List Mgmt. 2014 list discussion - drafts, free agents, trades, retirees, delistings and more

[MotlopMagic]

I have a sneaky feeling that there may be one or two surprises before the trade period is over.

 

[Cursed Cat]

I strongly disagree. I think it was a very good move with the potential to be the difference between winning a premiership and not. Giving up a pick in the 30s for that is absolutely fine. Unfortunately we've got unlucky and he hasn't got on the field. But if he was fit for the finals, and let's be harsh and assume that was only a 50% chance when we recruited him, then I think there's a good chance we win the premiership.

We could never know he wouldn't get on the field all year. Judging the trade based on the worst possible outcome, which we've had, is illogical. Sure it's not worked out but the decision at the time was a sound one considering how poor our ruck stocks were, how good he can be and how close we were to the ultimate success.

I thought it was a bit of a gamble to say the least - I must admit to never rating McIntosh all that highly to begin with either, but if he was fit and close to career-best form he would have been very handy, no doubt.

But prior to 2013 he'd played 8 games in two years.

Now make it 8 games in 3 years.

Not many players re-establish themselves after that kind of lay-off.

 

[Footy Smarts]

I thought it was a bit of a gamble to say the least - I must admit to never rating McIntosh all that highly to begin with either, but if he was fit and close to career-best form he would have been very handy, no doubt.

But prior to 2013 he'd played 8 games in two years.

Now make it 8 games in 3 years.

Not many players re-establish themselves after that kind of lay-off.

Pretty sure he'd played some VFL in 2012 too when North went with one ruck.

Of course it was a risk but it was a risk with massive upside and not that much downside. Nobody else we could've brought on the list last year would've made the difference this year to get us a premiership. We've given up a list spot and pick 36 last year. We gave up some salary cap but we haven't lost anybody based on salary so that's not really an issue. It's a pretty insignificant loss for what might have been a massively positive outcome.

 

[Partridge]

I strongly disagree. I think it was a very good move with the potential to be the difference between winning a premiership and not. Giving up a pick in the 30s for that is absolutely fine. Unfortunately we've got unlucky and he hasn't got on the field. But if he was fit for the finals, and let's be harsh and assume that was only a 50% chance when we recruited him, then I think there's a good chance we win the premiership.

We could never know he wouldn't get on the field all year. Judging the trade based on the worst possible outcome, which we've had, is illogical. Sure it's not worked out but the decision at the time was a sound one considering how poor our ruck stocks were, how good he can be and how close we were to the ultimate success.

We could, and did know he was 28 years old and had played 8 games in 2 years.

 

[Nicko29]

See my other post; we weren't. We did win centre clearances more with him (4-2 our way in 6 games), but in overall clearances we only won twice with him.

I think part of that comes down to our midfield being so used to being annihilated in the ruck that they weren't sure of how to set up/read a dominant ruck. Also they haven't played enough games with Simpson to form any sort of synergy, which I hope is an area addressed this preseason.

 

[Partridge]

I think part of that comes down to our midfield being so used to being annihilated in the ruck that they weren't sure of how to set up/read a dominant ruck. Also they haven't played enough games with Simpson to form any sort of synergy, which I hope is an area addressed this preseason.

Partly that, I think far bigger overall problem was the midfield itself. Too old and too slow. Don't think it mattered too much who the ruckmen were - it was a combination of quite a few factors.

 

[rooie]

I posted links to fairly in-depth comparisons on post #2880 (page 116), Partridge.

results were inconclusive .

seriously though; Vardy and Blicavs are already (moderately) ahead of West statistically - and a 10 hit out differential isn't that huge either (would love to see some hit-outs to advantage stats on all of our ruckman though).

but that is a crazy thing to say. you laud vardy and blitz as being ahead of west in most catagories but bytiny amounts, like 1 handball or half a mark, yet west is up by over 10 hitouts and you say that isnt huge?

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

So, West is behind both Blicavs and Vardy in most statistical categories despite being far and away the most experienced of the three players. Except hit-outs, which is the only thing even keeping him in the minds of supporters at all. But we've all seen his ruckwork, haven't we ? It's no better than Vardy's or Blicavs, all three are ordinary-to-rubbish in the ruck contests.

Absolute garbage. West's ruckwork is far and away the best of the three...it's not even close. Vardy gets a lot of hang time and occasionally gets his hand on the ball, but as we saw in the last quarter of the preliminary final when Hale was tiring and Bailey had been subbed, even when he got a clear palm on it, he often managed to put it straight into the waiting hands of Mitchell, who said 'Cheers' and pumped it into Hawthorn's forward 50, yet again. And, in my humble opinion, Blicavs will never be a ruckman. If he is ever to become a long-term AFL player, it will either be on a wing, or playing a similar role to Michael Johnson. Those are his two options.

Despite often rucking on his lonesome in 2012, the only times I can remember West getting well and truly slaughtered in there were against Carlton in 2012 (paired with Stephenson against Warnock, Hampson and Kreuzer) and the second North Melbourne game this year (where he split time with Vardy and Blicavs against Goldstein and Petrie). The combined opposition hitouts/our hitouts in those two games was 111/53. The combined clearances: 79/70. As for Blicavs and Vardy, in the three finals this year, they were beaten 131/73 and 110/86.

So, even if we cherry-pick the worst games of West's career (with regards to hitouts), one of which Blicavs and Vardy were both just as culpable in, he still looks significantly better than Vardy and Blicavs in their three most recent games. Walker even contested a centre bounce or two in the Fremantle game which, when you supposedly have two fit 'ruckmen' playing, is practically a cry for help.

 

[thejester]

Absolutely spot on and at the heart of the issue. Sandilands and Clarke destroyed everyonethis finals series, including ruckmen who are on any objective measure far better than Trent West.

Our midfield let us down badly against Freo. It's plain for all to see.

View attachment 32517

Great post mate. Reckon it remains a huge question as to how valuable ruckmen are and what constitutes that value.

 

[rooie]

for the record, im not a west fan, but i would keep him around if he wants to stay as backup to our injury prone pair of no. 1 rucks.

i just don't like people demonizing one of our premiership players for no reason at all by cherry picking data and trying to push their personal dislike of him as a reason to get rid of him.

west has been our most durable ruck over the last 3 years. he isn't great, but he competes and gets his hands to the ball in the ruck, which is kind of the point. if we are conceding winning the ruck contests, we might as well pick 2 more midfielders instead of 2 x 198cm kids with no experience.

 

[Cat Addict]

Looks like we either get Shaw and Adams or neither, getting Shaw to Geelong removes the Shaw to GWS currency that Collingwood sees to have. GFC have offer our first pick for Adam. Not sure what they will be looking at to get Shaw from Collingwood, maybe a West bundle or a straight swap for Varcoe?

 

[Turbocat]

Whats the question? Who should have played or who will be better in 2 years time? I feel the MC lost faith in West and once they did they saw playing him as a wasted games that could be put into Vardy etc.
Vardy and Blitz as a team lacked influence , infact even worse , they couldn't prevent opponents influence. And West lacked any upside and confidence

Lets face it rock and a hard place. The club gambled and lost Hmac and once Simpson went down they were cornered. Add the lack of marking ability by Hawkins and Pods and one can see we true lacked big man players. That were were within a goal of a GF anyway is amazing.

So for 2014 I see it as a duel for the #1 spot between Hmac and Simpson. Vardy will play forward , Blitz will be a utility and West will not be at Geelong if at all possible

 

[Big Tom 2013]

Apparently this draft is known for it's midfield talent, whereas next years will be more stacked with kpp and rucks. Maybe this is why we are ok about trading our first pick for Shaw.

 

[rooie]

Whats the question? Who should have played or who will be better in 2 years time? I feel the MC lost faith in West and once they did they saw playing him as a wasted games that could be put into Vardy etc.
Vardy and Blitz as a team lacked influence , infact even worse , they couldn't prevent opponents influence. And West lacked any upside and confidence

Lets face it rock and a hard place. The club gambled and lost Hmac and once Simpson went down they were cornered. Add the lack of marking ability by Hawkins and Pods and one can see we true lacked big man players. That were were within a goal of a GF anyway is amazing.

So for 2014 I see it as a duel for the #1 spot between Hmac and Simpson. Vardy will play forward , Blitz will be a utility and West will not be at Geelong if at all possible

i agree with everything you are saying turbo, but given we were in the finals, i would have played our best available ruckman ahead of being concerned with getting games into kids. i would keep west if he wants to stay purely because hmac and simpson will be lucky to play 10 games between them based on their recent injury history.

i also dont see where blitz can fit in if not as a no. 2 ruck, but i think vardy will offer more as the rotating second ruck/forward. so i would have whoever is fit out of simpson and hmac as the no.1 ruck, and the no.2 spot be taken by vardy who will also play forward. you can then sub out the no.1 ruck like the hawks have been doing, leaving vardy (roughead) to ruck the 4th quarter.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Great post mate. Reckon it remains a huge question as to how valuable ruckmen are and what constitutes that value.

I think it's a domino effect when they are as dominant as they were against us in the qualifying final. When your ruckman is uncompetitive in the ruck contests (when the opponent is getting a clear palm/fist on the ball time and again, rather than a finger tip), he can put it wherever he feels like. And the midfielders can tell him exactly where they want it. And it follows that the quality of clearances and, subsequently, the quality of inside 50s is also greatly enhanced.

Unfortunately, the ruck stats that we have access to, on their own, are hopelessly simplistic. 'Hitouts' should mean clear hits/taps, not that the contest was halved, so 'shit, we need to give someone a hitout stat'. Hitouts to advantage, 'clanger' hitouts (that go directly to an opponent), Hitouts that directly lead to an inside 50, and/or a score, ruckman second efforts (following up their own ruckwork with a tackle, or actually getting their hands on the ball, after it hit the deck, an area which - in fairness - I think West would fare poorly in)...all of those things would give us some clear context as to which player is the better option as a second ruck. And hopefully, competition for spots is a lot more fierce in 2014 (which doesn't augur well for West if he couldn't get a game with probably our two preferred options on the sidelines).

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Apparently this draft is known for it's midfield talent, whereas next years will be more stacked with kpp and rucks. Maybe this is why we are ok about trading our first pick for Shaw.

But the best rucks this year generally figure to be picked around the 30-60 range. I think it's past time for us to take a punt on one and I think that's what we should do with our second or third round pick.

 

[Big Tom 2013]

But the best rucks this year generally figure to be picked around the 30-60 range. I think it's past time for us to take a punt on one and I think that's what we should do with our second or third round pick.

So do I, we should use one of our picks to draft a young ruck.
Kevin Sheehan apparently mentioned that clubs are already salivating at the Kpp's and rucks that are just a bit young for this draft but will be right to go in next years

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

I don't want to get into the West/Vardy/Blitz argument again, but they're all crap rucks and Sandilands is arguable the best along with Cox. So I don't expect the likes of Hale/Bailey or Pyke/Mummy to beat him or certainly not any of ours who are worse.

The simple reason I wanted West in the Freo game is not because he would have done any better,but because they could have played Vardy forward instead of Walker. Vardy imo is a better forward then Walker and structure wise I think we would have been better too.

Vardy to me in the ruck is the same as Hawkins in the ruck, do not want.

 

[Bangers and Mash]

This has turned into 'Who's Out Best Ruck Option For 2014' thread!

 

[Jon Douglas]

If true what has been reported there are better ruck options available next season - so think it best we concentrate on mids this draft.

Unless of course we rookie one - no issues there as we have two spaces available and they cost bugger all.

I see us, on probability, going for 3 picks all mids unless Gardiner slips thru to our first round pick. Even then who knows ?

If a good mid slips thru I think Geelong will jump on him.

I reckon someone this year will get the first round draft pick right for once as posters get better at assessing players. Could be acres, Marsh, Bomtempentalli, Crouch, Dunstan or Sheed.

Latest Phantom guide says Gardiner will go pick 20 - so that adds some spice to a very difficult decision. We need a good inside mid - but they probably rate Gardiner and know a fair bit about the local boy. But is he big enough at 192 to really be a replacement for Lonners (197 cm) ?

Cannot wait for the thread where people get to pick the first selections.

 

[THE CAT WRANGLER]

With the current salary cap relief and possibly more if we don't land a player of significance what happens to the $$$$

Need to pay overs to get quality

 

[Cat Addict]

But the best rucks this year generally figure to be picked around the 30-60 range. I think it's past time for us to take a punt on one and I think that's what we should do with our second or third round pick.

I think we are better off look at a ruck man with one of the rookie spots. Ben Brown will probably be gone, but you might get an Apeness or similar. Even look at a ex-basketballer for a B grade rookie.

 

[Nicko29]

i agree with everything you are saying turbo, but given we were in the finals, i would have played our best available ruckman ahead of being concerned with getting games into kids. i would keep west if he wants to stay purely because hmac and simpson will be lucky to play 10 games between them based on their recent injury history.

i also dont see where blitz can fit in if not as a no. 2 ruck, but i think vardy will offer more as the rotating second ruck/forward. so i would have whoever is fit out of simpson and hmac as the no.1 ruck, and the no.2 spot be taken by vardy who will also play forward. you can then sub out the no.1 ruck like the hawks have been doing, leaving vardy (roughead) to ruck the 4th quarter.

Unlike Bailey, Simpson can actually run out games and have an influence in last quarters. I think that subbing out your monster ruck man is never a good idea in last quarters as they can provide you with ascendancy in the ruck and clearances as well as being important marking targets around the ground when everyone is tiring and slowing down.

 

[Cursed Cat]

Absolute garbage. West's ruckwork is far and away the best of the three...it's not even close. Vardy gets a lot of hang time and occasionally gets his hand on the ball, but as we saw in the last quarter of the preliminary final when Hale was tiring and Bailey had been subbed, even when he got a clear palm on it, he often managed to put it straight into the waiting hands of Mitchell, who said 'Cheers' and pumped it into Hawthorn's forward 50, yet again. And, in my humble opinion, Blicavs will never be a ruckman. If he is ever to become a long-term AFL player, it will either be on a wing, or playing a similar role to Michael Johnson. Those are his two options.

Despite often rucking on his lonesome in 2012, the only times I can remember West getting well and truly slaughtered in there were against Carlton in 2012 (paired with Stephenson against Warnock, Hampson and Kreuzer) and the second North Melbourne game this year (where he split time with Vardy and Blicavs against Goldstein and Petrie). The combined opposition hitouts/our hitouts in those two games was 111/53. The combined clearances: 79/70. As for Blicavs and Vardy, in the three finals this year, they were beaten 131/73 and 110/86.

So, even if we cherry-pick the worst games of West's career (with regards to hitouts), one of which Blicavs and Vardy were both just as culpable in, he still looks significantly better than Vardy and Blicavs in their three most recent games. Walker even contested a centre bounce or two in the Fremantle game which, when you supposedly have two fit 'ruckmen' playing, is practically a cry for help.

As I've stated throughout this thread and many have commented upon on this board - merely getting your hand to the ball does not mean you're a ruckman, it just means you're tall.

West's hit-outs have been generally spectacularly ineffectual; you only need to watch other decent ruckmen around the comp to see he gives us nothing. As far as his around-the-ground work, it's non-existent.

I was happy with the MC's decision to go with Vardy/Blicavs on the mere *possibility* they might give us more than West - who had proven beyond all reasonable doubt that he's simply not an AFL level ruckman, merely an honest VFL-level toiler.

I don't 'dislike' West, and Vardy/Blicavs are no 'favourites' of mine, but purely as a footballers I would take either of the younger blokes over West every time - we may actually get to see a head-to-head battle next year.

 

[Cursed Cat]

but that is a crazy thing to say. you laud vardy and blitz as being ahead of west in most catagories but bytiny amounts, like 1 handball or half a mark, yet west is up by over 10 hitouts and you say that isnt huge?

Firstly I didnt exactly 'laud' Blicavs/Vardy for their advantage over West in disposals/everything-apart-from-hit-outs; in fact I acknowledged your point that there wasn't a helluva lot in it.
But there is a differential in most categories, and they nearly always favoured the more inexperienced pair.

As for my argument re : hit-outs - put it this way; Sandilands might get say 50 hit-outs in a good match; even at his most dominant he'd still probably 'only' take 3-4 contested marks.

Ruckmen have the opportunity to amass big numbers when it comes to hit-outs because it's just them and their opponent contesting (9 times outta 10).

if yer man West lost the hit-out count 40-50 against Sandilands, you'd probably take that.

but if West took 0.6 of a contested mark and his opponent took a couple, then he's effectively doubled West in that statistic.

A difference in a couple of contested marks per game can be the difference between Travis Cloke and Chris Dawes over the course of a season.

Blicavs (I usually focus on him in the Vardy/West/Blicavs debate, because he seems to be the ugly duckling with the Go-West crowd) obviously played more games than West for 2013, but his 63-23 'edge' in marks, coupled with a 14-6 advantage in contested marks, paints a picture as to just how ineffectual West is. This is a bloke who has played 7 more seasons than Blicavs remember.

Same goes for tackles (69-12 in Blicavs favour); make 1-2 and you're making the minimal contribution, make 6-8 and you've put in a solid effort.

Again I acknowledge Blicavs played more games than West, that's why the averages are more instructive obviously. But who's to say West's averages wouldn't have plummeted to even greater depths had he been given more games ?