TalkingCarlton :: View topic - Play Lance at Full Forward ? The next Plugger?

If by chance lance stays next year, what do you guys think of playing him permanently from the gaolsquare? Once we improve our delivery (hitting him on the chest) we could add another dimension to our farward line, who knows another plugger?

Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him?

Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again. :evil:

bax wrote:

It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list.

Wojee wrote:

bax wrote:

It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list.

No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all.

How will trading Lance improve our list for next year or the year after... . Is there a KPP player like Reiwolt or Brown that we will trade him for? No, so what is the point.

Our team lacks talent and height.... I've seen some suggestions about Lance for Bartel.... as good a player as Bartel is that suggestion is a load of crap.

No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all.

bax wrote:

Wojee wrote:

bax wrote:

It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list.

Thats your opinion and your entitled to it but the way Lance has played the last 4 seasons trading him could quite easily improve the list. If we could nab a quality mid-fielder ( yes Bartel ) that would take a hell of a load of the guys playing there now. Imagine Fev, Waite and Fisher with a stronger, fresher mid-field bring the ball in constantly with better quality.

Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it.

bax wrote:

No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all.

See, you're looking at in purely a Lance vs whoever we trade for him sense. I'm thinking in a team + Lance vs team + traded player sense.
You can improve the list overall without having to trade Whitnall for a better version of Whitnall.

Our backline is a bigger problem than our midield and that is why I like Lance there. He may not be the fastest the bloke around but look at what he does with the ball when he does get it and the amount of times he gets it.

If we could get a decent KPP backman then Lance in that possition could be lethal.

Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it.

bax wrote:

Yep I'll crucify a guy who's been on 500 000 for the last 4 years and produced Peter Mann like performances. Injuries on many occasions with Lance have been a bi-product of his poor training and health regime so that is no excuse. I'd rather go with a developing Hartlett or O'hailpin than watch Lance under achieve for another 4 years.

How is Lance a KP player?

How has he gone when given a chance at CHF this year?

Lets see Lance on Lucas this week and on Thompson next week then we'll see how much of a KP player he is :garthp:

Author:	jvcfalcon [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 1:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Play Lance at Full Forward ? The next Plugger?
If by chance lance stays next year, what do you guys think of playing him permanently from the gaolsquare? Once we improve our delivery (hitting him on the chest) we could add another dimension to our farward line, who knows another plugger?

Author:	mikey_m [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 1:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Play Lance at Full Forward ? The next Plugger?
jvcfalcon wrote: If by chance lance stays next year, what do you guys think of playing him permanently from the gaolsquare? Once we improve our delivery (hitting him on the chest) we could add another dimension to our farward line, who knows another plugger? If another club wants Lance then that is the position I would be playing him. Could do it for a few years and use his smarts and time his leads. We have Fevola who is really only a FF so we cannot use Lance there. FF at the Dogs would get him 50 to 60 goals next year. He is not a CHB but a floating man in defence and when manned up and held accountable by a good player will struggle. Waite has overtaken Whitnall for the CHF position. Setanta is coming on and looks a forward now. Fisher is the other marking option. Bryan is starting to take a few contested marks and is a deadly kick. We need a KPP down back but I just dont think Lance is that player.

Author:	Wojee [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 1:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Plugger had strength to grapple in the square and pace to get out on the lead. Lance has neither, although I guess he could dazzle opponents with football riddles such are his football smarts.

Author:	GWS [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 2:03 pm ]
Post subject:
Yep - can't take a contested mark and hasn't got the pace to lead... This is a very silly thread. If someone could just start an argument about tanking it'd be perfect...

Author:	thrylos7 [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 2:39 pm ]
Post subject:
play him across half forward. im sick of all this anti lance crap, the guy hasn't done much wrong this year except something personal to synbad

TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Play Lance at Full Forward ? The next Plugger? http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4524	Page 1 of 2

Author:	billc3 [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 3:08 pm ]
Post subject:
Is Lance eligible for the NRS? .. <duck>

Author:	bax [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 4:36 pm ]
Post subject:
Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him? Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again.

Author:	Wojee [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 4:37 pm ]
Post subject:
bax wrote: Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him? Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again. It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list.

Author:	bax [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Wojee wrote: bax wrote: Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him? Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again. It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list. No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all. How will trading Lance improve our list for next year or the year after... . Is there a KPP player like Reiwolt or Brown that we will trade him for? No, so what is the point. Our team lacks talent and height.... I've seen some suggestions about Lance for Bartel.... as good a player as Bartel is that suggestion is a load of crap.

Author:	Beantown [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:01 pm ]
Post subject:
bax wrote: Wojee wrote: bax wrote: Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him? Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again. It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list. No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all. How will trading Lance improve our list for next year or the year after... . Is there a KPP player like Reiwolt or Brown that we will trade him for? No, so what is the point. Our team lacks talent and height.... I've seen some suggestions about Lance for Bartel.... as good a player as Bartel is that suggestion is a load of crap. Thats your opinion and your entitled to it but the way Lance has played the last 4 seasons trading him could quite easily improve the list. If we could nab a quality mid-fielder ( yes Bartel ) that would take a hell of a load of the guys playing there now. Imagine Fev, Waite and Fisher with a stronger, fresher mid-field bring the ball in constantly with better quality.

Author:	Wojee [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:09 pm ]
Post subject:
bax wrote: No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all. See, you're looking at in purely a Lance vs whoever we trade for him sense. I'm thinking in a team + Lance vs team + traded player sense. You can improve the list overall without having to trade Whitnall for a better version of Whitnall.

Author:	bax [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:
Beantown wrote: bax wrote: Wojee wrote: bax wrote: Why do we want to trade one of our better players? Makes no sense that people really want Lance traded. Who would replace him? Then again it makes no sense that so called Carlton supporters want us to get a wooden spoon again. It makes perfect sense to trade Lance if doing so ultimately improves our list. No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all. How will trading Lance improve our list for next year or the year after... . Is there a KPP player like Reiwolt or Brown that we will trade him for? No, so what is the point. Our team lacks talent and height.... I've seen some suggestions about Lance for Bartel.... as good a player as Bartel is that suggestion is a load of crap. Thats your opinion and your entitled to it but the way Lance has played the last 4 seasons trading him could quite easily improve the list. If we could nab a quality mid-fielder ( yes Bartel ) that would take a hell of a load of the guys playing there now. Imagine Fev, Waite and Fisher with a stronger, fresher mid-field bring the ball in constantly with better quality. Our backline is a bigger problem than our midield and that is why I like Lance there. He may not be the fastest the bloke around but look at what he does with the ball when he does get it and the amount of times he gets it. If we could get a decent KPP backman then Lance in that possition could be lethal. Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it.

Author:	Wojee [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:15 pm ]
Post subject:
bax wrote: Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it. Personally I just want the club to improve on field. If we can do that by keeping Lance then good, but if we can improve by trading him we'd be doing ourselves a disservice to not look hard at our options.

Author:	bax [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:18 pm ]
Post subject:
Wojee wrote: bax wrote: No offence but that is a weak response. Give me an idea how trading Lance will improve our list? Take a look at our KPP's in the team, we have bugger all. See, you're looking at in purely a Lance vs whoever we trade for him sense. I'm thinking in a team + Lance vs team + traded player sense. You can improve the list overall without having to trade Whitnall for a better version of Whitnall. For a team with stuff all KPP players, how on earth do we improve the list by robbing Peter to pay Paul.... all I read is trade lance, trade lance. But I have not heard one, not one good plausible alternative.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Effes [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:25 pm ]
Post subject:
How is Lance a KP player? How has he gone when given a chance at CHF this year? Lets see Lance on Lucas this week and on Thompson next week then we'll see how much of a KP player he is

Author:	Beantown [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:
bax wrote: Our backline is a bigger problem than our midield and that is why I like Lance there. He may not be the fastest the bloke around but look at what he does with the ball when he does get it and the amount of times he gets it. If we could get a decent KPP backman then Lance in that possition could be lethal. Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it. Yep I'll crucify a guy who's been on 500 000 for the last 4 years and produced Peter Mann like performances. Injuries on many occasions with Lance have been a bi-product of his poor training and health regime so that is no excuse. I'd rather go with a developing Hartlett or O'hailpin than watch Lance under achieve for another 4 years.

Author:	bax [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:38 pm ]
Post subject:
Beantown wrote: bax wrote: Our backline is a bigger problem than our midield and that is why I like Lance there. He may not be the fastest the bloke around but look at what he does with the ball when he does get it and the amount of times he gets it. If we could get a decent KPP backman then Lance in that possition could be lethal. Unfortunatley not many of you can see the forest through the trees as you are still upset that Lance had a few poor years, mostly due to injury, and you still want to crucify him for it. Yep I'll crucify a guy who's been on 500 000 for the last 4 years and produced Peter Mann like performances. Injuries on many occasions with Lance have been a bi-product of his poor training and health regime so that is no excuse. I'd rather go with a developing Hartlett or O'hailpin than watch Lance under achieve for another 4 years. Mate dont be too envious about people making more money than you. But clarify your facts before you comment. Lance's two major injuries 2002 - Was when Fev crashed into him in a pack against the Dee's and hurt his shoulder - out for year. 2003 - Beasy falling across his knee. Out for year. So how those two injuries are a bi - product of his poor training and health is beyond me, but hey I must be replying to a genius who has the answer. Also 2004 - stress fractures but he wasn't the only one.

Author:	Sydney Blue [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:39 pm ]
Post subject:
When someone can come up with a trade that is benifical for Carlton then trade Lance until such time there is no point trading him. And for someone to suggest that an Irishman who only learnt to kick last year and is only two to three years younger than Lance is a better proposition then you should go follow another code as you know nothing about football

Author:	TheSheik [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 6:23 pm ]
Post subject:
Effes wrote: How is Lance a KP player? How has he gone when given a chance at CHF this year? Lets see Lance on Lucas this week and on Thompson next week then we'll see how much of a KP player he is Finally someone with some commonsense. To all those who consider Whitnall to be a KP player, think again. He is a damn good third or fourth marking option, nothing more.

Author:	TheGame [ Mon Aug 15, 2005 6:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Plays a few games as a floating backman and all of a sudden he is not a key position player. I've seen him play over 150 games at CHF, thats key position enough for me.