Losing Josh Kennedy to WCE - really all that bad?!?

camel · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:19 pm

Michael Jezz wrote:

marciblue wrote:

Iâ€™ve been of the opinion that the club erred in its draft choices over 2004-05 in that we selected too many tall forwards and not enough midfielders and this may have held back our revival to some extent. I was particularly critical that we had recruited Hartlett as a key forward hoping he would cement a defensive KP role. Then with the addition of Kennedy, if Hartlett could not deliver in this role, he would always remain surplus to our needs if JK stepped up as Josh was always going to get first crack having the greater credentials.

From what I have seen of Adam I am pretty confident that he can play CHF if given time and if he can avoid injury (the BIG if with Adam). In terms of dimensions they are fairly similar (source: club website)
Adam: 195cm, 88 kg â€“ could be 1-2cm taller now and is definitely heavier than that now
Josh: 195cm, 93 kg â€“ apparently had grown to close to 199cm and was around 97kg

The only ? is his durability and doubt on whether he can hold down a tough role like CHF at AFL level. He is aggressive, a pretty good mark and a thumpi
ng kick so he can be given a go. Iâ€™m hoping he can stake a claim

I just gotta compliment you on this post. You are spot on. I would have preferred to trade Hartlett than Kennedy. This post is one of the best ever on this forum. Really adds insight.

Yeah, except the Eagles didn't want Hartlett.

I would have preferred to trade Lance for Judd in a direct swap, but that was never going to happen, was it.

Also, at the time Hartlett was recruited we had one of the shortest lists in the comp. We needed talls. Moreover, there wasn't a lot of quality after Hartlett was drafted either. Mark LeCras, perhaps? Rosa? Sherman? Apart from the father/sons it doesn't appear as though our recruiters have made a massive hindsight blunder.

Since then we've added Murphy and Gibbs to our midfield, among others, to address our midfield needs. And, erm, we took Russell before Hartlett.

As for Hartlett being a surplus tall. Having a bloke of his height and build in defence would be very handy right about now. Don't you think?

Before the next counter to that proposition. Trent Croad can play forward and back. Justin Leppitsch. And so it goes...

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:27 pm

camelboy wrote:

Michael Jezz wrote:

marciblue wrote:

Iâ€™ve been of the opinion that the club erred in its draft choices over 2004-05 in that we selected too many tall forwards and not enough midfielders and this may have held back our revival to some extent. I was particularly critical that we had recruited Hartlett as a key forward hoping he would cement a defensive KP role. Then with the addition of Kennedy, if Hartlett could not deliver in this role, he would always remain surplus to our needs if JK stepped up as Josh was always going to get first crack having the greater credentials.

From what I have seen of Adam I am pretty confident that he can play CHF if given time and if he can avoid injury (the BIG if with Adam). In terms of dimensions they are fairly similar (source: club website)
Adam: 195cm, 88 kg â€“ could be 1-2cm taller now and is definitely heavier than that now
Josh: 195cm, 93 kg â€“ apparently had grown to close to 199cm and was around 97kg

The only ? is his durability and doubt on whether he can hold down a tough role like CHF at AFL level. He is aggressive, a pretty good mark and a thumpi
ng kick so he can be given a go. Iâ€™m hoping he can stake a claim

I just gotta compliment you on this post. You are spot on. I would have preferred to trade Hartlett than Kennedy. This post is one of the best ever on this forum. Really adds insight.

Yeah, except the Eagles didn't want Hartlett.

I would have preferred to trade Lance for Judd in a direct swap, but that was never going to happen, was it.

Also, at the time Hartlett was recruited we had one of the shortest lists in the comp. We needed talls. Moreover, there wasn't a lot of quality after Hartlett was drafted either. Mark LeCras, perhaps? Rosa? Sherman? Apart from the father/sons it doesn't appear as though our recruiters have made a massive hindsight blunder.

Since then we've added Murphy and Gibbs to our midfield, among others, to address our midfield needs. And, erm, we took Russell before Hartlett.

As for Hartlett being a surplus tall. Having a bloke of his height and build in defence would be very handy right about now. Don't you think?

Before the next counter to that proposition. Trent Croad can play forward and back. Justin Leppitsch. And so it goes...

And dont forget that season 2004 was the "Pagan save my arse season" where instead of biting the bullet and cleaning out the list we went for the stop gap draft every shite mature age body we could and we plucked 10 wins out of our arse finished 10th.

And in the first draft we had proper access to after our fines and penalties we ended up with Pick 9 and Pick 15.

Instead of finishing in the bottom 4 and having a go at Deledio, Roughead, Franklin etc.

Now I am not having a go at Russell and Hartlett - they may turn out alright - but what Pagan did in season 2004 would have to be the most short sighted strategy in the history of our club.

Jarz · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:55 pm

i would've liked 2 keep kennedy and eventually i think he'll turn out 2 bequite a handy player but in the end im very happy to lose him for judd in return
:-D

Blue Beatle · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:18 pm

AGRO wrote:

camelboy wrote:

Michael Jezz wrote:

marciblue wrote:

Iâ€™ve been of the opinion that the club erred in its draft choices over 2004-05 in that we selected too many tall forwards and not enough midfielders and this may have held back our revival to some extent. I was particularly critical that we had recruited Hartlett as a key forward hoping he would cement a defensive KP role. Then with the addition of Kennedy, if Hartlett could not deliver in this role, he would always remain surplus to our needs if JK stepped up as Josh was always going to get first crack having the greater credentials.

From what I have seen of Adam I am pretty confident that he can play CHF if given time and if he can avoid injury (the BIG if with Adam). In terms of dimensions they are fairly similar (source: club website)
Adam: 195cm, 88 kg â€“ could be 1-2cm taller now and is definitely heavier than that now
Josh: 195cm, 93 kg â€“ apparently had grown to close to 199cm and was around 97kg

The only ? is his durability and doubt on whether he can hold down a tough role like CHF at AFL level. He is aggressive, a pretty good mark and a thumpi
ng kick so he can be given a go. Iâ€™m hoping he can stake a claim

I just gotta compliment you on this post. You are spot on. I would have preferred to trade Hartlett than Kennedy. This post is one of the best ever on this forum. Really adds insight.

Yeah, except the Eagles didn't want Hartlett.

I would have preferred to trade Lance for Judd in a direct swap, but that was never going to happen, was it.

Also, at the time Hartlett was recruited we had one of the shortest lists in the comp. We needed talls. Moreover, there wasn't a lot of quality after Hartlett was drafted either. Mark LeCras, perhaps? Rosa? Sherman? Apart from the father/sons it doesn't appear as though our recruiters have made a massive hindsight blunder.

Since then we've added Murphy and Gibbs to our midfield, among others, to address our midfield needs. And, erm, we took Russell before Hartlett.

As for Hartlett being a surplus tall. Having a bloke of his height and build in defence would be very handy right about now. Don't you think?

Before the next counter to that proposition. Trent Croad can play forward and back. Justin Leppitsch. And so it goes...

And dont forget that season 2004 was the "Pagan save my arse season" where instead of biting the bullet and cleaning out the list we went for the stop gap draft every shite mature age body we could and we plucked 10 wins out of our arse finished 10th.

And in the first draft we had proper access to after our fines and penalties we ended up with Pick 9 and Pick 15.

Instead of finishing in the bottom 4 and having a go at Deledio, Roughead, Franklin etc.

Now I am not having a go at Russell and Hartlett - they may turn out alright - but what Pagan did in season 2004 would have to be the most short sighted strategy in the history of our club.

But had that been done, would we have continued to bump along the bottom and pick up murphy, gibbs, kennedy, kruezer and judd. it is problematic and maybe in the long run pagan may have done us a favour.

what ifs only waste time??? ... if yer auntie had balls she'd be yer uncle.

it's here and now - we have gibbs, murphy, judd, kruezer, walker, etc so lets look forward.

Blue Beatle · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:22 pm

TenOutOfTen wrote:

I wouldn't read too much into the stats, but he had a few weaknesses really holding him back IMO... being such a big guy, he was very slow and immobile, and wasn't very capable at ground level. He's still going to be a good player, but probably not the star some people thought he'd be - a workhorse really. Great endurance.

i like what little i have seen of the way hartlett moves, etc. what do others who have seen him in the bullies think?

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 8:32 pm

Blue Beatle wrote:

AGRO wrote:

camelboy wrote:

Michael Jezz wrote:

marciblue wrote:

Iâ€™ve been of the opinion that the club erred in its draft choices over 2004-05 in that we selected too many tall forwards and not enough midfielders and this may have held back our revival to some extent. I was particularly critical that we had recruited Hartlett as a key forward hoping he would cement a defensive KP role. Then with the addition of Kennedy, if Hartlett could not deliver in this role, he would always remain surplus to our needs if JK stepped up as Josh was always going to get first crack having the greater credentials.

From what I have seen of Adam I am pretty confident that he can play CHF if given time and if he can avoid injury (the BIG if with Adam). In terms of dimensions they are fairly similar (source: club website)
Adam: 195cm, 88 kg â€“ could be 1-2cm taller now and is definitely heavier than that now
Josh: 195cm, 93 kg â€“ apparently had grown to close to 199cm and was around 97kg

The only ? is his durability and doubt on whether he can hold down a tough role like CHF at AFL level. He is aggressive, a pretty good mark and a thumpi
ng kick so he can be given a go. Iâ€™m hoping he can stake a claim

I just gotta compliment you on this post. You are spot on. I would have preferred to trade Hartlett than Kennedy. This post is one of the best ever on this forum. Really adds insight.

Yeah, except the Eagles didn't want Hartlett.

I would have preferred to trade Lance for Judd in a direct swap, but that was never going to happen, was it.

Also, at the time Hartlett was recruited we had one of the shortest lists in the comp. We needed talls. Moreover, there wasn't a lot of quality after Hartlett was drafted either. Mark LeCras, perhaps? Rosa? Sherman? Apart from the father/sons it doesn't appear as though our recruiters have made a massive hindsight blunder.

Since then we've added Murphy and Gibbs to our midfield, among others, to address our midfield needs. And, erm, we took Russell before Hartlett.

As for Hartlett being a surplus tall. Having a bloke of his height and build in defence would be very handy right about now. Don't you think?

Before the next counter to that proposition. Trent Croad can play forward and back. Justin Leppitsch. And so it goes...

And dont forget that season 2004 was the "Pagan save my arse season" where instead of biting the bullet and cleaning out the list we went for the stop gap draft every shite mature age body we could and we plucked 10 wins out of our arse finished 10th.

And in the first draft we had proper access to after our fines and penalties we ended up with Pick 9 and Pick 15.

Instead of finishing in the bottom 4 and having a go at Deledio, Roughead, Franklin etc.

Now I am not having a go at Russell and Hartlett - they may turn out alright - but what Pagan did in season 2004 would have to be the most short sighted strategy in the history of our club.

But had that been done, would we have continued to bump along the bottom and pick up murphy, gibbs, kennedy, kruezer and judd. it is problematic and maybe in the long run pagan may have done us a favour.

what ifs only waste time??? ... if yer auntie had balls she'd be yer uncle.

it's here and now - we have gibbs, murphy, judd, kruezer, walker, etc so lets look forward.

No I disagree - it took extra years to clear the deadwood from our list because of our 10th placed finish in 2004 - extra first round draft pick (possibly 2) in National Draft 2004 would have accelerated our renewal.

Shippy_cfc · **Posted:** Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:25 pm

I really wonder where JK will fit in with the eagles??? Unless Qstick, Hansen, Staker, Hunter occasionally are injured, i dont reckon he'll be in their best 22. Still some pine time to come for josh i reckon.

1derful · **Joined:** Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:30 am **Posts:** 78

Whilst Kennedy has a lot of upsize so did Minton-Connell when he was part of the deal when the club got Williams. I don't think anyone regretted that deal once Williams settled in and basically was the best player in the comp in 93 & 94 then going on to win the Norm Smith in 95.

I reckon Cameron Cloke could easily take on the bullocking forward role that Kennedy would've played. Fisher & Waite also showed they can handle CHF quite capably.

The club are in good hands, let's notcry over spilt milk when the cream (Judd)has arrived!

bluehammer · **Posted:** Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:38 am

camelboy wrote:

Moreover, there wasn't a lot of quality after Hartlett was drafted either.

BUT look who went at 33

Humpers · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:28 pm **Posts:** 4953

I'm still not convinced that JK will make it, and if he does he will be an Earl Spalding type player.

Not a major sacrifice in my opinion.

camel · **Posted:** Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:25 pm

Earl Spalding was a gun for us for a few years. He left Carlton with a much stronger resume than when he arrived from Melbourne. For example, he could kick! Still looked ugly, but after a bit of time at Carlton his kicking, especially for goal, became quite dependable.

If I was Josh Kennedy, and ended up a "an Early Spalding type player", I'd be very happy with myself.

Elwood Blues1 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am **Posts:** 4827

camelboy wrote:

Earl Spalding was a gun for us for a few years. He left Carlton with a much stronger resume than when he arrived from Melbourne. For example, he could kick! Still looked ugly, but after a bit of time at Carlton his kicking, especially for goal, became quite dependable.

If I was Josh Kennedy, and ended up a "an Early Spalding type player", I'd be very happy with myself.

Agree...ten years out of JK doing the Earl Spalding gig and WC would be very happy....Lynch, Hansen and Jk is going to need some tall timber to play on.

Losing Josh Kennedy to WCE - really all that bad?!?

Who is online