of trading guys like McVeigh & Schneider is crazy unless it was for something that we couldn't refuse - because we would just want to trade their replacements when they hit 20 and weren't world beaters.

Goodes peaked at about 23, Jude is now 25 (?), Kirk was probably 27, Hall 27, Williams around that age, Ablett is now 22 and is still improving. If a player looks like a dud you don't give him until 26 but if he has talent, which McVeigh obviously does, you don't look to get rid of him at 20.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Sean
Goodes peaked at about 23, Jude is now 25 (?), Kirk was probably 27, Hall 27, Williams around that age, Ablett is now 22 and is still improving. If a player looks like a dud you don't give him until 26 but if he has talent, which McVeigh obviously does, you don't look to get rid of him at 20.

Nicely put.

The problem with Judd and L Ball is that they give every other player a bad name. Suddenly if you aren't a superstar by your second year you wont amount to anything.

Most importantly, there are plenty of others on our list who have much more to be concerned about than Schneider or McVeigh at this stage.

[giant]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Most importantly, there are plenty of others on our list who have much more to be concerned about than Schneider or McVeigh at this stage.

Who would you trade before McVeigh at the moment? I don't think he's a dud which is what makes him tradable.

I just don't think he's fitting into the side or contributing his true worth - sometimes it's in both parties' interests to move on.

[barry]

The only person McVeigh should be compared to is Salopek of Port who some beleieve we should have taken instead, and was taken right after McVeigh. Although many beleive McViegh was the right choice. 6 to one, half dozen to another.

I'm guessing many of you are saying: Salopek who?

Exactly.