- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,671
- 99,033
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
This is a battle that's been raging since the week Butcher was dropped and it's permeated just about every thread since that time. I thought discussion of whether we need the third tall going forward was worth it's own thread.
Since the North game, we've gone with a 2 man tall forward line in Schulz and Westhoff surrounded by some top quality smalls, and for the most part it's been very effective. Final Siren 's brilliant squiggle from the main board thread shows us to be the 2nd best side at putting points on the board.
We also have Schulz 4 goals clear in the lead in the Coleman, and Robbie Gray 2nd in the Coaches Association award rotating between the midfield and forward line. It's a very dangerous forward line both on paper and in reality.
However, several on this board have worried about our forward structure. Yes, we are winning, and yes, we are scoring freely most weeks, but there are some underlying issues that are being masked by our gameplan, skill, fitness, pace and class. These issues have been exposed in 3 of the last 5 games, disastrously so in the Showdown, and i'm getting a little worried that we're being figured out, and that there is a bit of a blueprint for stopping us.
That blueprint might not have worked in the Showdown had Trengove not gone down, but he did, and it did.
Basically every week now in modern football we're facing a loose opposition defender in our attacking 50. Don't worry, we're doing it to other teams to and we're usually devastatingly effective with our own loose man, so I don't really see manning him up as a viable option, nor is it particularly necessary.
The trick to beating a loose man is super quick ball movement, lowering our eyes and hitting targets, and having players who can hold a mark. Fortunately we've got 5 forwards who are all fantastic marks of the ball most of the time, in Schulz, Westhoff, Wingard, Gray, and Monfries.
The problem comes when our ball movement is pressured, and against any decent side, and especially in finals, it is absolutely going to be. None of those marking targets are a Hawkins or Cloke style man mountain who can haul in a grab against a big strong defender on a regular basis. Schulz is better on the lead, Westhoff suffers a little in a wrestle for a mark, and the smalls aren't big enough to contend with taller defenders in a one on one high ball situation. Yet when our ball movement is pressured, we're getting a lot of high ball situations and we're seeing our guys chopped out by the loose man far too often.
This effect is magnified when Westhoff is required elsewhere, and he is almost every single game. He is at his best when he floats around and exploits his unique set of skills and goes where he is required, as tribey coined, the Chess Queen role. Our tallest marking target out of the forward line means that taller defenders can simply bear hug Schulz with impunity and the loose man can jog over for an effectively uncontested mark.
Trengove left an enormous hole in our side when he went off injured on Sunday and his absence was the difference. Our defence that had been rebounding like Damon White's chest was suddenly being outmarked. Lobbe having his worst day since the infamous Jacobs 60 hitouts game had to spend more time in the ruck, and when we finally did get it forward, we were barely offering a contest because our forwards were outsized, out numbered, and it Schulz's case scragged out of the play over and over again.
Had we had an extra tall forward, Trengove out would have stung because he's a fantastic player, but we would have still been able to contest in defence by throwing Westhoff back and move the ball out of our defence and find a man who had the chance to mark the ball. As it was we were relying on Schulz to mark, or Kane Mitchell to run and contest enough that we could get a throw in up the ground a bit, it was ugly.
We've been exposed in the Sydney and Melbourne games as well by a lack of marking targets, perhaps not as catastrophically as in the Showdown but still very noticeably.
The absolute worst argument I hear on this board against the third tall is that "We're winning so why change the structure" or "lolle El Scorcho you gronk i'm pretty sure Kenny knows what he's doing". We're winning (now not consistently) in spite of the structure, not because of it. All the noises from the coaches preseason were that Butcher was an incredibly important player to our structure this year. For whatever reason (and i'm sure i'll hear plenty of the same that we've heard before in this thread), Butcher was left out after the North game which was a dirty day for everyone, and never replaced. Had we had a fit Redden or Mason Shaw, we may have seen another tall option used up forward, and I genuinely believe that Hinkley intends to play the extra tall. I believe if you asked the coaching staff, they'd tell you the plan is to have another tall playing up forward long term.
Under finals like pressure, we wont always be able to move the ball in the slick, freewheeling manner that we have for most of the year, and when we're kicking under pressure, we need someone who can take a grab, or at least effect a contest so that the opposition loose man isn't cutting us to ribbons. I'd argue that a third tall being picked in place of Sam Gray or Kane Mitchell (or Chad Wingard or Hamish Hartlett) on the weekend may have been the difference between us staying the course and collapsing into our own arseholes as we did in the 2nd half.
I'm hoping i've been able to convince you that a third tall will make us a better football team. That was part A of this thread.
Now to address the forwards that might come in. We all know how controversial John Butcher is on this board because of his kicking action. I'll make the Pittard Argument™ that given how important the tall could be to our structure, we can handle the odd miss. Butcher in the side would provide a net increase in scoring opportunities.
Mason Shaw is the shiny new KPF going around, and he's looked very good in the games he's played so far. While i'd be very happy to see Shaw come in, I still think Butcher is the better prepared player for AFL football. He's still taking the best defenders at SANFL level every week, and for all the excitement about Shaw's 6, Butcher has been kicking goals on a regular basis all season in the SANFL, including 3 bags of 5. I'd be happy with either one of the two in, but given the choice for next week, i'd want Butcher.
Funnily, there has been a big call recently for us to throw a contract at Sam Reid to try to lure a more effective key forward. Reid was taken in the same draft as Butcher, is roughly the same age, and despite being given 40 more games by Sydney than we've given Butcher, his average numbers are basically the same. A couple more touches, one more mark and less goals on average. Pump 40 more games into Butch and he'd be a better player than Sam Reid, I have absolutely no doubt about it. The other side of the coin with playing a third tall is development. Games in the SANFL are fine but to really develop at AFL level, these guys need to be playing regularly.
Not everyone is Jeremy Cameron. Not everyone is a star from game 1, and with KPFs, most of them go through a long development period where people are calling for their heads and writing them off at every stage. Look at Cloke, Hawkins, Schulz, Westhoff, Tippett. All guys who were heavily maligned for a long time early in their career because it wasn't quite clicking for them, yet all have turned into very good to great KPFs.
Getting games into the likes of Butcher and Shaw now is good for the side in 2014 and it's good for the side in 2015 and 2016 and beyond.
Since the North game, we've gone with a 2 man tall forward line in Schulz and Westhoff surrounded by some top quality smalls, and for the most part it's been very effective. Final Siren 's brilliant squiggle from the main board thread shows us to be the 2nd best side at putting points on the board.
We also have Schulz 4 goals clear in the lead in the Coleman, and Robbie Gray 2nd in the Coaches Association award rotating between the midfield and forward line. It's a very dangerous forward line both on paper and in reality.
However, several on this board have worried about our forward structure. Yes, we are winning, and yes, we are scoring freely most weeks, but there are some underlying issues that are being masked by our gameplan, skill, fitness, pace and class. These issues have been exposed in 3 of the last 5 games, disastrously so in the Showdown, and i'm getting a little worried that we're being figured out, and that there is a bit of a blueprint for stopping us.
That blueprint might not have worked in the Showdown had Trengove not gone down, but he did, and it did.
Basically every week now in modern football we're facing a loose opposition defender in our attacking 50. Don't worry, we're doing it to other teams to and we're usually devastatingly effective with our own loose man, so I don't really see manning him up as a viable option, nor is it particularly necessary.
The trick to beating a loose man is super quick ball movement, lowering our eyes and hitting targets, and having players who can hold a mark. Fortunately we've got 5 forwards who are all fantastic marks of the ball most of the time, in Schulz, Westhoff, Wingard, Gray, and Monfries.
The problem comes when our ball movement is pressured, and against any decent side, and especially in finals, it is absolutely going to be. None of those marking targets are a Hawkins or Cloke style man mountain who can haul in a grab against a big strong defender on a regular basis. Schulz is better on the lead, Westhoff suffers a little in a wrestle for a mark, and the smalls aren't big enough to contend with taller defenders in a one on one high ball situation. Yet when our ball movement is pressured, we're getting a lot of high ball situations and we're seeing our guys chopped out by the loose man far too often.
This effect is magnified when Westhoff is required elsewhere, and he is almost every single game. He is at his best when he floats around and exploits his unique set of skills and goes where he is required, as tribey coined, the Chess Queen role. Our tallest marking target out of the forward line means that taller defenders can simply bear hug Schulz with impunity and the loose man can jog over for an effectively uncontested mark.
Trengove left an enormous hole in our side when he went off injured on Sunday and his absence was the difference. Our defence that had been rebounding like Damon White's chest was suddenly being outmarked. Lobbe having his worst day since the infamous Jacobs 60 hitouts game had to spend more time in the ruck, and when we finally did get it forward, we were barely offering a contest because our forwards were outsized, out numbered, and it Schulz's case scragged out of the play over and over again.
Had we had an extra tall forward, Trengove out would have stung because he's a fantastic player, but we would have still been able to contest in defence by throwing Westhoff back and move the ball out of our defence and find a man who had the chance to mark the ball. As it was we were relying on Schulz to mark, or Kane Mitchell to run and contest enough that we could get a throw in up the ground a bit, it was ugly.
We've been exposed in the Sydney and Melbourne games as well by a lack of marking targets, perhaps not as catastrophically as in the Showdown but still very noticeably.
The absolute worst argument I hear on this board against the third tall is that "We're winning so why change the structure" or "lolle El Scorcho you gronk i'm pretty sure Kenny knows what he's doing". We're winning (now not consistently) in spite of the structure, not because of it. All the noises from the coaches preseason were that Butcher was an incredibly important player to our structure this year. For whatever reason (and i'm sure i'll hear plenty of the same that we've heard before in this thread), Butcher was left out after the North game which was a dirty day for everyone, and never replaced. Had we had a fit Redden or Mason Shaw, we may have seen another tall option used up forward, and I genuinely believe that Hinkley intends to play the extra tall. I believe if you asked the coaching staff, they'd tell you the plan is to have another tall playing up forward long term.
Under finals like pressure, we wont always be able to move the ball in the slick, freewheeling manner that we have for most of the year, and when we're kicking under pressure, we need someone who can take a grab, or at least effect a contest so that the opposition loose man isn't cutting us to ribbons. I'd argue that a third tall being picked in place of Sam Gray or Kane Mitchell (or Chad Wingard or Hamish Hartlett) on the weekend may have been the difference between us staying the course and collapsing into our own arseholes as we did in the 2nd half.
I'm hoping i've been able to convince you that a third tall will make us a better football team. That was part A of this thread.
Now to address the forwards that might come in. We all know how controversial John Butcher is on this board because of his kicking action. I'll make the Pittard Argument™ that given how important the tall could be to our structure, we can handle the odd miss. Butcher in the side would provide a net increase in scoring opportunities.
Mason Shaw is the shiny new KPF going around, and he's looked very good in the games he's played so far. While i'd be very happy to see Shaw come in, I still think Butcher is the better prepared player for AFL football. He's still taking the best defenders at SANFL level every week, and for all the excitement about Shaw's 6, Butcher has been kicking goals on a regular basis all season in the SANFL, including 3 bags of 5. I'd be happy with either one of the two in, but given the choice for next week, i'd want Butcher.
Funnily, there has been a big call recently for us to throw a contract at Sam Reid to try to lure a more effective key forward. Reid was taken in the same draft as Butcher, is roughly the same age, and despite being given 40 more games by Sydney than we've given Butcher, his average numbers are basically the same. A couple more touches, one more mark and less goals on average. Pump 40 more games into Butch and he'd be a better player than Sam Reid, I have absolutely no doubt about it. The other side of the coin with playing a third tall is development. Games in the SANFL are fine but to really develop at AFL level, these guys need to be playing regularly.
Not everyone is Jeremy Cameron. Not everyone is a star from game 1, and with KPFs, most of them go through a long development period where people are calling for their heads and writing them off at every stage. Look at Cloke, Hawkins, Schulz, Westhoff, Tippett. All guys who were heavily maligned for a long time early in their career because it wasn't quite clicking for them, yet all have turned into very good to great KPFs.
Getting games into the likes of Butcher and Shaw now is good for the side in 2014 and it's good for the side in 2015 and 2016 and beyond.
