Opinion Pick your Round 1 side

[Partridge]

Agree with you that it looks tough now for Walker to break into the side. That is due as much as anything to their apparent preference for two talls rather than three, IMO. Three talls is quite an orthodox modern forward setup yet we seem uninterested in trying it. I'm not sure why.

Because of one thing; what happens when the ball hits the ground.

There are a lot of people in football now, both fans on here and the media, who repeat the same things over and over, almost like it's going to make it more true. If you are going to play three genuine tall forwards, then at least one of them needs to be really agile. Not 'agile for big man' either; genuinely quick at ground level. None of Hawkins, Clark or Walker are this. Watch how efficiently any defense mops up when the ball hits the ground, and then remember Hawthorn is even better again. That's why.

 

[you pick one]

He's a question for the masses,I have no doubt the Hawks will start with Lake, Frawley and Gibson and will be keen to play a +1 defence as well, that may even be Roughead to take away any advantage we have in the air at all in the forward line,do we allow them to have the +1? if the answers no and we push someone else forward to combat that, this would leave them with a smaller quicker open forward 50 which doesn't suit us either.
I think we need to be very astute picking this rd1 side,the result of the game may well be decided at selection.

 

[catempire]

Because of one thing; what happens when the ball hits the ground.

There are a lot of people in football now, both fans on here and the media, who repeat the same things over and over, almost like it's going to make it more true. If you are going to play three genuine tall forwards, then at least one of them needs to be really agile. Not 'agile for big man' either; genuinely quick at ground level. None of Hawkins, Clark or Walker are this. Watch how efficiently any defense mops up when the ball hits the ground, and then remember Hawthorn is even better again. That's why.

I'm not going to debate it with you again, but I fundamentally disagree as do all of the other coaches that play 3 or more tall forwards who are no more agile than ours.

 

[bulletproof]

My concern with three talls is that Hawthorn sets the game up off half back and we really couldn't close them down off half back last year. Walker is pretty good defensively. But I would worry about the defensive pressure of Clark and Hawkins. I think we may need to overcompensate with a defensive forward.

Oh for another Max Rooke....We don't really have anyone for the role.

 

[you pick one]

To be any chance against the Hawks rd1 we need to present to them something they haven't seen from the Cats in the past and that's 3 tall forwards Hawkins, Clark and Walker.Make them do something different.

 

[Partridge]

I'm not going to debate it with you again, but I fundamentally disagree as do all of the other coaches that play 3 or more tall forwards who are no more agile than ours.

Fair enough. We get to find out in Round 1, either by how well Walker goes in tandem with Hawkins and Clark, or when the match committee (who remember, know better than you and me) don't pick him.

 

[thejester]

To be any chance against the Hawks rd1 we need to present to them something they haven't seen from the Cats in the past and that's 3 tall forwards Hawkins, Clark and Walker.Make them do something different.

Put Stokes in the ruck as well. They'll be bamboozled!

 

[Partridge]

Put Stokes in the ruck as well. They'll be bamboozled!

Well, at least they've been trailling him as a marking target!

 

[catempire]

Fair enough. We get to find out in Round 1, either by how well Walker goes in tandem with Hawkins and Clark, or when the match committee (who remember, know better than you and me) don't pick him.

More generally though, I can't see why it's not worth trying. I feel we are really up against it beating Hawthorn and simply using the same setups we have seen before and praying for a different result is the definition of madness.

It's a shame we didn't get to see Walker working with the other 2 in at least one NAB game as now it seems unlikely they will experiment in round 1.

If we get beaten by 6 goals with a similar setup to the 2014 final, what have we learnt or gained?

 

[Tackle_happy]

Sorry, but I have to ask........how? He was on the ground for the entire third quarter and didn't touch the ball.

He was overall compared to the last couple of weeks.

I'm not saying he was good - just better than the previous ones (be it positioning or getting the ball a bit more - minus the third quarter).

 

[dazbroncos]

Because of one thing; what happens when the ball hits the ground.

There are a lot of people in football now, both fans on here and the media, who repeat the same things over and over, almost like it's going to make it more true. If you are going to play three genuine tall forwards, then at least one of them needs to be really agile. Not 'agile for big man' either; genuinely quick at ground level. None of Hawkins, Clark or Walker are this. Watch how efficiently any defense mops up when the ball hits the ground, and then remember Hawthorn is even better again. That's why.

All valid points but we can't have it both ways.
We either try something new and a bit different and, as you rightly say, risk the ball on the ground rebounding out potentially or we roll out a similar side and plan to last year and we all know how that went.
If CS and MC do something different it's criticism it might not work. Of they do the same it's criticism for doing the same.

Can't win.
Go Catters

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

My concern with three talls is that Hawthorn sets the game up off half back and we really couldn't close them down off half back last year. Walker is pretty good defensively. But I would worry about the defensive pressure of Clark and Hawkins. I think we may need to overcompensate with a defensive forward.

Oh for another Max Rooke....We don't really have anyone for the role.

To allow three (very) tall forwards to work, everyone in the forward line has to be extremely disciplined and be prepared to work hard for every minute they are on the ground. You can't afford any bludging. If their isn't sufficient space between Clark/Hawkins/tall forward 3 for each of our forward entries, the Hawthorn defenders start zoning off and we become easy pickings for them.

Then there's the crumbers, which was a major issue for us last year. It's all well and good for our big men to 'just create a contest', but there's got to be players that are able to pick up the loose ball and capitalise, often in heavy traffic. This didn't really look like a strength of Murdoch or Bartel last year (though Bartel could be better if he's just collecting the ball and then feeding it off; just don't think he has the pace to break clear and get a snap off consistently). So who fills that role? Motlop is an obvious candidate. The midfielders can do their bit when they're resting forward. Lang seems to get his shots more from just sneaking into space and accepting short passes, though that can translate to him being a genuine crumbing threat (he tends to be in the right place at the right time, he's quick, he makes good decisions under pressure and he seems to be a reasonably good finisher). I think Murdoch has scope to improve in this area. Smedts and Blease are mature age options that we should expect to see in the seniors this year (though not necessarily in those spots). And if Johnson spends a lot of time forward, his shuffling isn't likely to get him clear of his opponents, but his party tricks mean he should still be a threat to slot a couple, or set up an open teammate. Gregson and Cockatoo could also help, from the younger players that we've seen.

And the third thing is the delivery. It must be precise. How many times did we beat Hawthorn between 2009-13 because they played right into our hands by going with the 'just bomb it in to Buddy and Roughy' strategy? We'd be advised to remember that. If it's a one-out situation, sure, go nuts. But if the opposition has the numbers, or it's relatively even, you don't want to continually bomb it long to your talls. It's incredibly predictable. So you mix up the bowling, hit up the lesser lights whenever possible to keep their men (Stratton, Birchall etc.) honest, get all of the bigs sacrificing their own games with decoy leads and pushing up the ground to expose a favourable match-up (say, if Gibson gets caught on Hawkins)...all those little things could make it work.

But it's risky. I'd much rather go in with a hybrid third tall (someone like Kersten or Murdoch), or a mobile tall that can play forward, but can also run around on a wing (or as a high half forward), play loose in defence, pinch hit in the ruck (Blicavs can do that, Vardy and Stanley might be able to do that, not sure if Walker has all those strings to his bow, but I wouldn't categorically rule it out)...a guy that will spend maybe 40% of the game in the forward line, so the defence never settles on the 'three bigs inside 50m' set-up.

 

[sauron256]

And the third thing is the delivery. It must be precise. How many times did we beat Hawthorn between 2009-13 because they played right into our hands by going with the 'just bomb it in to Buddy and Roughy' strategy? We'd be advised to remember that. If it's a one-out situation, sure, go nuts. But if the opposition has the numbers, or it's relatively even, you don't want to continually bomb it long to your talls. It's incredibly predictable. So you mix up the bowling, hit up the lesser lights whenever possible to keep their men (Stratton, Birchall etc.) honest, get all of the bigs sacrificing their own games with decoy leads and pushing up the ground to expose a favourable match-up (say, if Gibson gets caught on Hawkins)...all those little things could make it work.

Too right. Watch the QF last year and see how superb the Hawthorn deliver was into the forward 50. Losing Buddy really forced them to fix the bomb long strategy, and it seriously hurt us that day.

 

[you pick one]

Well, at least they've been trailling him as a marking target!

Yeh I noticed in a couple of the NAB games he has been the goto marking forward again on occasions.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Well, if Walker (who turned 22 at the end of last year) was expected to continue on from his pretty impressive form last year and hold down a key forward spot this year, it's hard to understand why the Cats would recruit not one, but two ready-made senior players who would be expected to spend a lot of their time at centre half forward, without even worrying about the possibility of Shane Kersten playing as a key forward. I'm finding it hard to understand the trade for Stanley for precisely that reason. And the fact that Walker played the last two preseason games in the VFL and didn't appear in the AFL side during the preseason, even though Stanley wasn't available suggests to me that Walker is no chance of playing in Round 1, unless Clark or Hawkins gets injured in the next week and a half.

It's really not that hard to understand when you realise that solid talls are critical in winning premierships, relying on 22 year old key forwards with <20 games experience rarely works and we've got a total of 2 proven, durable key position players under the age of 30.

Basically we could rely on Walker, Blicavs, Vardy, Kersten and Simpson to provide almost the entirety of our future key position player lineup. Not only have none of them shown any more than glimpses of genuine quality at AFL level but 3 of those 5 have spent more time in the medical room than on the field. The coaching staff aren't saying those guys won't be good players or even stars but not bringing in other options would be demanding almost all of them become good players (or better) which would be a massive gamble.

Clark fell in our lap without giving up too much. Even if we're only a 20% chance of getting his best that's a risk worth taking. But even adding Clark to that list and it still looks pretty thin. Stanley's a pick up that's looking more to the future than the present. Sure he hasn't produced a huge amount at AFL level yet but he's got the full package of skills and athleticism. The league's littered with quality talls who didn't do much early in their careers. While he's not guaranteed to make the grade he's a very, very good chance.

Ultimately it's up to each player to make their case. All the talls in the squad will be picked if they bash the door down. Walker's knocking pretty damn hard and if he keeps doing that he'll be picked, whether that's round 1 or a bit later on. Sure this year if all our young talls take a big step up there's going to be some selection headaches. But I'd prefer to have a gun playing in the 2s and ready to come in if needed than what we had last year with Walker and Brown coming in for a final. Those headaches will sort themselves out pretty soon too with McIntosh, Rivers and Lonergan not far from retirement and, although it's horrible to think about, Vardy and Simpson probably 1 more major injury away from hanging up the boots too. So overall getting in ready made players has nothing to do with not rating Walker. It's just about making sure we're not stuffed if our players don't all develop the way we hope.

 

[you pick one]

Put Stokes in the ruck as well. They'll be bamboozled!

Nice word,havn't heard that in yonks.But that's not the intent the intent is not to let them set up as they want and control the game, but to simply take them out of their comfort zone.

 

[Cattery]

It's really not that hard to understand when you realise that solid talls are critical in winning premierships, relying on 22 year old key forwards with <20 games experience rarely works and we've got a total of 2 proven, durable key position players under the age of 30. ...................

But I'd prefer to have a gun playing in the 2s and ready to come in if needed than what we had last year with Walker and Brown coming in for a final. Those headaches will sort themselves out pretty soon too with McIntosh, Rivers and Lonergan not far from retirement and, although it's horrible to think about, Vardy and Simpson probably 1 more major injury away from hanging up the boots too. So overall getting in ready made players has nothing to do with not rating Walker. It's just about making sure we're not stuffed if our players don't all develop the way we hope.

Agree 100% FS, not sure why there appears to be a fair bit of angst/bewilderment over the recruiting of Stanley.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

It's really not that hard to understand when you realise that solid talls are critical in winning premierships, relying on 22 year old key forwards with <20 games experience rarely works and we've got a total of 2 proven, durable key position players under the age of 30.

Basically we could rely on Walker, Blicavs, Vardy, Kersten and Simpson to provide almost the entirety of our future key position player lineup. Not only have none of them shown any more than glimpses of genuine quality at AFL level but 3 of those 5 have spent more time in the medical room than on the field. The coaching staff aren't saying those guys won't be good players or even stars but not bringing in other options would be demanding almost all of them become good players (or better) which would be a massive gamble.

Clark fell in our lap without giving up too much. Even if we're only a 20% chance of getting his best that's a risk worth taking. But even adding Clark to that list and it still looks pretty thin. Stanley's a pick up that's looking more to the future than the present. Sure he hasn't produced a huge amount at AFL level yet but he's got the full package of skills and athleticism. The league's littered with quality talls who didn't do much early in their careers. While he's not guaranteed to make the grade he's a very, very good chance.

Ultimately it's up to each player to make their case. All the talls in the squad will be picked if they bash the door down. Walker's knocking pretty damn hard and if he keeps doing that he'll be picked, whether that's round 1 or a bit later on. Sure this year if all our young talls take a big step up there's going to be some selection headaches. But I'd prefer to have a gun playing in the 2s and ready to come in if needed than what we had last year with Walker and Brown coming in for a final. Those headaches will sort themselves out pretty soon too with McIntosh, Rivers and Lonergan not far from retirement and, although it's horrible to think about, Vardy and Simpson probably 1 more major injury away from hanging up the boots too. So overall getting in ready made players has nothing to do with not rating Walker. It's just about making sure we're not stuffed if our players don't all develop the way we hope.

All of those players are well and truly at crunch time in their AFL careers. If they don't make significant inroads and establish themselves as regular AFL players this year, their future in this league is in jeopardy. So how long do we expect them to play the good soldier and be strictly depth players? If those players don't get enough opportunities in the senior team in 2015, they'll be looking for a club that can offer those opportunities. This set-up has got 'disgruntled players' written all over it, especially if we're not a top four team.

I think Walker did more than enough last year to suggest that he is ready to take a big step up this year. We were expecting Vardy to explode last year, before he did his knee; now he barely rates a mention. Kersten will be better for the experience this year. Clark was too good to pass up; I couldn't be happier that we got him for Varcoe (and even if he has an injury-plagued season, he was more than worth the risk).

There is an obvious problem with having too many middle aged (by the league's standards) seemingly AFL quality second tall forward/rucks on your list and that is that most - if not all - of them will be on good money. I don't know what we're paying Stanley (without even considering the first round pick), Simpson/McIntosh and Vardy, but I bet it's a lot for them to kick the dew off every week (if that's how it plays out).

 

[Partridge]

More generally though, I can't see why it's not worth trying. I feel we are really up against it beating Hawthorn and simply using the same setups we have seen before and praying for a different result is the definition of madness.

It's a shame we didn't get to see Walker working with the other 2 in at least one NAB game as now it seems unlikely they will experiment in round 1.

If we get beaten by 6 goals with a similar setup to the 2014 final, what have we learnt or gained?

Completely agree, but remember we have a stubborn coach who doesn't seem to want to make changes if he is fixed on a particular idea (or player). How much did Scott change between Round 22 and the Qualifying Final? Not a lot, and the only difference was we lost by more.

Going back over the last 8 years that we've been a top side, how many times - really - have we played three tall forwards? I certainly advocated (and defended) it in 2007 with Mooney, Nathan Ablett and Hawkins. But even then, after checking it, we only played all three 5 times that year, and we lost 2 of those (crucially, it wasn't tried once after Round 7, and that's after we were tearing chunks out of good teams on a weekly basis). That was with one player (Ablett) who was absolutely exceptional below the knees for a big guy too. Perhaps that ground level pace and discipline to keep your opponents separated is a lot tougher than we realise.

The pity of it is, of the three, I would argue Walker is by far the best at ground level in terms of pressure. So it'll be interesting to see what they do.

 

[Partridge]

All of those players are well and truly at crunch time in their AFL careers. If they don't make significant inroads and establish themselves as regular AFL players this year, their future in this league is in jeopardy. So how long do we expect them to play the good soldier and be strictly depth players? If those players don't get enough opportunities in the senior team in 2015, they'll be looking for a club that can offer those opportunities. This set-up has got 'disgruntled players' written all over it, especially if we're not a top four team.

Disagree slightly on two of those names. Walker and Kersten I absolutely concur, although Kersten really needs to replicate his best VFL form first before he can claim any misfortune in being omitted; if anyone played himself out of a senior berth he did this pre-season (depending on how selection goes, Murdoch could be another). I would argue to this point neither Simpson nor Vardy could claim any poor treatment by the club; one has played 24 games in 7 years, and the other 21 games in 5. Clubs with a harsher policy on injured players could have easily moved both on by now. I wouldn't include Blicavs in that list; he's not going to be a depth player as long as Scott is coach.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Disagree slightly on two of those names. Walker and Kersten I absolutely concur, although Kersten really needs to replicate his best VFL form first before he can claim any misfortune in being omitted; if anyone played himself out of a senior berth he did this pre-season (depending on how selection goes, Murdoch could be another). I would argue to this point neither Simpson nor Vardy could claim any poor treatment by the club; one has played 24 games in 7 years, and the other 21 games in 5. Clubs with a harsher policy on injured players could have easily moved both on by now. I wouldn't include Blicavs in that list; he's not going to be a depth player as long as Scott is coach.

You're spot on with Blicavs, skimmed past his name. He's certainly not at crunch time. With Vardy and Simpson, I think it's just a case of they've been here a while, big things have been expected of them at times and I can see the rank-and-file turning on them pretty quickly this year, if they don't see them becoming solid senior players this year. Mitch Brown was the golden child, once upon a time. And I can definitely see them making it known that they want a fresh start at another club, if they're stuck in the VFL this year, whether we think they have the right to be annoyed about it or not. It's their careers and with certain things, they've got to look out for what's best for them.

 

[Partridge]

I think people are quickly writing Kersten off on the back of two (three including the reserves) performances but we need to remember he is coming off minor knee surgery. A clean out by all accounts and is probably on a restricted training program.
He played 37% of gametime week one, 57% gametime against Adelaide and I would assume he spend considerable time coming on/off the interchange bench on the weekend against Werribee.

I'm not writing him off, but to me right now he's not near the senior team, and he's got Walker ahead of him in the queue. No reason he can't change that once the VFL stuff gets going.

 

[Footy Smarts]

So how long do we expect them to play the good soldier and be strictly depth players? If those players don't get enough opportunities in the senior team in 2015, they'll be looking for a club that can offer those opportunities. This set-up has got 'disgruntled players' written all over it, especially if we're not a top four team.

Until they earn a spot in the best 22 then they don't really have anything to be disgruntled about. They'll all get opportunities during the year and you can guarantee we'll be rotating our talls around. But the whole point is unless they grab the opportunities with both hands they'll head back to the VFL pretty quick. If they're not going to perform when given their chance at AFL level then frankly I don't see why we'd mind if they want out. If we get lucky and have a bunch of players step up massively and we can't give them all game time then we'll get compensated at the trade table. Overall it's just a much better situation than last year when everyone got their chance and due to various reasons nobody really took it. Walker went closest and he'll get another chance to cement his spot soon enough.

I think Walker did more than enough last year to suggest that he is ready to take a big step up this year. We were expecting Vardy to explode last year, before he did his knee; now he barely rates a mention. Kersten will be better for the experience this year. Clark was too good to pass up; I couldn't be happier that we got him for Varcoe (and even if he has an injury-plagued season, he was more than worth the risk).

There is an obvious problem with having too many middle aged (by the league's standards) seemingly AFL quality second tall forward/rucks on your list and that is that most - if not all - of them will be on good money. I don't know what we're paying Stanley (without even considering the first round pick), Simpson/McIntosh and Vardy, but I bet it's a lot for them to kick the dew off every week (if that's how it plays out).

Sorry but there's no way guys like Simpson, Vardy, Walker and Stanley are on even an average AFL wage. They'd just be standard fringe player salaries similar to guys like GHS and Murdoch. Sure they're "seemingly" AFL quality but as of yet none of them have proven themselves quality AFL players. Sure it's tough but I'm glad the club isn't just going to give games to an underperforming young tall in the hope they turn out ok. All those players have had 20 or so games over the course of a few years to get used to the pressure at AFL level. They've also had a good grounding in our VFL system. Now it's time to produce the goods. If they do there will be no issues because they'll be playing AFL week in week out. If they don't well they might not be here next year.

 

[SJ]

Put Stokes in the ruck as well. They'll be bamboozled!

We laugh about it, but Duncan was in the ruck in the final quarter of a semi final only six months ago.

 

[sauron256]

We laugh about it, but Duncan was in the ruck in the final quarter of a semi final only six months ago.

Watch the NAB game against Carlton, 3rd quarter with about 3:10 left on the clock, where there's a boundary throw-in and Selwood realises there's no one to contest the ruck for us and tries to do it himself!