Most valuable commodities

[plugger66]

Good players
My rating of the current (as of 2014 R8)

Riewoldt
Montagna
Dempster
Steven
Hayes
Armitage
Schnieder


I would consider Steven a Very Good player.... My assessment of him can change as he develops you know?
He wasn't a B&F winner when I called him a (average I think) player. At the time he was a frustrating player, who won a lot of the footy, gave a lot of drive and turned it over a lot?

Why do you believe Dal and Joey to be tagged instead of him? Just because he is getting the most footy, doesn't make him the best player. If roles were reversed, and Dal was allowed to run around unchecked and Jack was tagged heavily would the B&F results been the same.

He was tagged vs Carlton, well beaten. It's the first time I've noticed the opposition sit on him.

If I were coaching against StK I would tag Joey. I rate Joey more damaging. He was a good player in a good side

Btw
Many of those players at least 250 are more often in the seconds ..... Another 200 or so are just ordinary fringe AFL players or perhaps developing

To be a good AFL player is nothing to be sneezed at

Well thats where i was confused. i had no idea Rooy, Lenny, Joey or jack were good players. I would have thought very good now and even higher at their best.

As for jack not getting tagged well last year was his first break out year. he has been tagged more this year even after coming off injury. No idea if the B&F results would have been the same. its impossible to say. And you called him an average player last year. At that stage he wasnt a B&F winner but he was looking like it IMO.

And yeas at least 250 of those players are in the seconds. I suppose the question is you made a statement he wasnt close to AA. the facts and not opinion say he was rated between 23 and 40 out of 700 players in the AFL. it suggests to me he was very close. you havent been able to give any facts for your statement but i have given you facts why your statement seems very wrong.

Finally is that an order for good players because even though its your opinion how could lenny be below most of those players? he would clearly be second in the B&F at this stage.

[BigMart]

Address a couple of points plugger

I wrote Jack was NOW a very good player

Jack has only been tagged vs Carlton this year. Who else has tagged him? He was definitely allowed free reign last game. And not sure Hawthorn tagged too many?

I called him average at about R8 last year. Nick Riewoldt was looking a winner a out then and if he didn't miss the last few would have won it. Joey was a tad unlucky IMO.

Not being close to AA
Which player in the AA team was he close to dislodging?
Pendlbury, Ablett, Watson, Selwood, Griffen, Swan Jack or Dangerfield?

[BigMart]

Well I have Dempster probably leading the B&F ATM

Nick probably second

Lenny, Joey, Delaney and Ray next

Daniel Jackson has won a B&F .... When looking at great players in our team vs great players in the comp
There is a difference

[plugger66]

Address a couple of points plugger

I wrote Jack was NOW a very good player

Jack has only been tagged vs Carlton this year. Who else has tagged him? He was definitely allowed free reign last game. And not sure Hawthorn tagged too many?

I called him average at about R8 last year. Nick Riewoldt was looking a winner a out then and if he didn't miss the last few would have won it. Joey was a tad unlucky IMO.

Not being close to AA
Which player in the AA team was he close to dislodging?
Pendlbury, Ablett, Watson, Selwood, Griffen, Swan Jack or Dangerfield?

You are amazing BM. You said about 5 posts ago that jack was a good player. In that post you said nothing about very good. Even in the last post you called him a good player and then a very good player. You confuse the hell out of me and probably others. As for not being close to AA. You said it so prove it. It has nothing to do with replacing players as you said he wasnt close. i say facts suggest he was between 23 and 40. that is friggin close. you made the statement now prove it. As for the B&F if Joey was unlucky he was certainly unlucky. he lost by about 30% more votes. That suggests he wasnt even close to unlucky. No idea about Rooy as its again complete guess work by you. Can you ever admit you can be wrong BM. it seems easy for rest of us on here but even when facts say you are wrong you cant admit it.

[BigMart]

One p66

When have you ever admitted you were wrong

Not sure what I'm wrong about?!

The degree of goodness that I rate Jack Steven

He is clearly a good player.... He has clearly improved.....he Clearly has disposal weaknesses....

He is not close to as good as the following 12 midfielders... Therefore a long way off AA
Scott Pendlbury, Gary Ablett, Joel Selwood, Jobe Watson, Sam Mitchell, Pat Dangerfield, Dane Swan, Josh Kennedy, Nate Fyfe, Trent Cotchin, Travis Boak, Ryan Griffen, Chris Judd,
They are elite
Then you've got
Jack, Barlow, Mundy, Thompson, Goddard, Dal Santo, Cunnington, Martin, McVeigh, Shuey, Selwood, Jones, Douglas, Beams, Rockliff, Hannebury, a Mark Murphy, Liberatore, Hayes.... Even Boomer

All of those Guys if fit and firing.... Are VERY GOOD to ELITE...
is Jack Steven as accomplished as any of those.... Perhaps the equal of a few?

Certainly well down the list

He does not compare to Hayes, Dal Santo, Goddard, Ball 6 years ago.... Which is why we were top 4

Whilst you certainly think he is a jet, because he wins the most footy for us... The fact he is our Gun suggests why we sit at the bottom. Most good midfields he would be 3rd best player... Like Beams

[plugger66]

One p66

When have you ever admitted you were wrong

Not sure what I'm wrong about?!

The degree of goodness that I rate Jack Steven

He is clearly a good player.... He has clearly improved.....he Clearly has disposal weaknesses....

He is not close to as good as the following 12 midfielders... Therefore a long way off AA
Scott Pendlbury, Gary Ablett, Joel Selwood, Jobe Watson, Sam Mitchell, Pat Dangerfield, Dane Swan, Josh Kennedy, Nate Fyfe, Trent Cotchin, Travis Boak, Ryan Griffen, Chris Judd,
They are elite
Then you've got
Jack, Barlow, Mundy, Thompson, Goddard, Dal Santo, Cunnington, Martin, McVeigh, Shuey, Selwood, Jones, Douglas, Beams, Rockliff, Hannebury, a Mark Murphy, Liberatore, Hayes.... Even Boomer

All of those Guys if fit and firing.... Are VERY GOOD to ELITE...
is Jack Steven as accomplished as any of those.... Perhaps the equal of a few?

Certainly well down the list

He does not compare to Hayes, Dal Santo, Goddard, Ball 6 years ago.... Which is why we were top 4

Whilst you certainly think he is a jet, because he wins the most footy for us... The fact he is our Gun suggests why we sit at the bottom. Most good midfields he would be 3rd best player... Like Beams

Seriously. I admit I am wrong many times because I am. And naming those players means jack because AA is decided on one year and he finished between 23 and 40 which is very close. naming players doesnt make him further away, all it shows is you will admit you are wrong. And you know why you are wrong because you havent proved you are right.

[saintspremiers]

One p66

When have you ever admitted you were wrong

Not sure what I'm wrong about?!

The degree of goodness that I rate Jack Steven

He is clearly a good player.... He has clearly improved.....he Clearly has disposal weaknesses....

He is not close to as good as the following 12 midfielders... Therefore a long way off AA
Scott Pendlbury, Gary Ablett, Joel Selwood, Jobe Watson, Sam Mitchell, Pat Dangerfield, Dane Swan, Josh Kennedy, Nate Fyfe, Trent Cotchin, Travis Boak, Ryan Griffen, Chris Judd,
They are elite
Then you've got
Jack, Barlow, Mundy, Thompson, Goddard, Dal Santo, Cunnington, Martin, McVeigh, Shuey, Selwood, Jones, Douglas, Beams, Rockliff, Hannebury, a Mark Murphy, Liberatore, Hayes.... Even Boomer

All of those Guys if fit and firing.... Are VERY GOOD to ELITE...
is Jack Steven as accomplished as any of those.... Perhaps the equal of a few?

Certainly well down the list

He does not compare to Hayes, Dal Santo, Goddard, Ball 6 years ago.... Which is why we were top 4

Whilst you certainly think he is a jet, because he wins the most footy for us... The fact he is our Gun suggests why we sit at the bottom. Most good midfields he would be 3rd best player... Like Beams

Seriously. I admit I am wrong many times because I am. And naming those players means jack because AA is decided on one year and he finished between 23 and 40 which is very close. naming players doesnt make him further away, all it shows is you will admit you are wrong. And you know why you are wrong because you havent proved you are right.

I have an idea plugs and BM.

This Friday night at Etihad meet for a drink pregame.

You may actually get along with each other in person.

Just an idea....

[BigMart]

He was in no way close to dislodging any in the side, or as good as the next few in line P66

Exactly where do you rank him against those I named?

Ps
Give us an example where you admitted you were wrong?
Pps
Lewis Pierce is on our list of 40
Is he close to getting a game?

[plugger66]

He was in no way close to dislodging any in the side, or as good as the next few in line P66

Exactly where do you rank him against those I named?

Ps
Give us an example where you admitted you were wrong?
Pps
Lewis Pierce is on our list of 40
Is he close to getting a game?

Give an example where i was wrong. There is hundreds. said i didnt rate Roberton last year and was wrong. Said Siposs would be a good player for us.looking very wrong. Hundreds of times i was wrong.

And again you give us a poor example to prove you arent wrong. It doesnt matter where I rank those players you mentioned against Jack because you and me dont do the AA side. Lets talk facts as we know it. You said he wasnt close to the AA. We know including you that Jack was rated between 23 and 40 out of over 700 players. That is close and that is fact. Your example is poor because you picked about our 40th player out of 40 players so he isnt close. Fact is jack was btween 23 and 40 out of 700 so that is close. Do you admit the facts as we know it makes your statement incorrect? I think most logical people would. Ande a positve saints person would have made this statement instead of your staement. That person would have said Jack was very close to being picked in the AA side because we know he was in the top 40 players in the country last year. hey but thats only a positive supporter.

[BigMart]

Why do you mention 700 players?

Only 70 or so would even remotely be considered.. 4/5 best from each team... And then most of them would not come into calculation.

So whilst yes, he was a bit closer to AA than Jay Lever

He was even closer than James Gwilt.

He wouldn't have been as close as Nick Riewoldt.... Because the discussion between Riewoldt, Cloke and Cameron would have been a good debate.

Jack's name in the list of 40 would have been crossed pretty quickly, as he is a fair bit offsay Pendles?

We are looking at the argument two different ways....

You are comparing him to the rest of the comp... Half of which don't even play AFL regularly

I'm comparing him to those selected... Of which he is not close to that level yet

[dragit]

Being in the squad of 40 is the definition of being close, end of story.

[BigMart]

I'm sure Jobe, Joel and Pendles are pretty safe?!

Not to mention Gaz

He is not in their league... Not even CLOSE

[plugger66]

Why do you mention 700 players?

Only 70 or so would even remotely be considered.. 4/5 best from each team... And then most of them would not come into calculation.

So whilst yes, he was a bit closer to AA than Jay Lever

He was even closer than James Gwilt.

He wouldn't have been as close as Nick Riewoldt.... Because the discussion between Riewoldt, Cloke and Cameron would have been a good debate.

Jack's name in the list of 40 would have been crossed pretty quickly, as he is a fair bit offsay Pendles?

We are looking at the argument two different ways....

You are comparing him to the rest of the comp... Half of which don't even play AFL regularly

I'm comparing him to those selected... Of which he is not close to that level yet

Seriously can you ever admit you are wrong? i will answer that. No. The facts are he was between 23 and 40. thats close. the rest is gess work unless you know how it worked. The 700 matters because it proves he was closer than 660 other players.

[BigMart]

But not as close as the ones that were...

Was he close to getting a gig ahead of Pendlebury?

[plugger66]

But not as close as the ones that were...

Was he close to getting a gig ahead of Pendlebury?

No idea? Why do you ask these questions? Was he in the final 40? yes. Did you state he wsnt close to be AA? Yes. Was that statement incorrect based on facts? Yes.

[BigMart]

I'll spell it out for you slowly p66

You keep insisting he was close to selection?

I keep insisting he wasn't close to dislodging the ones selected... You admitted you have no idea how close he was to taking the place of
Pendlebury, Ablett, Watson, Swan, Selwood.... And then there's the guys that missed Hodge, Kennedy, Boak
the games elite, therefore I think he's a bit off

Yes, he's closer than a whole lot of fringe players... He's not close to the elite

Would you like me to list them again, and you can place him in the order...

Question
How close do you reckon Richard Douglas came to AA selection?

[plugger66]

I'll spell it out for you slowly p66

You keep insisting he was close to selection?

I keep insisting he wasn't close to dislodging the ones selected... You admitted you have no idea how close he was to taking the place of
Pendlebury, Ablett, Watson, Swan, Selwood.... And then there's the guys that missed Hodge, Kennedy, Boak
the games elite, therefore I think he's a bit off

Yes, he's closer than a whole lot of fringe players... He's not close to the elite

Would you like me to list them again, and you can place him in the order...

Question
How close do you reckon Richard Douglas came to AA selection?

You are actually amazing. You said he wasnt close to AA selection. The facts say he was top 40. Could have been 23. Thats facts. Your opinion has been pproven wrong because of facts. You do understand facts. Like I said previously a normal Saints supporter would have made the following statement. Jack was really close to AA last season because we know he was in the final 40 players. Hey but thats only a positive Saints supporter. If Douglas made the top 40, whicj im unsure, then yes of course he was close to AA selection. Closer than a whole lot of fringe players. Seriously its just impossible for you to say maybe that statement wasnt correct even when facts are presented to you. And I have no idea why you keep naming other players because i dont have the order of how they were picked and I doubt you do either.I doubt you picked the 22 players before they were named.

[BigMart]

So which player of the midfield group was he close to replacing?

I'd like to know? How close to Jobe?

Lewis Pierce is in our list of 40... Is he close to a game this year?....

[plugger66]

So which player of the midfield group was he close to replacing?

I'd like to know? How close to Jobe?

Lewis Pierce is in our list of 40... Is he close to a game this year?....

BM your examples are very poor. matter of fact pathetic. Pierce isnt close because he is around 40 on a list of 40. Jack is 23 to 40 on a list of nearly 800. Stop mentioning names. i wasnt on the AA committee so i have no idea as you dont. Did you get the exact 22 that were picked? i doubt it. That means players you rated between 23 and 40 were picked.

[BigMart]

Oh, it's you using the word pathetic.

Now, it's nearly 800... We counting Rookies yet...

Why not say all footballers in the country. I play, I am certain Jack was closer than me?

I'll also say...

That he is not CLOSE to
Jobe Watson
Joel Selwood
Gary Ablett
Scott Pendlebury
Patrick Dangerfield
Ryan Griifen


I know you love the Boy because you boarded him... But to suggest he is remotely close to that company is hilarious?!
You would be ridiculed if you suggested such a thing.

But yes he is closer to them than Darren Minchington... To grab one of your 800

[plugger66]

Oh, it's you using the word pathetic.

Now, it's nearly 800... We counting Rookies yet...

Why not say all footballers in the country. I play, I am certain Jack was closer than me?

I'll also say...

That he is not CLOSE to
Jobe Watson
Joel Selwood
Gary Ablett
Scott Pendlebury
Patrick Dangerfield
Ryan Griifen


I know you love the Boy because you boarded him... But to suggest he is remotely close to that company is hilarious?!
You would be ridiculed if you suggested such a thing.


I boarded him. What are you on about BM? Who said he was close to those guys careers. Certainly not me but he was close to them last season. Very close in fact as he was rated between 23 and 40 in the AFL so he was very close to AA. He isnt as good as Chris Judd either but he was much closer to AA than him. Fact. By the way BM did you pick the 22 players in the AA side last season.
But yes he is closer to them than Darren Minchington... To grab one of your 800

[gringo]

Stop being stubborn Big mart he's closer to elite than he is to being a fringe player, he was outstanding last year and would maybe not dislodge the top 4 or 5 mids in the comp but compares pretty well to Boak, Hannerbury and Dangerfield types quite well. Different players but just off the very top shelf few players. Don't make me agree with Plugger.

[BigMart]

He is very much closer to elite than fringe... He has an elite part of his game, perhaps two?

He is just gone into the A Grade category IMO which is high level.... Probably 80 players A Grade or above in the AFL

He is a bit behind Hannebury, Boak and definitely Danger (who is set to be offered 8M)

Hannebury had an electric GF and if unchecked he dominates similar to Jack... He is a better user though

Boak is an unheralded Gun IMO ... Captain of probably the best team ATM and probably their best player

[Old Mate]

I'd have Jack a bit behind that group (Hannebury, Beams, Danger, Boake etc). I'd have Jack in the Rory Sloane, Tom Rockliff, Scott Selwood category which is nothing to sneeze about.

[Bunk_Moreland]

So the new rules have changed nothing on here?

Why argue with someone whois incapable of admitting he is wrong?

Of course Steven was close to AA, he was in the top 40.

End of argument. No spin can change that.

Nothing can change the fact he WAS close.

Really disappointing the forum being hijacked by posters with rigid views and who posts diatribes and polemics and will brook no argument.

Makes the forum poorer