Essendon

[carey]

Great news with Dyson Heppell signing until 2020

He must be addicted

[Booney]

Great news with Dyson Heppell signing until 2020

Bloody hell, wait until Dutchy gets hold of this contract!

[woodublieve12]

So multi year deals are ok now are they?

[Jim05]

So multi year deals are ok now are they?

He is only 22, still got a lot of footy ahead of him.
B&F and a AA already, think 5 years isnt a bad deal
Seems to be the path clubs are taking now, try to lock away the kids.

[bennymacca]

5 years for basically their best player is fine.

[carey]

5 years for basically their best player is fine.

Jobe Watson says hello.

[bennymacca]

Fair. Reckon if I had to pick one of them now though I'd take Heppell given his age.

[Jim05]

5 years for basically their best player is fine.

Jobe Watson says hello.

Probably Jobe just but he is nearing the end of his career, Heppell will be the next skipper and could have another 10 or more years left in him.

[kickinit]

5 years for basically their best player is fine.

Oh so it's ok for your best player (which he isn't) but not ok for one of your key players. Make your mind up benny

[bennymacca]

Lobbe isn't Dyson Heppel's ballsack

[whufc]

Lobbe isn't Dyson Heppel's ballsack

Throw in serviceable ruckman can be found easily and generally the most injury prone footballers and generally unless there extremely elite have little effect on games I agree a long contract is a huge risk

[daysofourlives]

Essendon can replace Heppell not sure Port can replace Lobbe if injury was to strike.

[Jim05]

I dont have a problem with Lobbe getting a long term deal. If Port rate him that highly then its a smart move to lock him away.
I dont agree with long term deals like the Dogs have given to Boyd who has played a handfull of games and coming off a serious injury, can see that ending in tears

[bennymacca]

Essendon can replace Heppell not sure Port can replace Lobbe if injury was to strike.

That's a different argument imo. I don't think clubs will be lining up to poach lobbe, even with his value to port.

[kickinit]

Lobbe isn't Dyson Heppel's ballsack

When did I compare Heppel to Lobbe? If it ok for Heppel to be signed to a long contract why isn't it for Lobbe? Their both important players for their team. Lobbe will be a much improved player with just having someone to give a helping hand in the ruck. In terms of structure of a team (which is what contracts signings are based on) Lobbe is just as important to Port as Heppel is to Essendon.

[kickinit]

Lobbe isn't Dyson Heppel's ballsack

Throw in serviceable ruckman can be found easily and generally the most injury prone footballers and generally unless there extremely elite have little effect on games I agree a long contract is a huge risk

A genuine ruck men that can play 4 qtrs of footy isn't seen every day. Have little effect on games? Give your mids first use of the ball all day and your going to have a good day out. While they don't look like they have impact a ruck men can decided the game.

[whufc]

Having a look at the stats from last year

On average the best ruckman were having 10-11 hit outs to advantages per game, the lower ruckmen were averaging 5-6 hit out to advantages a game

On average there was about 6 hit outs difference between the best and the worse

Considering that 6 doesn't even take in to account how the ball was then used (which not 100% would have been used effectively) makes it a pretty null and void stat.

Look at the last two big dynasties, Geelong and Hawthorn both have had arguably ordinary ruck division yet managed to dominate the comp.

[daysofourlives]

Having a look at the stats from last year

On average the best ruckman were having 10-11 hit outs to advantages per game, the lower ruckmen were averaging 5-6 hit out to advantages a game

On average there was about 6 hit outs difference between the best and the worse

Considering that 6 doesn't even take in to account how the ball was then used (which not 100% would have been used effectively) makes it a pretty null and void stat.

Look at the last two big dynasties, Geelong and Hawthorn both have had arguably ordinary ruck division yet managed to dominate the comp.

Wouldnt say we had ordinary ruckman but what we did have was very good versatility in that they could genuinely go forward and kick goals(Hale, Bailey), Lobbe not in that category but Ryder certainly is. Geelong had Ottens too.

[kickinit]

Having a look at the stats from last year

On average the best ruckman were having 10-11 hit outs to advantages per game, the lower ruckmen were averaging 5-6 hit out to advantages a game

On average there was about 6 hit outs difference between the best and the worse

Considering that 6 doesn't even take in to account how the ball was then used (which not 100% would have been used effectively) makes it a pretty null and void stat.

Look at the last two big dynasties, Geelong and Hawthorn both have had arguably ordinary ruck division yet managed to dominate the comp.

I can only comment on Port as that is the majority of the games I watch. The last 2 years Port have kicked a lot of goals from Lobbe putting the ball down our mids throats and them then hitting up one of our forwards. If you can have a ruck men that sets up easy plays for your mids they have a better chance of using the ball effectively. Goodes is another player I recall been setup many times in Sydney forward line off ruck taps, usually resulting in goals. You ask any coach if they would rather their ruck men giving their mids first use, or them having to chase and tackle for the ball I know which one they would pick.

[stan]

Essendon can replace Heppell not sure Port can replace Lobbe if injury was to strike.

That's a different argument imo. I don't think clubs will be lining up to poach lobbe, even with his value to port.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. He is a vic and a improving ruckmen with pretty good stamina for a big guy. A team like Collingwood for example would be interested as its fair to say they are struggling in that area.