David Klemmer #264

Writings on the wall. Klem needs to be shipped off to SL where he will be a dominant prop and probably get 2 more years on the back end of his career. Bottom 20% prop in the NRL to top 20% prop in the SL and get an extra 2 years, more $$$ and 30min flights to all over Europe. It's a no brainer for 30+ year old.
 
watersider said:
Tamou was 32 or 33 when we got him, while Klemmer has only just turned 30. Klemmer should be in peak form, 30 is vintage prop age. But both Klemmer and Tamou faded a lot faster than they should have. Tamou seemed past it already at Penrith before he even came to us. It's interesting the way different players age. Do they just lose the passion for it? Klemmer's bland play is very disappointing, I thought he had more fire. Certainly not fussed about being subbed off the field anymore.
Click to expand...
I think Klem lost some leg size over the years and a lot of athleticism for whatever reason. It's showing now.

Starting to think Addin Fonua Blake was a worthwhile signing despite the price tag. I don't know what Klemmer is on, but for a few hundred thousand more you get week to week damaging consistency. Good buy for the Sharkies.
 
Winston Churchill said:
Writings on the wall. Klem needs to be shipped off to SL where he will be a dominant prop and probably get 2 more years on the back end of his career. Bottom 20% prop in the NRL to top 20% prop in the SL and get an extra 2 years, more $$$ and 30min flights to all over Europe. It's a no brainer for 30+ year old.
Click to expand...
On a slightly different point, Ice, Klemmer and Bateman were all signed playing at the same quality they are now.

Ice was signed a year before his Parra contract ended. His final season with Parra was pretty close to what his output is for us now.

Bateman was cooked and Klemmer was exactly the same at the Knights.

Why do we expect these players to lift a gear when we sign them?

These guys are supposed to be our Marquee forwards and they are all average.

Guys like Api and Olam were performing before we signed them and they are still performing now. Olam was injured so there was a decent reason for his lack of form where he was dropped at the Storm.

Bateman has to be the first to go. He is totally ineffective. Ice is gone...tick for that one. I can handle Klemmer, because we will need depth on the bench, but if we can flick his big contract, we're in business provided we have some decent replacements lined up.
 
weststigers said:
On a slightly different point, Ice, Klemmer and Bateman were all signed playing at the same quality they are now.

Ice was signed a year before his Parra contract ended. His final season with Parra was pretty close to what his output is for us now.

Bateman was cooked and Klemmer was exactly the same at the Knights.

Why do we expect these players to lift a gear when we sign them?

These guys are supposed to be our Marquee forwards and they are all average.

Guys like Api and Olam were performing before we signed them and they are still performing now. Olam was injured so there was a decent reason for his lack of form where he was dropped at the Storm.

Bateman has to be the first to go. He is totally ineffective. Ice is gone...tick for that one. I can handle Klemmer, because we will need depth on the bench, but if we can flick his big contract, we're in business provided we have some decent replacements lined up.
Click to expand...
All great....

But who on earth do we hire to replace them?

We finally have moved on from the James Tamou/one big strong forward idea. We need a strong pack and I can't see how Klemmer isn't a part of that. Other then Angus C, I don't know of many names on the market who would be serious upgrades on what we have. Sure, Bateman you can look for a second rower but I doubt we will find someone who is a real upgrade on Bateman.

Perhaps we are doing it all wrong, putting rookies at Fullback, Center and wing with experienced people in the forwards. Get a few more rookie forwards coming through and pick experienced centers who can defend...
 
weststigers said:
I think Klem lost some leg size over the years and a lot of athleticism for whatever reason. It's showing now.

Starting to think Addin Fonua Blake was a worthwhile signing despite the price tag. I don't know what Klemmer is on, but for a few hundred thousand more you get week to week damaging consistency. Good buy for the Sharkies.
Click to expand...
Fonua Blake doesn't sing the team song after the game so he would have been a good fit here because we don't either. 🤣
 
crazycat said:
All great....

But who on earth do we hire to replace them?

We finally have moved on from the James Tamou/one big strong forward idea. We need a strong pack and I can't see how Klemmer isn't a part of that. Other then Angus C, I don't know of many names on the market who would be serious upgrades on what we have. Sure, Bateman you can look for a second rower but I doubt we will find someone who is a real upgrade on Bateman.

Perhaps we are doing it all wrong, putting rookies at Fullback, Center and wing with experienced people in the forwards. Get a few more rookie forwards coming through and pick experienced centers who can defend...
Click to expand...
You're not wrong mate. Not a lot on the market. We can only hope someone is released to free up cap space.
 
weststigers said:
You're not wrong mate. Not a lot on the market. We can only hope someone is released to free up cap space.
Click to expand...
An idea I have been thinking...

Bateman isn't performing in the front row. What if we moved him to Center?

Bateman has played 5/8 before.
He clearly is far more physical then most of our backs, who other then Olam Suck!

Bateman isn't playing like a forward or having that impact. Sure we can offload him, but it will be us subsidising another player for a large cap chuck yet again.

I don't want to keep changing our backline. but we need a secure backline to stop the try rot. (we do rot a lot of tries). I also reckon Bateman would be able to run better lines being further out.
 
crazycat said:
An idea I have been thinking...

Bateman isn't performing in the front row. What if we moved him to Center?

Bateman has played 5/8 before.
He clearly is far more physical then most of our backs, who other then Olam Suck!

Bateman isn't playing like a forward or having that impact. Sure we can offload him, but it will be us subsidising another player for a large cap chuck yet again.

I don't want to keep changing our backline. but we need a secure backline to stop the try rot. (we do rot a lot of tries). I also reckon Bateman would be able to run better lines being further out.
Click to expand...
I think Bateman is on a fair whack of coin.

We already have Turuva for next year, so the money is better spent replacing a back rower.

I don't think Richo is into subsidies for contracts, so Bateman will either be released with no subsidy or not go at all unless the difference is very small.

He's probably trying to find him a spot in England as we speak.
 
weststigers said:
I think Bateman is on a fair whack of coin.

We already have Turuva for next year, so the money is better spent replacing a back rower.

I don't think Richo is into subsidies for contracts, so Bateman will either be released with no subsidy or not go at all unless the difference is very small.

He's probably trying to find him a spot in England as we speak.
Click to expand...
I don't know why we would go Turuva in the centers.

Guy hasn't played center, only FB and wing.

Look it would be good to have a Center or another wing who can keep pace with Turuva. But it would also be good to get defense right for once.
 
weststigers said:
I think Bateman is on a fair whack of coin.

We already have Turuva for next year, so the money is better spent replacing a back rower.

I don't think Richo is into subsidies for contracts, so Bateman will either be released with no subsidy or not go at all unless the difference is very small.

He's probably trying to find him a spot in England as we speak.
Click to expand...
It's easy to say this in hindsight, but I have no idea what Bateman did to deserve being offered a "fair whack of coin", we even got rid of Hastings to sign him. I suppose that's what happens when you let a 70+ year old with 10 years out of the NRL control everything.
 
crazycat said:
I don't know why we would go Turuva in the centers.

Guy hasn't played center, only FB and wing.

Look it would be good to have a Center or another wing who can keep pace with Turuva. But it would also be good to get defense right for once.
Click to expand...
I think the word is he was signed to play centre. Maybe that changes, but I think that's the plan.
 
weststigerman said:
It's easy to say this in hindsight, but I have no idea what Bateman did to deserve being offered a "fair whack of coin", we even got rid of Hastings to sign him. I suppose that's what happens when you let a 70+ year old with 10 years out of the NRL control everything.
Click to expand...
Hey I'm with you. I was never keen on Bateman.
 
weststigerman said:
It's easy to say this in hindsight, but I have no idea what Bateman did to deserve being offered a "fair whack of coin", we even got rid of Hastings to sign him. I suppose that's what happens when you let a 70+ year old with 10 years out of the NRL control everything.
Click to expand...
^take Canberra to the Grand final.

But yes, he isn't what he once was.
He also is unique as a player, in the way he plays and what he offers. He suits Ricky's style of a gutsy player and IMHO he should rejoin Canberra.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 3,510 (members: 27, guests: 3,483)
Back
Top