Seaby vs Pyke

[Primmy]

Lets put it this way. If I had my pick of 1.5 year player MykePyke or a 10 year Canberra district player, who would I pick.

No contest. MP every day of the week. He has worked, he wants it, he asked for it, he likes it, I like him, he is not an ego player, the graph is still going u p, lets enjoy the journey because we have no idea where we are going to end up!

The best thing of all, except for Tadgh and he had Gaelic behind him, NO other overseas player has come close to his growth (I do not include Jimmy in this exercise).

[Peace]

I think his increasing confidence is helping him the most, that kick to Goodes on the lead was fantastic! It will take a while but i predict him becoming full of confidence in a year or so, he will be a very good player!

[caj23]

I think he would be a far better option than Playfair or Richards.

West Coast are crying out for a big forward and didnt consider using him there which says something.

I can't think of too many ruckman in recent times who have successfully been played as a permanent forward.

[teddys mum]

Swans could put Mumford up forward, and have Seaby and Pyke in the ruck.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I reckon Seaby would be better up forward, he's played a bit there in his career and Mummy's too good around the stoppages to waste in the forward line

[dimelb]

West Coast are crying out for a big forward and didnt consider using him there which says something.

I can't think of too many ruckman in recent times who have successfully been played as a permanent forward.

Petrie, Jason Ball, Paul Salmon come to mind. Are there others?

[dimelb]

West Coast are crying out for a big forward and didnt consider using him there which says something. ...

It certainly does: WC coaches/selectors are a bunch of klutzes.

[royboy42]

Petrie, Jason Ball, Paul Salmon come to mind. Are there others?

My memory is that Salmon STARTED as a full forward, then rucked after his knee reco..seems the wrong way around but that's how I remember it. Anyone else got thoughts?

[laughingnome]

Petrie, Jason Ball, Paul Salmon come to mind. Are there others?

Big Q Lynch fitted the bill for West Coast. Good enough to kick 65 in 2006, the first Coaster to kick over 50 since Scott Cummings.

[laughingnome]

My memory is that Salmon STARTED as a full forward, then rucked after his knee reco..seems the wrong way around but that's how I remember it. Anyone else got thoughts?

Spot on. It sounds odd but Salmon has stated that after his knees couldn't take it anymore and he got older and couldn't run he rucked more, because even in 1996 (when he was at Hawthorn) the ruckman didn't run much. Occasionally they'd drift into the 50s to defend/goal but mostly stayed in the middle third, manning the ball-ups and throw ins. The change to an extra midfielder has been an innovation of the noughties, with Cox leading the way.

[Kirkari]

am i the only one who thinks pyke cant play? oh well, id drop him he has improved but not hard when you start out as nothing to improve somewhat. But around the ground he cant play much at all?

seaby was ahead of mumford before injury

You're not the only one, but truth isn't the same as popular opinion.

That said, Seaby's ranking is not under threat - at least not from Pikey. Mummy is another story.

[Bas]

How about Pyke and White switching between FF/CHF during a game, assuming Bradshaw doesn't make it back.

I would like to know whether Pyke follows a game plan as a player always bobs up for a handpass when he gets the ball. He is a very good overhead mark and I don't think the Swans have utilised his running ability. He would be a steam train in a rugby or league code. He knows how to palm players off which is not known in AFL circles.

He is improving significantly and will be on the list for a few more years. He is a professional footballer and carries himself as such in all aspects.

Personally, I would like to see all three to play on the field. As whoever said - at the end of the game, tall players don't get shorter.

[swansrule100]

You're not the only one, but truth isn't the same as popular opinion.

That said, Seaby's ranking is not under threat - at least not from Pikey. Mummy is another story.

he has improved out of site to the point where while we dont have the seaby option we can carry his minimal around the ground input but i think putting seaby mumford and pyke in the one side would make us even slower and top heavy

[Go Swannies]

he has improved out of site to the point where while we dont have the seaby option we can carry his minimal around the ground input but i think putting seaby mumford and pyke in the one side would make us even slower and top heavy

The speed side of their game would be Pyke well in front then probably Mummy then Seaby so you're right bringing Seaby back at the expense of Pyke would produce a slower team.

[laughingnome]

He is a very good overhead mark and I don't think the Swans have utilised his running ability. He would be a steam train in a rugby or league code. He knows how to palm players off which is not known in AFL circles.

It's not known because it's fraught with danger, especially with the crackdown on HTB and high contact. The only player I've ever seen give the don't argue repeatedly was Plugger, and if he ever got under threat he had enough nous to snap at goal reasonably accurately before the tackler retarded him.

Pyke's running ability is, like ROK's engine, a great asset off the ball and getitng to position. While it happens slightly more now then in years gone by, it remains true that the ball moves faster by kicking it then running with it. Running with the ball is done to break zones, usually with a chain of handballs to get past the wall. Then run to the next position and kick to the target. By virtue of his size, Pyke's position is as that target or defending against that target. His speed should (and I think eventually will) allow him to keep up when the play is switched to the alternate side or a fast break occurs, nullifying the advantage when the opposition executes the move and enhancing the advantage when we do.