Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

DaVe86 wrote:With the talk of Buckley retiring his captaincy late last year, Josh Frasers name popped up as the likely successor. This shocked me as I thought Josh's 2004 was below standard. The ruck department was a big weakness in our side and we were unable to obtain first possession around the clearences.

No surprise here. He has been touted as a future leader, and was the 1999 All-Austrlian U/18 skipper from memory. He was touted as becoming part of the leadership group in only his second season of AFL football back in 2001. He is a natural, born leader, and will only get better.

His 2004 was actually ok, if you take injury and general poor form into account. He was one of the better ones all year, and, as well all know, the best in our dismal 2003 Grand Final. He does still need to build up his body, but, aside fromt hat, will end up being the All-Austrlian 15 Brownlow Votes a season player we all expected from him back in 1999, but this time as a forward. The side looks so menacing and dangerous with Rogan as the forward target. There is a certain element of potency in his play, as he can play well in the air, or below his knees. An underrated forward, and as we saw in the 2002 Grand Final, he can play there, and perform capably. He is not a ruckman. Guy Richards is. Fraser and Cameron Cloke will share the last 10% of the ruck duties this season.

Did you think he was a ruckman?

I think Josh is often judged too harshly simply because he was a number one pick. Having said that, I do agree with much of what Dave86 has said.
There are not too many 'tall talls' that develop quickly enough to take on a key position, let alone ruck, at a young age.
Josh deserves credit for what he has done since being at the Club and playing 100 games is no mean feat for a player of his age.
Part of the problem is that neither the match committee, or Josh for that matter, seem to know what he is; a ruckman or foward. He seems to be better suited to the foward line at this stage, but he has enough raw talent to be able to play wherever and do it more than well.
Chris Grant took a while to emerge and his body to fill out. If someone said when he was first drafted that he would be to Collingwood what Grant has been for the Doggies, I would've taken it.

Let's face it, Josh was never going to be able to live up to all the hype.

Our priority pick, great white saviour, after we'd been down at the trash end of the ladder for too long.

Media had also hyped him right up before he came to Collingwood as the best in the draft by a country mile.

Kid was thrown in at the deep-end practically from day one.

I think he has handled it remarkably well and is certainly a good player, just not the brownlow threat\out-and-out champ that so many were hoping for and even predicting.

Postitives: very mobile for his size, good smarts, very good disposal skills for his size, decent pace for his size. Reads the play well. Good mobile big unit with good decision making, skills and athleticism.

Negatives: Cannot take a pack mark to save himself and this is by far his biggest deficiancy. Rarely (almost never) wins a hit out. Can get done cold body on body, can be muscled out of contests too easily, doesn't seem to like the physical stuff and other rucks now it and give it to him.

I certainly think he has been a good player for us and people forget that he has often had to play a lone hand in the ruck. Had a lot of responsibility thrown on his young shoulders early and has been consistant and performed to a high standard throughout.

Will he be the brownlow threat/champion that was predicted even before his arrival at the club?
Chances are he will not, unless he can find a way to learn to take consistant overhead marks under pressure.
At the moment, players half his size seem to be able to put him of a mark in a contested situation.

Hypothetical:
If you have Richards firing in the ruck, Rocca and Cam Cloke starring in the forward line and Tex Walker holding down CHB with Travis, Davo and Fanning doing well at Willy FF/Ruck and keeping the pressure on; then were do you play Josh, is there really room for him in our future?

I ask this because at the moment he seems to be our second best ruckman (behind Richards and I know that's controversial but look at hit outs/clearance stats, just go with me for the sake of the exercise) and our third best tall forward (behind Taz and Ant).

Given that he rarely wins hit outs, Fanning could go past him soon in the ruck pecking order. And given that he can't take a contested mark, Cam, Trav or even Davo could go past him in the tall forward pecking order soon.

So I think 'what is the future for Fraser', is a very legitimate question.
Someone on another site calls him the world's tallest half forward flanker but again, is he our best option there?

Of course, much should be answered this year and the kid is still plenty young enough to keep getting better but . . . . hmmmmmmm.

Being the number 1 pick is a curse. You either never meet peoples expectations or when you do they say nothing as thats just what they expect. Hodge from Hawthorn could end up being a good player but will always be seen harshly because other players fron that year and subsequent drafts have been better. I think that Josh plays a vital role for us not least as an onfield leader. I think his largest problem is that he doesn't have a set position and therefore has not yet been able to develop his game to suit a position. Let's also remember that he is still a young man (despite his hair).

So I think 'what is the future for Fraser', is a very legitimate question. Someone on another site calls him the world's tallest half forward flanker but again, is he our best option there?

Is the wing an option rand corp? He's great at ground level, and has wondeful skills.

I think its all going to be a matter of whether josh can put on a bit of muscle and strengthen up a bit. If he can, he could become as lethal as jeff white, with a big leap, mobility and football smarts. Its just a question of whether josh can become stronger. He will definately always be an option up forward, but with the emergence of cameron cloke, he may not be able to settle down up there. For me, he is still a ruckman. As everyone seems to agree, he has shouldered a big workload from a young age. If he can build his weight up, this experience will hold him in good stead.

DaVe86 wrote:I think its all going to be a matter of whether josh can put on a bit of muscle and strengthen up a bit. If he can, he could become as lethal as jeff white, with a big leap, mobility and football smarts. Its just a question of whether josh can become stronger.

Agreed DaVe. Jeff White is the player i think Josh should be modelled on. He was as skinny as Josh when he first started, as was Chris Grant, but they're both pretty strong and built boys now. Is he a ruckman? Probably not. Is he a forward flanker? Probably yes. I've never seen anyone that tall be so good below his knees. His skill and pace around the ground, and his resillience are fantastic. If he makes a blunder, you can bet that he will make up for it with his next touch. Doesn't seem to lose his bundle, most of the time. The biggest frustration is that he can not take a pack mark. With his mobility and leap, he would be the tallest bloke in the pack on most occasions. We've seen him take some great marks one on one, but obviously he has no confidence in his strength to go up in a pack. For a guy his height, i think thats inexcusable. Oh and he can get rid of those little lollipop kicks he regularly does. You know....the ones that travel about 20 metres yet take 20 years to get to the target. They shit me so much.

Jonno, perhaps, but again you have to ask the question, is he our best option as a wingman. (Ahead of people like Rowe, Lonie, Roids, Woey, Chad and several others.) Having someone that tall and mobile on the wing could aid us going up the ground but, wingman have to do a lot of chasing and maning up down in the backline too and I reckon we could get hurt for pace going the other way with the wrong match-up.

I guess my own feeling is that he is alright around the ground, roaming across mid-field floating and forward into attack. However, because he doesn't win hit outs he is never going to be a genuine ruckman.

He has a lot of good skills to see him play as a HFF or FP -if only he could take a bloody pack mark.

Colin Alexander wrote: Oh and he can get rid of those little lollipop kicks he regularly does. You know....the ones that travel about 20 metres yet take 20 years to get to the target. They shit me so much.

Lol totally agree there.

I sometimes have visions of Josh...

Bruce Doull head band, balding and about 40 years of age kicking bags of goals in Collingwood Grand Finals. lol

Well if he doesnt work out for us a player he could come in as handy trade bait if nothing else

Interesting. I don't follow your reasoning.

rand corp wrote:Jonno, perhaps, but again you have to ask the question, is he our best option as a wingman. (Ahead of people like Rowe, Lonie, Roids, Woey, Chad and several others.)

I reckon he is. We need to play him on the wing for some of the ps, and then see how we go from there. He is a natural wingman/rover.

stonedpies wrote:Well if he doesnt work out for us a player he could come in as handy trade bait if nothing else

If he doesn't perform then his value on the market isn't going to be worth a lot.