Prediction Do we have the squad for a serious crack at this years flag?

[Partridge]

Ling was the smartest football I have ever seen at Geelong. He was a freak occurrence. I don't think we should make a habit out of turning under performing key forwards into midfielders. There is only one Cameron Ling.

It's also pertinent to point out that Ling was a FAILED key forward as well. He had to make it as a midfielder, or else he wasn't going to have a career. Even then, it took 4-5 years before you got regular, consistent performances. Exactly what you'd expect, and exactly what we don't have the patience for now.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

This lack of patience you speak of, exaggerated slightly?

 

[dazbroncos]

Well, they've just put two on the list who are going to need (at minimum) 4-5 years of development. I think it's just that they recognised Ottens retiring left a hole in the side and they've tried to fill it - first with Stephenson, then with McIntosh, and now with Stanley. The failure of each has made the need for the next seemingly more acute.

And Otto is no longer at the club coaching either…

Go Catters

 

[Stan The Caddy]

And Otto is no longer at the club coaching either…

Go Catters

Isn't he? I wasn't aware of that.

Who is our ruck coach now then?

 

[dazbroncos]

Isn't he? I wasn't aware of that.

Who is our ruck coach now then?

There currently is not one.

http://www.sen.com.au/news/dwindling-talent-a-coaching-challenge

And the Cats do not look to replace him. There are money issues at play here perhaps.

Go Catters

 

[nohairandfair]

Not exactly sure if true but didn't Lingy consistently reach high 15's in the beep test?

It has always fascinated me that freakish endurance he possessed because he was a fairly big lump of a guy. Not exactly the kind of body you would associate with a league footballer. Desktop workers build (Lance Whitnall physique) and was quite slow when compared to the slowest of the slow but this ability to keep on running until his opponents had literally had enough was legendary.

I was always amazed how he could absolutely blanket guys like Boomer Harvey who had some real pace.

He was a gem!

 

[Teriyakicat]

Walker is yet to make it as a key forward. Let him do that first.

Has he ever played midfield in the VFL? Just because he's reasonably mobile for a big guy doesn't mean he's mobile full stop. A quick midfielder would be past him in an instant.

I realise everyone here wants all their favourites in the team, but the hard, cold reality is they can't all fit. And they won't all fit. Walker may absolutely deserve a crack at centre half forward (and depending on how he goes in the following fortnight he might be first choice), but I see nothing to indicate he's a midfielder. He's too big and too slow. Yeah Watson and Fyfe are big midfielders; but they're still much smaller than Walker and much, much better players.

Lingy was slow- yeah, just sayin'....

 

[Teriyakicat]

Well, they've just put two on the list who are going to need (at minimum) 4-5 years of development. I think it's just that they recognised Ottens retiring left a hole in the side and they've tried to fill it - first with Stephenson, then with McIntosh, and now with Stanley. The failure of each has made the need for the next seemingly more acute.

I'm just bemused as to why they didn't draft a young 'un to train up alongside the gap-fillers.

 

[Cataholic]

There currently is not one.

http://www.sen.com.au/news/dwindling-talent-a-coaching-challenge

And the Cats do not look to replace him. There are money issues at play here perhaps.

Go Catters

Serious question Daz.......iirc, you made a reference to money issues in another post recently. Are you aware of financial issues at the club, or is it just a sense that may be the case?

 

[Teriyakicat]

There currently is not one.

http://www.sen.com.au/news/dwindling-talent-a-coaching-challenge

And the Cats do not look to replace him. There are money issues at play here perhaps.

Go Catters

That is one in-depth write up, Daz! I wish there were more like that- as opposed to the regular drip feeding we normally experience. Some parts were a bit strange (eg. Mackie rating #5) and clarification of Chris and Kris getting the chop rather than leaving of their own accord (or is that just hearsay?)) but, all in all, full of answers to quite a few questions posed on BF and echoing quite a few opinions here, too.
Interesting to note Murdoch's back issue.

 

[thejester]

An international rookie and a speculative rookie. The risks I was speaking of are virtually non existent.

The risks you described as belonging uniquely to ruck men - that they potentially take a long time to mature and that this makes them vulnerable to poaching - apply just as much to rookie picks as they do players taken at any other position in the draft...and TBH thinking about it more I'd be surprised if the developmental curve of ruckmen was all that different from regular players, especially compared to their draft position.

If I were to be more expansive on how I see the club's strategy it would be "(1) don't draft ruckmen with high draft picks, (2) trade for them and target free agents and (3) make speculative ruck selections using the rookie list".

Maybe, but I don't think there's much evidence that any of them are 'strategy' so much as a product of circumstance.

they must have assumed Ottens was going to play on until he was Enright's age.

No, I think it's just players of his calibre are not easily replaced. We were able to pick up a guy picked #2 overall (who easily justified that draft position) for (essentially) a first rounder and a good young player. That kind of deal only really happens if the player in questions cracks it and demands to be traded to club x or else.

Do you reckon that plays a part in the price we pay.

As in opposition clubs know we're desperate and as such can milk the deal in their favour?

On the face, most neutrals would say 21 for Stanley is overs. Has Hmac justified what we gave up for him either? Pick 36 was it?

No, not really. I think they just must rate Stanley.

 

[catempire]

The risks you described as belonging uniquely to ruck men - that they potentially take a long time to mature and that this makes them vulnerable to poaching - apply just as much to rookie picks as they do players taken at any other position in the draft

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

The opportunity cost of a first round ruckman pick is high. A rookie pick low.

...and TBH thinking about it more I'd be surprised if the developmental curve of ruckmen was all that different from regular players, especially compared to their draft position.

Really? I thought it was pretty conventional wisdom.

Maybe, but I don't think there's much evidence that any of them are 'strategy' so much as a product of circumstance.

The evidence that I see is a pattern since Ottens retired that fits the description above. Of course, could be coincidence but that seems far less likely to me than a defined strategy given our circumstances.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

There currently is not one.

http://www.sen.com.au/news/dwindling-talent-a-coaching-challenge

And the Cats do not look to replace him. There are money issues at play here perhaps.

Go Catters

That sounds a bit concerning TBH Daz. It could definitely have something to do with monetary constraints I would have thought. The article doesn't specify whether Ottens decided to leave or if he was let go, but if it was the latter then I would suggest that it was definitely due to financial reasons.

This is why the club is crying out for more members, because sooner or later the lack of funds will begin to have an effect on the football department.

Hopefully McIntosh being the senior ruckman will be teaching and mentoring the younger ruckmen at the club so that their development isn't stalled due to a lack of coaching. Who knows, he may even be in a similar role to what Cox was doing last year at the Eagles, which was being a part time coach aswell as playing. Ben Hudson at Collingwood is another example of this.

Perhaps they see this as a way for McIntosh to actually earn his money!

 

[Teriyakicat]

That sounds a bit concerning TBH Daz. It could definitely have something to do with monetary constraints I would have thought. The article doesn't specify whether Ottens decided to leave or if he was let go, but if it was the latter then I would suggest that it was definitely due to financial reasons.

This is why the club is crying out for more members, because sooner or later the lack of funds will begin to have an effect on the football department.

Hopefully McIntosh being the senior ruckman will be teaching and mentoring the younger ruckmen at the club so that their development isn't stalled due to a lack of coaching. Who knows, he may even be in a similar role to what Cox was doing last year at the Eagles, which was being a part time coach aswell as playing. Ben Hudson at Collingwood is another example of this.

Perhaps they see this as a way for McIntosh to actually earn his money!

I hate to suggest it but perhaps Otto leaving was a mutual parting of ways. He must've been frustrated at being asked to turn sows' ears into silk purses and the club was probably frustrated at the same old same old coming from the ruckmen who were able to at least get on the park.

 

[Vdubs]

No not at all. If anything we got Mac for unders, not overs.

And as for Stanley, St Kilda were never going to let him go for a pick in the 30's under any circumstances so it was either 21 or not at all. He was a contracted player and they would have been happy to keep him had a good offer not been made, regardless of the club that might have been interested in him.

St Kilda were happy to state publicly that they were after 3 picks inside the first round if possible, to marry up with their recruiting strategy that they had mapped out.

Any club could have offered a pick in the 30's and St Kilda simply wouldn't have accepted it.

That I don't agree with

 

[Stan The Caddy]

I hate to suggest it but perhaps Otto leaving was a mutual parting of ways. He must've been frustrated at being asked to turn sows' ears into silk purses and the club was probably frustrated at the same old same old coming from the ruckmen who were able to at least get on the park.

One side is always more "mutual" than the other TCat... At least that's what all of my ex girlfriends tell me!

 

[thejester]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

The opportunity cost of a first round ruckman pick is high. A rookie pick low.

Really? I thought it was pretty conventional wisdom.

Yeah, but I don't think it stands up to scrutiny. Ruckmen taken in the first round 2005-2013: Ryder, Clark, Bailey, Gumbelton, Leuenberger, Sellar, Hampson, Kreuzer, McEvoy, Lobbe, Naitanui, Vickery, Cordy, Longer, Daniher, Grundy, Apeness. Glancing through that list, could you sustain the argument that teams face a significant opportunity cost in terms of games played opposed to midfielders or KPP?

The evidence that I see is a pattern since Ottens retired that fits the description above. Of course, could be coincidence but that seems far less likely to me than a defined strategy given our circumstances.

But it could just as easily be that they simply preferred other players to the ruckmen available rather than having an objection in principle to picking ruckmen with high picks.

 

[RightorKhan]

How much have we paid H Mac and what has he done??

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Pretty sure we took over his contract from North Melbourne. Hefty contract too if the rumors circulating around here when he first signed with us are to be true.

Not bad for a bloke who's spent one year on the couch and the other spudding it up for half a season.

He was our best ruckmen last season by some distance.

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

and Simpson was pretty woeful which puts things into perspective.

That we have the worst ruck stocks in the league?

 

[catempire]

Yeah, but I don't think it stands up to scrutiny. Ruckmen taken in the first round 2005-2013: Ryder, Clark, Bailey, Gumbelton, Leuenberger, Sellar, Hampson, Kreuzer, McEvoy, Lobbe, Naitanui, Vickery, Cordy, Longer, Daniher, Grundy, Apeness. Glancing through that list, could you sustain the argument that teams face a significant opportunity cost in terms of games played opposed to midfielders or KPP?

Glancing at it I'm not moved either way. I'd have to go back and see how long it took these guys to become established in their teams. My feeling is generally when you draft a midfielder in the first round you hope they can come into your 22 close to straight away. I don't think you're reasonably hoping that with a ruckman from the first round. I'd love someone else to do the empirical work to demonstrate what happens one way or the other...

But it could just as easily be that they simply preferred other players to the ruckmen available rather than having an objection in principle to picking ruckmen with high picks.

Yeah, could be a lot of things. I'm just saying what I think is most likely. Preferring other players to ruckmen over and over again to me is a pattern that means something. What's more, I think we'll see it again at the end of this season. I think we'll see mature ruckmen targeted through trade and again overlooked ruckmen on draft day.

 

[Turbocat]

That I don't agree with

Unders...man how could you agree with it. Hmac backened deal which we took the last year and added two more. Of which he will play how many games?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

and Simpson was pretty woeful which puts things into perspective.

I just don't agree with the classification 'spudding it up'. My views on him last season I've made quite clear to you over the last few months.

 

[Turbocat]

Really have not followed the debate on Rucks , so I'm not sure where the stake in the ground is... but imo if you can get a chance to get an absolute gun in a minimal number position , you have to consider it. How many mids in a side , how many kp players , how may rucks.... so ideally when you really only have 1 spot for a ruck , obviously you want as good player you can in that role.

Of course , there are plenty of example of great rucks coming from late or as Rookies. So picking early is not always a great way to max your pick , not picking early and relying on late and Rookie alone because of Cox and Sandilands is like planing for retirement by getting a tattslotto ticket each week.

So what do I say we do. Ideally we always have a Rookie ruck. Well now we have two. TickTick. Trouble is thats the long way to Sydney (via Perth) , so we have to keep the other recruitment approaches in mind as well. The closer to ready gun kid at draft/trade/FA.

Trying to do that with a Hmac type was not such a bad idea. Doing it with Hmac was the bad idea. We already are injury handicapped and we brought in yet another injury handicapped player to be our play now main gun player.And we didn't back it up. So sure have the Rookies , but ensure we have play now guy on the list with a legit backup. And if they are injured types then you carry more.

So basically I like where are now a lot better but Id be happier again if one of the Ute types was a legit ruck type , a real blood dripping blue steak meat eater that radiated "I'm here , and get out of my way". I suspect at years end we will be looking again.

So ,in this thread here we are. Can Vardy get fit. Can the others get fit. Can Stanley transform himself. Can one of the Rookies "become". Just a lot of questions.

 

[Vdubs]

How much have we paid H Mac and what has he done??

He didn't do it.
It was Dolly.