Johnson v Jones

[Warriorsoul]

So who's better at this stage of their career? By that I mean is Johnson in his fifth year as good a player as Jones was by 2000?

 

[Wheeled Warrior]

Johnson has the speed and skill factor over Jones at this time of his career. Jones was a better organizer and had more consistent overall performance. I believe Johnson within the next 3-4 years will surpass Jones in all factions

 

[Rich102]

Stacey could lead a team. SJ hasn't shown this ability yet.

 

[ozbash]

Talent-Johnson
Skill- Stace

 

[Diesel]

You can learn skill, you can't teach talent.

SJ2 has plenty of time on his side to learn the skill and definitely has ample potential, but SJ1 would be NZ's best half to date

 

[Marty]

With all due respect to Stacey...what had he achieved in the first 5 years of his career?

Shaun has played in GF, won a golden boot award and beaten the Aussies 3 times in row.

I guess the real question would be...would you prefer Stacey Jones circa 2000 playing for the warriors this weekend...or Shaun?

 

[SpaceMonkey]

It's an interesting one. Jones was worshipped at this point in career, Johnson is often criticised. But Johnson plays in an era of a much better Kiwi side, and is I think a notably more talented footballer. Jones was a fantastic halfback who always gave 100% but I think a lot of his legacy was built on being the most talented player on a losing side. He could carry a side to a win, but in reality he really didn't do it any more often than Johnson does, and I think Johndon had the ability to dominate a game more completely than Jones could.

 

[Marty]

Well said.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

With all due respect to Stacey...what had he achieved in the first 5 years of his career?

Shaun has played in GF, won a golden boot award and beaten the Aussies 3 times in row.

I guess the real question would be...would you prefer Stacey Jones circa 2000 playing for the warriors this weekend...or Shaun?

I kinda think the opposite. Jones started slightly younger than Johnson and was a more rounded product from a younger age.

Johnson is 25 in a couple of months, the same age Jones was at the start of the 2001 season. When I think of Jones at that point of his career he was much more in the "established veteran" class while Johnson remains a work in progress.

I take your point that the 1995-2000 period wasn't a time when the Kiwis or Warriors amassed many famous victories but nevertheless, Jones was more prominent as the established best player in the side than Johnson is.

Jones' prime was probably 2001-2003 so hopefully Johnson is just coming into his prime as well. However, Jones was a bit of an "early bloomer" who wasn't as good of a player, imo, after about age 27-28. Hopefully Johnson can be more the late-blooming type who will still be good into his 30s.

 

[jaseg]

Johnson. Johnson at this stage of his career is better than Jones was at the same stage, and Johnson will likely end his career with higher standing than Stacey. That's not to say Stacey wasn't a great player for us - but Shaun Johnson will quite possibly/probably finish his career as the best player to have ever played for us, and possibly the best player in the NRL (not ever, just at that point and/or the 'peak' years of his career). Stacey, for all his awesome work, was never that.

As far as I see it there is only 1 half (that's 7 or 6) in the NRL (or the world - I make this distinction as Langer was still playing at the same stage in Jones' career, albeit in England) with a genuine claim to being better than Johnson - Thurston. That's it. Stacey couldn't really say that either.

 

[ozbash]

As far as I see it there is only 1 half (that's 7 or 6) in the NRL (or the world - I make this distinction as Langer was still playing at the same stage in Jones' career, albeit in England) with a genuine claim to being better than Johnson - Thurston. That's it. Stacey couldn't really say that either.

cant agree with you there, Stace was top of the list for a year or 2, 2002 he was sublime.

SJ is different in that he has a freakish talent,,as far as 'off the cuff' play goes, he is the champ. Stace never had that freakish talent, he learnt his trade and mastered it..

 

[jaseg]

cant agree with you there, Stace was top of the list for a year or 2, 2002 he was sublime.

SJ is different in that he has a freakish talent,,as far as 'off the cuff' play goes, he is the champ. Stace never had that freakish talent, he learnt his trade and mastered it..

I agree with your comments RE the difference between SJ & Stacey. But not that Stacey was ever top of the list at any point - Johns, Fittler & Langer were all playing at that stage, and I think Stacey was 'best of the rest', verging on that select few (but never reaching Johns in particular).

 

[Warriorsoul]

If SJ keeps playing the way he is for the rest of the season, I think he'll have passed Stacey Jones.

Maybe we should only recruit players with the intials SJ....

 

[warrior poet]

If you look at their golden boot years, could you say that 2014 Shaun Johnson was better than 2002 Stacey Jones? I don't think you can, Stacey seemed to be able to inspire the Warriors better than Shaun does.
Shaun is not a leader, Stacey was. The team seemed to lift when Stacey lifted his performance, I don't see that with Shaun. (It seems to me that he lifts his performance after the team does).
I'm not taking anything away from Shaun, but at this point in his career he's not better than Stacey was in his prime, although he has the potential to be the better player by time he retires. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a second golden boot in the next year or 2.

 

[Warrior@Heart]

Shaun Johnson is the icing on the cake, whereas Stace could turn a cup of flour and one egg into a pavlova. SJ has some good players around him in the form of Mannering, Tomkins, Matulino, Hoffman, Vatuvei etc. Stace had to play with Campion, Cleary, Seuseu, Guttenbeil & Meli and made them all look like rockstars. Shaun Johnson is really good though and if he can win a title than he'll instantly eclipse Jones but Stace was a leader, a game manager and had more heart than any other warrior ever. Fittler, Johns & Langer all had star studded teams aswell so imagine how good he could've been if he had a team that didn't get tired in the last 20 minutes haha.

 

[Marty]

I kinda think the opposite. Jones started slightly younger than Johnson and was a more rounded product from a younger age.

Johnson is 25 in a couple of months, the same age Jones was at the start of the 2001 season. When I think of Jones at that point of his career he was much more in the "established veteran" class while Johnson remains a work in progress.

I take your point that the 1995-2000 period wasn't a time when the Kiwis or Warriors amassed many famous victories but nevertheless, Jones was more prominent as the established best player in the side than Johnson is.

Jones' prime was probably 2001-2003 so hopefully Johnson is just coming into his prime as well. However, Jones was a bit of an "early bloomer" who wasn't as good of a player, imo, after about age 27-28. Hopefully Johnson can be more the late-blooming type who will still be good into his 30s.

I agree with alot of what you are saying. But I still think that Johnson is the better player now than when Stacey was at the same age. Yes Stacey was a more mature/finished player at the same age...but only because his range of growth/talent was not as great as Shauns IMO. Shaun has more moving parts and it just takes a little longer, more development to put them together.

Having said all that though on the other side they are very different players with Shaun being suited to a more traditional style of 5/8th and not being the first ball receiver where Stacey was an out and out half. They would have complimented each other quite well.

Organising/Leadership: Stacey
Running game: Shaun
Kicking game: Shaun
Passing game: Even

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

I think Stacey's organising skills are getting pretty overrated in this thread. At his best he was primarily a ball-runner, never a pure playmaker. He was actually much more like Johnson than you'd know from reading this thread.

I'd say Johnson actually has the better raw materials as a playmaker (longer/stronger passing and kicking game, uncanny vision) whereas Stacey maybe had a more natural feel for the game and was a footy player through and through. However, Stacey was much more of an individualistic player than he's being remembered as. His best moments were making long runs and chip-n-chase tries, not setting up his outside men really.

 

[KeepingTheFaith]

Shaun Johnson is the icing on the cake, whereas Stace could turn a cup of flour and one egg into a pavlova. SJ has some good players around him in the form of Mannering, Tomkins, Matulino, Hoffman, Vatuvei etc. Stace had to play with Campion, Cleary, Seuseu, Guttenbeil & Meli and made them all look like rockstars. Shaun Johnson is really good though and if he can win a title than he'll instantly eclipse Jones but Stace was a leader, a game manager and had more heart than any other warrior ever. Fittler, Johns & Langer all had star studded teams aswell so imagine how good he could've been if he had a team that didn't get tired in the last 20 minutes haha.

Not sure about this argument. Leaving out Toopi, Ali, Marsh from the 2001-2003 equation creates a very unbalanced view. There may be more strike in the 2015 team across the board, but those 3 in 2002 especially were on another level.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

Not sure about this argument. Leaving out Toopi, Ali, Marsh from the 2001-2003 equation creates a very unbalanced view. There may be more strike in the 2015 team across the board, but those 3 in 2002 especially were on another level.

Yeah couldn't get on board with that post at all really...Jones was never the dominant half he's now being remembered as. What set the 2001-3 Warriors apart was not the dominance of Jones, it was that we played as a cohesive team with a lot of guys being at their peak at around the same time. I would say that Lauiti'iti hitting his straps was the biggest single factor if anything.

I do agree that in retrospect the team wasn't as strong on paper as it might've seemed at the time but it was just a lot of guys in career best form. At various points in that period of time the likes of Lauiti'iti, Toopi, Meli, Marsh, Seuseu, Faumuina, Webb were all guns.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Stace had to play with Campion, Cleary, Seuseu, Guttenbeil & Meli and made them all look like rockstars.

3 Kiwi Internationals, a Qld Origin rep and a solid clubman, hardly numpties like you're making out. If you want to talk about Stace carrying rubbish teams look at the late 90, and to be fair we didn't win often then.