Unofficial Preview Changes vs North (Broomy out, Tooves in, Marsh, Dwyer and Broomy emergencies)

[Knightmare]

Sounds like you are off the bus too.

While it's abundantly clear that you enjoy being a fan. My enjoyment comes instead from learning and analysis.

 

[jmac70]

While it's abundantly clear that you enjoy being a fan. My enjoyment comes instead from learning and analysis.

Fair enough. We are one of the best sides in terms of inside 50s, contested possession and tackling. Where do you think that fits in your analysis?

 

[swoop42]

Playing better teams is my reason for expecting a drop off with the schedule to get harder from this point. Even assuming a fairly mild injury load. We've a worse team without Beams/Ball/Maxwell/Lumumba.

Then looking at what we have. We're a poor stoppage team. A poor running team. And a poor kicking team. When you're poor in those three categories, you're not going to be a good team and that's where we sit right now. With our tackling and pressuring game as well as our 1v1 ability in the contest what we hang our hats on and rely on to get wins.

Additionally I struggle with what we've got on each line. Up forward we don't have that second marking key forward for Cloke to be productive as per last season. Or midfield is worse lacking power and the stoppages or outside pace. Our backline is too young and too inexperienced to win with, with veteran backlines winning backlines.

North minus Wells, Dal Santo and Swallow are still a better team. If we had Dayne Beams, Lumumba and Shaw, I'd back us. But we're not the same team we were in 2010/2011 and we're lacking those pieces after our best 7/8 players to beat good teams with any consistency.

Crisp for Beams, Adams for Ball, Langdon/Oxley/Goldsack for Maxwell and Varcoe for Lumumba.

I don't think we're losing a hell of a lot there outside of experience.

We've improved in other areas though and for all of the criticism White has still managed 14 goals for the year and has had more scoring shots than Elliott.

We beat them last year and I think we are capable of doing so again on Sunday though if Frost doesn't get up it'll make it tougher.

 

[Knightmare]

Fair enough. We are one of the best sides in terms of inside 50s, contested possession and tackling. Where do you think that fits in your analysis?

All areas of relative strength. I agree.

We draft in the vast majority guys who can win the contested ball, and around the ground we are a good contested ball winning team, without having those stoppage specialists. And as mentioned in my earlier post. Tackling and pressure is what this team does and hangs it's hat on.

Inside 50s I consider to be good because of the poor opponents we've had and that's going to fall as the season progresses, though not completely as we still have the contested ball winners who can get it forward. But then converting those inside 50s into scoreboard impact will with this group be an issue with not enough good ball users, and not enough guys with pace.

The reason my earlier post was negatively slanted was because I was being asked why I anticipate Collingwood from this point slide, with the poster pressing me for some specifics on specifically that, which I gave.

 

[Tbone McGraw]

Has the final side been named?

 

[Knightmare]

Crisp for Beams, Adams for Ball, Langdon/Oxley/Goldsack for Maxwell and Varcoe for Lumumba.

I don't think we're losing a hell of a lot there outside of experience.

We've improved in other areas though and for all of the criticism White has still managed 14 goals for the year and has had more scoring shots than Elliott.

We beat them last year and I think we are capable of doing so again on Sunday though if Frost doesn't get up it'll make it tougher.

No need to remind me how much worse we are this year.

Crisp is fine but no difference maker and he isn't nearly Beams who is a best 10 mid in the game.

Ball was better than Adams, with Adams' form in my view unimpressive in recent weeks which is concerning given we've been playing against teams without even good midfields.

Oxley/Goldsack are not Maxwell. Maxwell was pretty great before injury last year.

And Varcoe isn't nearly as good as Lumumba either, as well as he performed against the Suns.

Beams/Ball/Maxwell/Lumumba were all best 10 players on our list and the leadership and intangibles lost is a big setback to winning. None of those guys you're talking about as new list additions are best 10 players other than possibly Langdon, though he was playing as a regular defender last year so I wouldn't be counting him in this discussion.

In terms of the quality of our list. We should still be a top 8 team I'd add to that, that we had a top 4 quality list last year, that still should have with the injuries been a top 8 team, and we should have been a grand finalist on Nathan's first season with the list we still had. Any list with Pendlebury, Cloke, Sidebottom, Swan, Elliott and Grundy playing like he is playing should be finishing inside the top 8 this year. Just in watching this team play. We're looking like a team more likely to finish around 12th, as opposed to finishing inside the top 8.

--
On the result v North. We have the ability to win. I'm just not tipping it. And 75/25 I'd say North Melbourne win, with the betting odds for this game I'd say fairly flattering with North Melbourne even with the team listed missing a few key players, a better team.

White I will acknowledge has played better than last season, and he has needed to. Critically he is more reliable than he was overhead last year which is needs to be. The test for him will be from here how he goes against better opponents. My comment is even with White playing better, he hasn't helped Cloke be effective, with Cloke's form still poor, and it's Cloke's form that reflects exactly how strong a target that other key forward is offering. And unlike when playing alongside Dawes/Reid/Lynch, White hasn't proven a sufficient second key forward.

 

[Tbone McGraw]

So Tooves is in for Broomy.

Does Tooves go straight to Lindsay Thomas or elsewhere?

 

[Maggie5]

Pies by 20.

 

[TradeDraft]

While it's abundantly clear that you enjoy being a fan. My enjoyment comes instead from learning and analysis.

So you are bit of a footy nerd then

 

[TradeDraft]

Pies by 20.

I Picked North by 25

 

[Knightmare]

So you are bit of a footy nerd then

You know it.

 

[Bard]

You know it.

Nerds for life.

 

[jackcass]

Playing better teams is my reason for expecting a drop off with the schedule to get harder from this point. Even assuming a fairly mild injury load. We've a worse team without Beams/Ball/Maxwell/Lumumba.

Then looking at what we have. We're a poor stoppage team. A poor running team. And a poor kicking team. When you're poor in those three categories, you're not going to be a good team and that's where we sit right now. With our tackling and pressuring game as well as our 1v1 ability in the contest what we hang our hats on and rely on to get wins.

Additionally I struggle with what we've got on each line. Up forward we don't have that second marking key forward for Cloke to be productive as per last season. Or midfield is worse lacking power and the stoppages or outside pace. Our backline is too young and too inexperienced to win with, with veteran backlines winning backlines.

North minus Wells, Dal Santo and Swallow are still a better team. If we had Dayne Beams, Lumumba and Shaw, I'd back us. But we're not the same team we were in 2010/2011 and we're lacking those pieces after our best 7/8 players to beat good teams with any consistency.

Or we're an improving/developing *insert all of those things* Team and that holds us in good stead to demonstrate improvement over the remainder of the season.

 

[jackcass]

No need to remind me how much worse we are this year.

Crisp is fine but no difference maker and he isn't nearly Beams who is a best 10 mid in the game.

Ball was better than Adams, with Adams' form in my view unimpressive in recent weeks which is concerning given we've been playing against teams without even good midfields.

Oxley/Goldsack are not Maxwell. Maxwell was pretty great before injury last year.

And Varcoe isn't nearly as good as Lumumba either, as well as he performed against the Suns.

Beams/Ball/Maxwell/Lumumba were all best 10 players on our list and the leadership and intangibles lost is a big setback to winning. None of those guys you're talking about as new list additions are best 10 players other than possibly Langdon, though he was playing as a regular defender last year so I wouldn't be counting him in this discussion.

In terms of the quality of our list. We should still be a top 8 team I'd add to that, that we had a top 4 quality list last year, that still should have with the injuries been a top 8 team, and we should have been a grand finalist on Nathan's first season with the list we still had. Any list with Pendlebury, Cloke, Sidebottom, Swan, Elliott and Grundy playing like he is playing should be finishing inside the top 8 this year. Just in watching this team play. We're looking like a team more likely to finish around 12th, as opposed to finishing inside the top 8.

--
On the result v North. We have the ability to win. I'm just not tipping it. And 75/25 I'd say North Melbourne win, with the betting odds for this game I'd say fairly flattering with North Melbourne even with the team listed missing a few key players, a better team.

White I will acknowledge has played better than last season, and he has needed to. Critically he is more reliable than he was overhead last year which is needs to be. The test for him will be from here how he goes against better opponents. My comment is even with White playing better, he hasn't helped Cloke be effective, with Cloke's form still poor, and it's Cloke's form that reflects exactly how strong a target that other key forward is offering. And unlike when playing alongside Dawes/Reid/Lynch, White hasn't proven a sufficient second key forward.

Seems such a shame to waste all that learning and analysis on an outlook mired in bland, totally discounting the joy of potential realized in some small measure. I'll take being a fan any day.

 

[lenny20]

No need to remind me how much worse we are this year.

Crisp is fine but no difference maker and he isn't nearly Beams who is a best 10 mid in the game.

Ball was better than Adams, with Adams' form in my view unimpressive in recent weeks which is concerning given we've been playing against teams without even good midfields.

Oxley/Goldsack are not Maxwell. Maxwell was pretty great before injury last year.

And Varcoe isn't nearly as good as Lumumba either, as well as he performed against the Suns.

Just to pull you up on a couple of things there...

Crisp is certainly no Beams (yet) but he's a hell of a lot better than "fine". He's a 21 year old who's played 20-something games and currently he'd only be behind Pendles and maybe one or two others for the Copeland. He's only really played the two down games to start the year and from there he's been in our best five in every other match. To be going at over 20 disposals and a goal per game is bloody fantastic, especially from a player of his experience profile - he's got "fine" covered by the length of the Flemington straight.

Ball was better than Adams at his peak, but Adams is currently producing better football than Luke could manage in his final two seasons at the club. We're certainly not missing out on anything by not having him in the side. It's unfortunate but Bally's body was broken and the writing was on the wall. Unless you're comparing current-day Taylor Adams to 2010 Luke Ball, which would hardly be fair.

Oxley & Goldsack aren't Maxwell - but Langdon is tracking near-identically to a young Collingwood #43 who fast earned a reputation for courage, composure and competitiveness. Tommy has a lot of the former skipper about him, but seems to be blessed with more natural ability than Nick ever was. And again - all of Oxley, Goldsack and Langdon are upgrades on the post-injury variety of Maxwell, another whose body let him down before his time.

And finally, the Travis Varcoe of 2015 has played rings around the Heritier Lumumba of 2015. Sadly Harry hasn't been the same player since the name change. We'd all love to have the Harry O'Brien of 2010 winning contest after contest, beating his direct opponent into the ground and then launching powerful, accurate rebounds from the half back line - but that Harry doesn't exist any more. What we do have, in Travis Varcoe, is a player who's currently performing at a much greater level than Lumumba, whose bizarre unaccountable midfield act of get-ball, side-step, fend-off and bomb-in-hope is becoming more caricatured by the year.

Anyhow, you seem to have adopted a very negative view of Collingwood in recent times but I'd urge you not to let it poison your otherwise excellent analysis with unnecessary pessimism. I'm not suggesting that every write-up be glowing with praise, but by the same token it would be nice to see the Knightmare of yesteryear back, where successes and failures were critiqued in equal measure.

 

[mike123]

Our midfield is allot better than it was than last year.

In: Swan, Crisp, Adams, Seedsman, Oxley
Out: Beams, Maccaffer, Ball, Young, Lumumba

I know which group I'd rather...

 

[Knightmare]

Just to pull you up on a couple of things there...

Crisp is certainly no Beams (yet) but he's a hell of a lot better than "fine". He's a 21 year old who's played 20-something games and currently he'd only be behind Pendles and maybe one or two others for the Copeland. He's only really played the two down games to start the year and from there he's been in our best five in every other match. To be going at over 20 disposals and a goal per game is bloody fantastic, especially from a player of his experience profile - he's got "fine" covered by the length of the Flemington straight.

Ball was better than Adams at his peak, but Adams is currently producing better football than Luke could manage in his final two seasons at the club. We're certainly not missing out on anything by not having him in the side. It's unfortunate but Bally's body was broken and the writing was on the wall. Unless you're comparing current-day Taylor Adams to 2010 Luke Ball, which would hardly be fair.

Oxley & Goldsack aren't Maxwell - but Langdon is tracking near-identically to a young Collingwood #43 who fast earned a reputation for courage, composure and competitiveness. Tommy has a lot of the former skipper about him, but seems to be blessed with more natural ability than Nick ever was. And again - all of Oxley, Goldsack and Langdon are upgrades on the post-injury variety of Maxwell, another whose body let him down before his time.

And finally, the Travis Varcoe of 2015 has played rings around the Heritier Lumumba of 2015. Sadly Harry hasn't been the same player since the name change. We'd all love to have the Harry O'Brien of 2010 winning contest after contest, beating his direct opponent into the ground and then launching powerful, accurate rebounds from the half back line - but that Harry doesn't exist any more. What we do have, in Travis Varcoe, is a player who's currently performing at a much greater level than Lumumba, whose bizarre unaccountable midfield act of get-ball, side-step, fend-off and bomb-in-hope is becoming more caricatured by the year.

Anyhow, you seem to have adopted a very negative view of Collingwood in recent times but I'd urge you not to let it poison your otherwise excellent analysis with unnecessary pessimism. I'm not suggesting that every write-up be glowing with praise, but by the same token it would be nice to see the Knightmare of yesteryear back, where successes and failures were critiqued in equal measure.

I don't agree with your assessment on all those players.

Crisp wouldn't be in my top 5 performers to this point. I'd have Pendlebury, Grundy and Elliott as our three standout performers. Sidebottom if healthy would be in that company. Swan, Toovey and Goldsack I also rate ahead of Crisp this year on performance. Langdon and Seedsman I'd have on parr. They've all had good season as Crisp has. But Crisp is a component to a midfield. That's who he is.

Adams by foot has been less unreliable this season than previously better knowing his limitations, but I'm still not comfortable playing him as part of a best team. He is getting his 20+ disposals per week through the midfield, but he isn't offering any scoreboard impact, no drive or anything on the outside. Not taking enough marks around the ground or linking up. His tackle numbers aren't nearly where they need to be for someone playing heavy midfield minutes. And with his ball use still not where I'd like it to be and you're not getting any hurt factor either. I'm just not comfortable with him getting games and being a primary midfielder. Ball while like Adams could win the ball, his tackling around the ball was much better. And I'd also argue that if he got the midfield minutes Adams was getting, you'd be getting better performance. And that's before factoring in the leadership he offered.

Langdon for on field performance is closing in on what Maxwell was doing. He isn't the leader and isn't as hard and probably not as athletic as a young Maxwell was with Maxwell providing some run and carry at times. Where Langdon has the edge is slightly better ball use and some midfield potential. The leadership is where Maxwell will be missed and where Langdon just won't be able to replace Maxwell, in the way Adams just won't replace Ball.

Varcoe like Adams I'm not completely comfortable with playing as part of the clubs best 22. He is a very good pressure player, and is quick. But his game is terrible limited. He doesn't find much of the footy. He despite being exceptionally quick doesn't actually generate the meters gained you'd hope from an outside type, providing very little run and carry or penetration by foot. His ball use is below average for an outside type. So while he was terrific against Gold Coast and can have the odd good game, there isn't enough of that.
Lumumba on the other hand was exceptionally productive throughout his time at Collingwood. I'd also regard Lumumba while he had his issues and was clashing with particularly Nathan towards the end, I'd regard him as a very good leader and someone who really puts in the work with the best of them on the track and helped mentor some of the younger players - with Seedsman a key example of this.

The reason for my generally negative tone is there is more to be negative about than there is to be positive about relatively speaking and my posts will continue to reflect this as we continue to get worse.

--
Where we stand as a list is to simplify what we have. We've got a terrific best 7/8. We had a team that goes 35 deep, with any of 35 players able to step into the senior side and play a role as required as at least able 19-22 standard players as needed. And we've got arguably after GWS and Gold Coast got the next best young core group with a number of players I project as excellent future leaders.

What I am critical of and will remain critical of is what we have with regards to winning now. That best 7/8 needs to become a best 15+ containing the quality of players you'd say we have amongst that best 7. We also need to find those next generation key forwards and further star power. We lack leadership with no established high level leaders outside of Pendlebury.
Injury prevention and career continuation is a long standing issue that has failed to improve, until it is obvious that it has. Our coaching group outside of Ben Hart have to fit in the questionmark category, with only the back half from year to year coming back clearly better. Our recruiting of opposition talent has been questionable with that the relative weakness of our recruiting team, who just have that element missing, with their junior talent identification excellent.

I'm sure there is a lot more on both sides of things that could be commented on. Those are just the top of mind thoughts, which I'll over the bye or whenever I get around to it expand upon in my Collingwood Almanac.

It's hardly all doom and gloom, with some elements around the club strong. But being Collingwood and being my team, I'll be hard in my assessments because I want and expect success.

 

[shizzle]

Elliott one our best 3 this year so far? Goldsack and Toovey having better years than Crisp? Lolmumba much better than Varcoe? Who is also not best 22 along with Adams?

I generally like your informed and well researched posts, but no, just no.

It also seems like you have this expectation that we drop off the face of the earth like last season, ignoring the fact we are fitter and have a far better injury profile this year.

 

[Scodog10]

Wow Knightmare has come in and owned this thread

His comments will be about as popular as a s**t flavoured lollipop, but he hasn't missed with any of them yet (aside from the Elliott top 3 statement that was bonkers)!

 

[good4footy]

I don't agree with your assessment on all those players.

Crisp wouldn't be in my top 5 performers to this point. I'd have Pendlebury, Grundy and Elliott as our three standout performers. Sidebottom if healthy would be in that company. Swan, Toovey and Goldsack I also rate ahead of Crisp this year on performance. Langdon and Seedsman I'd have on parr. They've all had good season as Crisp has. But Crisp is a component to a midfield. That's who he is.

Adams by foot has been less unreliable this season than previously better knowing his limitations, but I'm still not comfortable playing him as part of a best team. He is getting his 20+ disposals per week through the midfield, but he isn't offering any scoreboard impact, no drive or anything on the outside. Not taking enough marks around the ground or linking up. His tackle numbers aren't nearly where they need to be for someone playing heavy midfield minutes. And with his ball use still not where I'd like it to be and you're not getting any hurt factor either. I'm just not comfortable with him getting games and being a primary midfielder. Ball while like Adams could win the ball, his tackling around the ball was much better. And I'd also argue that if he got the midfield minutes Adams was getting, you'd be getting better performance. And that's before factoring in the leadership he offered.

Langdon for on field performance is closing in on what Maxwell was doing. He isn't the leader and isn't as hard and probably not as athletic as a young Maxwell was with Maxwell providing some run and carry at times. Where Langdon has the edge is slightly better ball use and some midfield potential. The leadership is where Maxwell will be missed and where Langdon just won't be able to replace Maxwell, in the way Adams just won't replace Ball.

Varcoe like Adams I'm not completely comfortable with playing as part of the clubs best 22. He is a very good pressure player, and is quick. But his game is terrible limited. He doesn't find much of the footy. He despite being exceptionally quick doesn't actually generate the meters gained you'd hope from an outside type, providing very little run and carry or penetration by foot. His ball use is below average for an outside type. So while he was terrific against Gold Coast and can have the odd good game, there isn't enough of that.
Lumumba on the other hand was exceptionally productive throughout his time at Collingwood. I'd also regard Lumumba while he had his issues and was clashing with particularly Nathan towards the end, I'd regard him as a very good leader and someone who really puts in the work with the best of them on the track and helped mentor some of the younger players - with Seedsman a key example of this.

The reason for my generally negative tone is there is more to be negative about than there is to be positive about relatively speaking and my posts will continue to reflect this as we continue to get worse.

--
Where we stand as a list is to simplify what we have. We've got a terrific best 7/8. We had a team that goes 35 deep, with any of 35 players able to step into the senior side and play a role as required as at least able 19-22 standard players as needed. And we've got arguably after GWS and Gold Coast got the next best young core group with a number of players I project as excellent future leaders.

What I am critical of and will remain critical of is what we have with regards to winning now. That best 7/8 needs to become a best 15+ containing the quality of players you'd say we have amongst that best 7. We also need to find those next generation key forwards and further star power. We lack leadership with no established high level leaders outside of Pendlebury.
Injury prevention and career continuation is a long standing issue that has failed to improve, until it is obvious that it has. Our coaching group outside of Ben Hart have to fit in the questionmark category, with only the back half from year to year coming back clearly better. Our recruiting of opposition talent has been questionable with that the relative weakness of our recruiting team, who just have that element missing, with their junior talent identification excellent.

I'm sure there is a lot more on both sides of things that could be commented on. Those are just the top of mind thoughts, which I'll over the bye or whenever I get around to it expand upon in my Collingwood Almanac.

It's hardly all doom and gloom, with some elements around the club strong. But being Collingwood and being my team, I'll be hard in my assessments because I want and expect success.

I found a conversion on radio interesting. They were discussing the difference between winning centre bounce clearances when players are in the middle and when they are not.

Crisp is 3rd in the whole league for a negative disparity when he is not in our centre bounce. Biclavs was first. From memory it was something like plus 26 when Crisp was in the centre bounce and minus 13 when he wasn't.
I find that amazing regards how important he has become to us.

 

[ottoman]

I found a conversion on radio interesting. They were discussing the difference between winning centre bounce clearances when players are in the middle and when they are not.

Crisp is 3rd in the whole league for a negative disparity when he is not in our centre bounce. Biclavs was first. From memory it was something like plus 26 when Crisp was in the centre bounce and minus 13 when he wasn't.
I find that amazing regards how important he has become to us.

I didn't quite understand this stat. Sorry for my ignorance good4footy but is this a good thing or a bad thing. Not quite sure what the plus 26 refers to and the negative disparity means.

 

[Scodog10]

I didn't quite understand this stat. Sorry for my ignorance good4footy but is this a good thing or a bad thing. Not quite sure what the plus 26 refers to and the negative disparity means.

When Crisp is in for centre clearances we have won 26 more than our opposition. When he hasn't been in our opponent has won 13 more

 

[Apex36]

I didn't quite understand this stat. Sorry for my ignorance good4footy but is this a good thing or a bad thing. Not quite sure what the plus 26 refers to and the negative disparity means.

It means we win centre clearances a hell of a lot more than we lose them when Crisp is in the guts.

 

[ottoman]

When Crisp is in for centre clearances we have one 26 more than our opposition. When he hasn't been in our opponent has won 13 more

It means we win centre clearances a hell of a lot more than we lose them when Crisp is in the guts.

Got it. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Implanttheseed]

Playing better teams is my reason for expecting a drop off with the schedule to get harder from this point. Even assuming a fairly mild injury load. We've a worse team without Beams/Ball/Maxwell/Lumumba.

Then looking at what we have. We're a poor stoppage team. A poor running team. And a poor kicking team. When you're poor in those three categories, you're not going to be a good team and that's where we sit right now. With our tackling and pressuring game as well as our 1v1 ability in the contest what we hang our hats on and rely on to get wins.

Additionally I struggle with what we've got on each line. Up forward we don't have that second marking key forward for Cloke to be productive as per last season. Or midfield is worse lacking power and the stoppages or outside pace. Our backline is too young and too inexperienced to win with, with veteran backlines winning backlines.

North minus Wells, Dal Santo and Swallow are still a better team. If we had Dayne Beams, Lumumba and Shaw, I'd back us. But we're not the same team we were in 2010/2011 and we're lacking those pieces after our best 7/8 players to beat good teams with any consistency.

We need to start living in the future, it looks bright from where I sit

Langdon = maxwell
Adams= ball
Varcoe = or actually > than Harry o at present

The only < I see is breams

Our youngsters are coming on fast I think you need to give them more credit. I agree that the next four weeks are tough but i have a good feeling we will surprise a few sides with our spirit and pinch a few wins as underdogs, this will particularly come to the fore when it's wet as we tend to play well on these conditions as it suits our game style...

Pies by 15