2013 Player Profile: Brian Lake

[henry]

Can't have been too bad then. We probably realised we needed him round 1 to play on tommahawk so a suspension was out of the question  :P

[Adamant]

What’s the best case scenario for him? If everything goes to plan he may increase his average by 10-15 points which just isn’t enough to compensate for his significant downside.

There are three big problems with him as far as I’m concerned.
1. He’s old enough that he could just break down and miss a lot of weeks
2. His form could deteriorate to the point where he can’t get a game in that back line
3. He could play lock down a large percentage of the time and average 60ish

All of these are possibilities that destroy his value. Also, Hawthorn plays the other 7 finalists in the first 7 weeks. I think Buddy will be fine through this period, but I’m not convinced with Lake. Even if he does really well and ends the year as a top 6 back (unlikely) he may not increase his average much over the first 2 months.

[Jukes]

Somebody comments apart from the drinking and pun related posts :O

1. He's younger than Dean Cox yet most people are locking him in. From 2005 (his 4th season) to 2010 he played 22, 22, 20, 22, 22, and 22 games in each season. Very durable.
2. Pretty sure they wouldn't trade for a 30 year old 200 gamer just so he can watch games from the stands. He'd knock out pretty much every hawk defender bar Birchall, Suckling and maybe Schoey.
3. Lake doesn't get his points from defensive efforts so playing strictly on a man, which is Schoey's job down there, won't affect him that much the few times he does that, as Lake gets most of his points from kick and mark combos while heading up the ground slowly.

If hawks play harder teams then their backline will benefit more then there forward line as the ball will be back there more so Lake can do more in turnover efforts such as intercepting marks and tackles rather than just mark+kick combos.

[Justin Bieber]

I don't have Dean Cox so that argument is invalid.

[Jukes]

^ did not read rest of post

And why wouldn't you have Cox, if Naitanui misses like 5 weeks Cox will smash it, he averaged like 133 without Nat in 2012.

[Adamant]

^ did not read rest of post

And why wouldn't you have Cox, if Naitanui misses like 5 weeks Cox will smash it, he averaged like 133 without Nat in 2012.

Wait a minute... you have Cox, Jukesy?

[Justin Bieber]

Being younger than Cox is irrelevant and good luck with Dean. Expect 2010.

And not West Coast!!!

[Jukes]

^ did not read rest of post

And why wouldn't you have Cox, if Naitanui misses like 5 weeks Cox will smash it, he averaged like 133 without Nat in 2012.

Wait a minute... you have Cox, Jukesy?

yes, for the first month or so or 2013 at least.

[Adamant]

^ did not read rest of post

And why wouldn't you have Cox, if Naitanui misses like 5 weeks Cox will smash it, he averaged like 133 without Nat in 2012.

Wait a minute... you have Cox, Jukesy?

yes, for the first month or so or 2013 at least.

Haha, what happened to your hatred of him? Evidence in your RMDT thread:

Cox old and will be rested a lot, can't see him averaging 100, more like 97, which is not enough to warrant wasting a rookie spot for the DPP connection.

Cox too old and slow for me, would prefer Daisy, especially seeing as you aren't going for DPP (which is stupid btw).

Unsure on Cox, he's old and frail, not worth it for DPP if he drops 5-10 average points which is a distinct possibility.

I'm unsure on Cox however. He's old and I can see him dropping in average to around the 95 mark as he is overtaken by his younger counterparts and require more resting.

I'd prefer alternatives to Cox, as I've explained in previous analysis, he almost definitely will drop average to like 94, maybe even right down to ~90.

Btw, he is in my team as well. :P

[Jukes]

That was with Naitanui's presence having a very heavy impact on him. Without Nat Cox will do a lot more and his average will boost early, then I'll ship him out, pocket a fair amount of $$$, and be laughing.

[owenbond007]

lol! Im getting persuaded on cox. But what if he doesnt score what you predict jukes and loses value - do you stick with him when nicnat returns. Im tossing up between Roughie & Cox atm.

[JBs-Hawks]

What’s the best case scenario for him? If everything goes to plan he may increase his average by 10-15 points which just isn’t enough to compensate for his significant downside.

There are three big problems with him as far as I’m concerned.
1. He’s old enough that he could just break down and miss a lot of weeks
2. His form could deteriorate to the point where he can’t get a game in that back line
3. He could play lock down a large percentage of the time and average 60ish

All of these are possibilities that destroy his value. Also, Hawthorn plays the other 7 finalists in the first 7 weeks. I think Buddy will be fine through this period, but I’m not convinced with Lake. Even if he does really well and ends the year as a top 6 back (unlikely) he may not increase his average much over the first 2 months.

From a hawks supporters perspective I believe 3 is the go.

He will take the number 1 forward shoey will tAke number 2 and gibbo will be free.  For all the short kicking in the backline they will use gibbo and guerra as they are our best short kicks and then have shoey,  birch and suckers rebounding it.

[Jukes]

lol! Im getting persuaded on cox. But what if he doesnt score what you predict jukes and loses value - do you stick with him when nicnat returns. Im tossing up between Roughie & Cox atm.

Should make this thread "Brian Lake Player Profile and Dean Cox discussion" :P

If he doesn't score at 100+ I'll keep him until Naitanui returns if he stays over 95, if he drops below that I"ll trade him out soon to like Mitch Robbo.