Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Due to his total lack of physicality and competitiveness, he is a great asset as a classy finisher in a top side, but looks a liability in an ordinary side.
Played some high possession games in the midfield last year, but teams know that if they apply physical pressure on him, he will disappear out of the game.

He spent a good block of time in the back half against the Hawks and his defensive efforts were non existent. He’s had the rocket already after round one, so the remainder of his season is a must watch.

He’ll be a Pie again within two seasons and North will pay 300 of his annual 500 salary.

Why has this reared its head now, may i be so bold too ask. sigh.

^ Because he was dropped this week, after a poor performance last week. And you'll recall that we were a laughing stock for letting "an absolute jet" go so cheaply.

#26 wrote:^ Because he was dropped this week, after a poor performance last week. And you'll recall that we were a laughing stock for letting "an absolute jet" go so cheaply.

And now we're just a laughing stock for having wasted pick 6 when we drafted him.

npalm wrote:

#26 wrote:^ Because he was dropped this week, after a poor performance last week. And you'll recall that we were a laughing stock for letting "an absolute jet" go so cheaply.

And now we're just a laughing stock for having wasted pick 6 when we drafted him.

I don't know that there's much point talking in terms of the pick being "wasted". He was plainly a brilliant footballer when he arrived and he immediately improved the team - if Collingwood hadn't choked at the end of 2018, he'd be remembered as a significant contributor to a premiership team (38 goals and 10 goal assists was a remarkable return for a first-year player) and the decision to draft him would have been "brilliant", irrespective of what came afterwards.

There's still time for him (he's only just 23). It's hard to see him ever being a consistent player but he does have skills most others don't.

Plainly, though, watching him play in round 1, he needs a rocket inserted. Happily, that's no longer our problem. Watching him, I couldn't help wondering whether he needed to take up landscape art.

Pies4shaw wrote:Watching him, I couldn't help wondering whether he needed to take up landscape art.

npalm wrote: Every club has had early draft picks that could have gone on better players.

Didn’t Richmond have an earlier pick than Hawthorn and take Tambling ahead of Buddy? And there are a few more examples of getting wiser after the event. Bullshit exercise because you can only do what you think is best at any given time. Retroactive assessment is interesting but useless.

Lazza wrote:

npalm wrote: Every club has had early draft picks that could have gone on better players.

Didn’t Richmond have an earlier pick than Hawthorn and take Tambling ahead of Buddy? And there are a few more examples of getting wiser after the event. Bullshit exercise because you can only do what you think is best at any given time. Retroactive assessment is interesting but useless.

True Comrade Lazza, and i well recall in 1978 we could have got superboot Bernie Quinlan, but we cocked it up and he went to the Roys. Imagine him in th 1979 GF v the Bluescum, we would have won that easily with him, he was at his peak, big CHF, who could kick the pill a country mile, but there ya go.

And that all relates to Stephenson's situation, how?

Pies4shaw wrote:And that all relates to Stephenson's situation, how?

I guess it means all teams make trade cockups at times, and we have , but so have others. Just on Stevo, the fact only one team wanted him, rang alarm bells for me, Norf were the only ones, so hard cheese for them.