Nick Davis (quality or not)

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Steve
He can have 8 touches and people still go away saying "what about that goal, what about ...", whereas effective players are perceived to have had poor days.

Yeah, but he could have 8 touches and kick 6 or 7 goals and be BOG, that's the sort of player he is. He's not terribly hard at it, but I don't think he's soft either and he's not a ball magnet but he gives us that little bit of polish and class that we require. He's unique, and we don't have anyone else like him. He won't have the ball on a string too often but when you need someone to kick a steadying goal, more often than not, he'll be the one there doing it.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Steve
Those who watch him closely would have noticed that in the second half of the year he was regularly used as a kind of 'link-man' b/w defence and the midfield - he regularly would float wide on a HBF to get an easy receive from defenders under some sort of pressure.

I noticed in a number of those games that he went in and got the ball too. I don't think he was simply a receiver.

He can have 8 touches and people still go away saying "what about that goal, what about ...", whereas effective players are perceived to have had poor days.

But that's what forwards do - if he gets 8 possessions and kicks 2-3 goals, that's a great return. Depends on how much he plays up forward and how much in the midfield.

[Cheer Cheer]

Anyone noticed how he has really bulked up to?
Quite a muscular figure - he has been involved in the rough stuff this year and more than held his own.

I think calling him soft is not the right term - I don't think he is soft, but he is definately laconic sometimes which people may perceive as soft - i/e - his one handed attempt at a mark against hawthorn early on in the season at the G' and his lazy kick to cresswell against carlton in melbourne - both situations should have lead to swans being in the attacking fifty - yet the ball was turned over.

[Reggi]

Originally posted by Plugger46
Yeah, but he could have 8 touches and kick 6 or 7 goals and be BOG, that's the sort of player he is. He's not terribly hard at it, but I don't think he's soft either and he's not a ball magnet but he gives us that little bit of polish and class that we require. He's unique, and we don't have anyone else like him. He won't have the ball on a string too often but when you need someone to kick a steadying goal, more often than not, he'll be the one there doing it.

And he could get 40 kicks and Kick 24 goals in a game and be the greatest player ever.

Don't make no difference though

He never did it and he never will

[Reggi]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I noticed in a number of those games that he went in and got the ball too. I don't think he was simply a receiver.



But that's what forwards do - if he gets 8 possessions and kicks 2-3 goals, that's a great return. Depends on how much he plays up forward and how much in the midfield.

Yeah I got lots of fond memories of seeing Nick Davis at the bottom of packs - winning hard footies.

toughest player I've seen in I don't know how many years...

This explains why after playing every game he was 11th in disposals - even after a fair run in the midfield.

And to the point at hand is he just a fair forward or a good to top forward like say Nathan Brown who plays a similar role however kicked 56 goals and had more disposals.

Personally on that basis I would say - just a fair player - but others are entitled to their opinion

[Bart]

Reggi,

I know you're pretty biased on this as per your comments pror to picking up Davis and not the best at eating humble pie. I would suspect that Davis would need to win a Bronlow for you to change your mind.

However, I tend to agree with you. I find Davis just lazy. I know we never picked him as an in and under player, but I recall so much him recoiling fom a 50:50 ball right in front of me on the O'Reilly wing which left a sour taste.

I don't recall him turning a game this year bar his cameo appearance against the Pies in Melb.

Jury is out.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Reggi
Yeah I got lots of fond memories of seeing Nick Davis at the bottom of packs - winning hard footies.

You don't have to be at the bottom of the pack to get the football without being a receiver. He was 10th in our clearances and 10th in tackles. I'm sure he could do better, but it doesn't make him as woeful as you seem to think.

toughest player I've seen in I don't know how many years...

Um... don't think I even vaguely implied that...

This explains why after playing every game he was 11th in disposals - even after a fair run in the midfield.

Well, he was 10th in kicks and he was 11th overall behind J Bolton, A Goodes, P Williams, N Fosdike, T Kennelly, B Kirk, B Mathews, D Cresswell, S Maxfield and L Barry, so it's not such a shabby lot of players who beat him.

I don't think he had a huge run in the midfield, had an interrupted pre-season and is new to playing midfield.

That said, I've never said he's already a star and I've said before he needs to improve in a number of ways. However, I think you are way too negative.

And to the point at hand is he just a fair forward or a good to top forward like say Nathan Brown who plays a similar role however kicked 56 goals and had more disposals.

Firstly, the possession difference is not that great - 15ppg against 13ppg. I also notice that Brown finished higher in his team's handling error table than Davis.

Secondly, Brown has less competition for goalkicking - he is by far and away their main inside 50 target.

Thirdly, I think Brown is a better player at this stage, but so what.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Bart
I don't recall him turning a game this year bar his cameo appearance against the Pies in Melb.

We wouldn't have won the Richmond game at the MCG, without him IMO, he kicked 3 or 4 telling goals. And he had a huge hand in winning the last game against the dees, along with Micky and Goodesy.

Reggi,

I think you're expecting too much from Davis. You're trying to make him into a player that he's not. He's not an 'in and under' type. He's not a superstar, and never will be but he's a quality player.

The bottom line is, he's a very important part of the side, and is more important than you're letting on Reggi.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Reggi
This explains why after playing every game he was 11th in disposals - even after a fair run in the midfield.

Who gives a stuff where he finished in disposals? The number of disposals a player gets is overrated, it's what you do with them that counts. Mathews finished ahead of him on disposals and as far as I'm concerned, Davis has a bigger influence on most matches than Mathews does. By the way, he didn't spend that much time in the midfield, his fitness after an interrupted pre-season prevented him from playing there too often.

[Frosty_13]

Originally posted by Plugger46
Who gives a stuff where he finished in disposals? The number of disposals a player gets is overrated, it's what you do with them that counts. Mathews finished ahead of him on disposals and as far as I'm concerned, Davis has a bigger influence on most matches than Mathews does. By the way, he didn't spend that much time in the midfield, his fitness after an interrupted pre-season prevented him from playing there too often.

Mathews is a far better player than Nick Davis. Mathews is a great finisher (much like frosty) and he gets it. Davis is soft and lazy.

[stellation]

Originally posted by Frosty_13
Mathews is a far better player than Nick Davis. Mathews is a great finisher (much like frosty) and he gets it. Davis is soft and lazy.

obviously this is just an issue that is in the eye of the beholder, but I can't see at all how you could compare the two and have finishing as the first thing to bring up as an argument for Mathews over Davis...

[Ruda Wakening]

Personally I think gun or champion are words that are used too often.

Collingwood have always put pressure on their kids via the media. Actually I think Nick was labelled as being the next Peter Daicos, even before he'd played a senior game. When people make ridiculous statements like that, of course players are going to seem like they've underachieved, or not lived up to expectations. Unless of course they do actually make it to true champion status, and face it, not that many do.

Whilst his fitness was a little bit of an issue last season. I think it had just as much to do with him coming from such a regimented army type atmosphere, and then trying to adjust to a far more relaxed one. He left a place where the coach didn't welcome individuality on the football field, and come to one where it was encouraged. He's just found his feet. He had to learn how not to be the scapegoat basically.

He's never been a workhorse, but his brilliance compensates for that. In saying that though, I think many people do overlook his contributions in general. Perhaps if he were to change his game too much and try and become a tireless worker, he'd lose his brilliance. Does the name Phil Blake ring a bell?

Expecting Nick to change, and become a workhorse, is kind of like expecting Makybe Diva or Mr Prudent to win the Oakleigh Plate.

I can't really see why people say that he can't read play. In the final against Brisbane, there were a couple of occasions where he was in the process of setting something up, only to have others misread him.

He's a high quality player, who WILL bring good to Sydney.

Ask guys like Barry Hall what they think of him ...

[DST]

Originally posted by Reggi
He's a good mark, but I think he is limited by his reading of the play and the fact that he isn't a great ball-winner/ gatherer of the footy.

Which is more than half the battle really

Continue on

His reading of the play is one of his problems, but it is he reads it to well not well enough !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For to many years he has become lazy becuase he knows how to find the ball easily and read the play (it's natural to him). He therefore does not work hard enough when he hasn't got the ball or to support team mates.

Remember everyone it takes all types to build a succesfull team, so his 12 posessions a game and 2 to 3 goals are important.

You can't have 22 Kirks running around every week, sure the team would work hard and leave nothing on the field but I would gaurantee you we would lose by 15 goals a week.

DST

[Newbie]

Go easy on Davis, people.

He adds plenty to the team. Since he could kick from outside 50'm accurately, they have to man him up anywhere from the 50's arc. This obviously opens up the defense for others.

Taking him out from our team and the opposition could simply sit back and fill the space closer to goal. Obviously this spells trouble as most of our forwards are leading-type and thus need space to operate.

Could he be better? Yeap definitely and we EXPECT that.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Frosty_13
Mathews is a far better player than Nick Davis. Mathews is a great finisher (much like frosty)

Jeez... Mathews and McPherson better finishers than Davis...