List Mgmt. Round 1, 2015 Full strength team

Remove this Banner Ad

knaf said:
I am trying not to write this but cant help myself.... Discuss - a third tall forward is taller than the fourth tall forward but not as tall as the second tall forward.
Click to expand...

Not sure we have a second tall forward, or a first tall forward, all I ever see mentioned is a third tall forward, so I s'pose our third tall forward is our first tall forward and our second tall forward too, so I s'pose we do have a first tall ........ Aaarrgghh too seven asterisks confusing!
 
winged1 said:
Just pointing out how stupid it is to say anybody would be in a team for the next 10 years, especially since two of those guys may not be around in two years time. You are really saying we arent going to either
a) draft a dominant forward in the next 8 or so years
b) be able to draft for a key forward in the next 9 or so years
c) be able to develop anybody else off the list in the next 9 or so years.

So if you are going to keep on coming out with stupid statements I will keep pointing them out. Other than that shut your bong hole.
Click to expand...
Mad?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think this will be our round 1 team.

FB: Adcock, Merrett, Gardiner
HB: C Beams, Clarke, Rich
C: Mayes, Redden, Aish
HF: McStay, Close, Zorko
FF: Green, Staker, Taylor
Foll: Leuenberger, D Beams, Rockliff
Int: Martin, Robinson, Bewick
Sub: Christensen

How do you find space for Paparone? Maybe leave out Robinson? Bewick?

Next in line seems to be Paparone, Cutler, Lester, McGuane, Dawson, McGrath, Maguire :)().
 
DanT7 said:
I think this will be our round 1 team.

FB: Adcock, Merrett, Gardiner
HB: C Beams, Clarke, Rich
C: Mayes, Redden, Aish
HF: McStay, Close, Zorko
FF: Green, Staker, Taylor
Foll: Leuenberger, D Beams, Rockliff
Int: Martin, Robinson, Bewick
Sub: Christensen

How do you find space for Paparone? Maybe leave out Robinson? Bewick?

Next in line seems to be Paparone, Cutler, Lester, McGuane, Dawson, McGrath, Maguire :)().
Click to expand...
Thats a fairly solid team and the one id have round one aswell. Gonna be hard when hanley is available.
 
DanT7 said:
I think this will be our round 1 team.

FB: Adcock, Merrett, Gardiner
HB: C Beams, Clarke, Rich
C: Mayes, Redden, Aish
HF: McStay, Close, Zorko
FF: Green, Staker, Taylor
Foll: Leuenberger, D Beams, Rockliff
Int: Martin, Robinson, Bewick
Sub: Christensen

How do you find space for Paparone? Maybe leave out Robinson? Bewick?

Next in line seems to be Paparone, Cutler, Lester, McGuane, Dawson, McGrath, Maguire :)().
Click to expand...

Think that will be exactly it.
 
POBT said:
Still not convinced we'll play 3 tall forwards and 2 rucks. We might but I could see only 2 of the tall forwards getting a run. I'd then bring in Lester or Paps and push Jed upfield.
Click to expand...
I think that is the beauty of McStay, mobile and flexible enough that we aren't too top heavy IMO.
 
DanT7 said:
I think this will be our round 1 team.

FB: Adcock, Merrett, Gardiner
HB: C Beams, Clarke, Rich
C: Mayes, Redden, Aish
HF: McStay, Close, Zorko
FF: Green, Staker, Taylor
Foll: Leuenberger, D Beams, Rockliff
Int: Martin, Robinson, Bewick
Sub: Christensen

How do you find space for Paparone? Maybe leave out Robinson? Bewick?

Next in line seems to be Paparone, Cutler, Lester, McGuane, Dawson, McGrath, Maguire :)().
Click to expand...

Like it, but Staker vulnerable IMO to missing out in favour of Paparone depending on last NAB game performances
 
Milux said:
Thats a fairly solid team and the one id have round one as well. Gonna be hard when hanley is available.
Click to expand...

Don't worry.

Every club (no matter how deep the playing list) has/will at some stage of the season start scratching for players due to the inevitable injury toll..

I'd love to have the dilemma that your referring to, though.
 
WA Lion said:
I think that is the beauty of McStay, mobile and flexible enough that we aren't too top heavy IMO.
Click to expand...
Conversely, if you go slightly smaller, the advantage of using Mayes or even Robinson as the third option up forward is that you have a skilful, mobile line up which can push up to the midfield contest.

A tall forward line is a risk. Sides like Hawthorn and Sydney go tall and some might say we're getting the sort of midfield fire power that would allow us to take that sort of risk. That remains to be seen but it ignores the other side of the equation - that the Hawks/Swans tall forwards are collectively elite and 9 times out of 10 will operate highly effectively. Our tall structure probably won't which means we will lose more contests, allow the opposition defence to play with more freedom (zoning off defensively and running off in attack) and won't score as often. That's the risk of going tall.

I think we all recognise that we probably won't win games because of our tall forward line. We have to be better in other areas of the ground in order to paper over the fact that our tall forwards aren't great.

I guess the ultimate structural question is whether quantity will resolve the qualiity issues. Are 3 mediocre talls that much better than two? Or are we better off enhancing a strength by adding an extra runner?

IMO, two talls and a resting ruck gets the job done in terms of making a contest. Any more than that has marginal impact unless the quality of the player is such that it overcomes the downsides of a tall forward line. But I love the idea that some day we'll have a really competitive 3 or 4 tall forward structure which capitalises on a dominant midfield's supply. Do we then set up that tall forward line, knowing that's the long term vision or do we minimise risk with a structure that may be more competitive right now?

In my mind, our best chance of winning round 1 is by taking Close or Staker out and putting Paparone or Lester in. But if we decide to go tall up forward, I'll be fascinated to watch these guys develop. But we'll need to be prepared for weeks where those talls cost us.
 
Regardless of what Leppa does in the forward line, I just can't see him naming a side for round 1 that doesnt include one of Lester or Paps. It is just contrary to everything we've seen in the preseason.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

POBT said:
Conversely, if you go slightly smaller, the advantage of using Mayes or even Robinson as the third option up forward is that you have a skilful, mobile line up which can push up to the midfield contest.

A tall forward line is a risk. Sides like Hawthorn and Sydney go tall and some might say we're getting the sort of midfield fire power that would allow us to take that sort of risk. That remains to be seen but it ignores the other side of the equation - that the Hawks/Swans tall forwards are collectively elite and 9 times out of 10 will operate highly effectively. Our tall structure probably won't which means we will lose more contests, allow the opposition defence to play with more freedom (zoning off defensively and running off in attack) and won't score as often. That's the risk of going tall.

I think we all recognise that we probably won't win games because of our tall forward line. We have to be better in other areas of the ground in order to paper over the fact that our tall forwards aren't great.

I guess the ultimate structural question is whether quantity will resolve the qualiity issues. Are 3 mediocre talls that much better than two? Or are we better off enhancing a strength by adding an extra runner?

IMO, two talls and a resting ruck gets the job done in terms of making a contest. Any more than that has marginal impact unless the quality of the player is such that it overcomes the downsides of a tall forward line. But I love the idea that some day we'll have a really competitive 3 or 4 tall forward structure which capitalises on a dominant midfield's supply. Do we then set up that tall forward line, knowing that's the long term vision or do we minimise risk with a structure that may be more competitive right now?

In my mind, our best chance of winning round 1 is by taking Close or Staker out and putting Paparone or Lester in. But if we decide to go tall up forward, I'll be fascinated to watch these guys develop. But we'll need to be prepared for weeks where those talls cost us.
Click to expand...

Well said, certainly think Paps get in somehow if pre-season is anything to go by. Staker is the really vulnerable one IMO. I know he will be rusty after injuries, but still been outshone by Close and McStay so far this year
 
I would play Staker ahead of Close every day of the week. Seen nothing from Close that suggets he will be anything more than a mediocre player. He has elite endurance but doesn't seem to possess enough speed to get any seperation from his man. That, or he is too predictable with his leading/running patterns. McStay gets great seperation and always seems to be in the contest when the ball is in the air, even when he seems the most unlikely to take a mark or create a contest.

I'd play Staker, McStay and Martin/Leuey as the talls.
 
Eons said:
I would play Staker ahead of Close every day of the week. Seen nothing from Close that suggets he will be anything more than a mediocre player. He has elite endurance but doesn't seem to possess enough speed to get any seperation from his man. That, or he is too predictable with his leading/running patterns. McStay gets great seperation and always seems to be in the contest when the ball is in the air, even when he seems the most unlikely to take a mark or create a contest.

I'd play Staker, McStay and Martin/Leuey as the talls.
Click to expand...

I haven't exactly seen a lot from Staker recently to suggest he offers much.

Close will be our workhorse and will team up withe mozzies well.
 
Eons said:
I would play Staker ahead of Close every day of the week. Seen nothing from Close that suggets he will be anything more than a mediocre player. He has elite endurance but doesn't seem to possess enough speed to get any seperation from his man. That, or he is too predictable with his leading/running patterns. McStay gets great seperation and always seems to be in the contest when the ball is in the air, even when he seems the most unlikely to take a mark or create a contest.

I'd play Staker, McStay and Martin/Leuey as the talls.
Click to expand...

Would have to disagree with you there, Close has shown enough so far IMO for only a 3rd year KPP. Gets to plenty of contests (needs to hold more marks), very rarely gets out-marked so is at least bringing the ball to ground for our main goal scoring weapons, the mozzies and has reasonable defensive pressure for a KPP

Must remember KPP take longer to develop and he is only just starting his 3rd year. I would have him over an aging, injury prone and scratchy peforming Staker any day.
 
We've only seen Staker in short stints. The coach has seen him all summer. If his training form is good (which it reportedly is) then he's going to be in the mix.

It is worth remembering that preseason games aren't necessarily the selection trial we supporters make them out to be. For the coaches, it would be just another bit of intelligence to assist decision making.
 
POBT said:
Still not convinced we'll play 3 tall forwards and 2 rucks. We might but I could see only 2 of the tall forwards getting a run. I'd then bring in Lester or Paps and push Jed upfield.
Click to expand...
I have liked the balance of Jed roaming around off the wing - in the last challenge game he spent some stoppage time against Hannebery, not sure how Adcock statistically rated against his opponents in regard to positive chain assists but from what I saw it seemed to be working. Another positive in pushing Jed up to wing was that Merrett was given the freedom/responsibility of being the spare down back when Jed pushed back searching for a defensive match-up when one of the oppositions mids pushed forward.
 
Balony_pony16 said:
Nice sneeky dig at Rockliff from Mcstay lol
Click to expand...

"I'm already teeing up the midfielders in training and just trying to work with them, learn their strengths and what their favourite kicks are - (Tom) Rockliff can't kick over 30 metres, so you're always trying to hit up short," McStay joked.
Click to expand...

Now that's an unusual way to endear yourself to your new captain.
 
Leppa must be pretty confident in our backmen if he considers McStay won't get a look in down back. Wonder if he still thinks that given that was apparently his view last year. If so, not sure I share his confidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dlanod
2024 Brisbane Lions Supercoach leagues - Div 1 is full, Div 2 is open!
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Elixuh
Elixuh
Dalions
  • Locked
Preview Round 1 - Dockers v Lions
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
255
Views
9K
ZoBlitz
ZoBlitz
Section 5
Round 14 Changes
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Section 5
Section 5
ZoBlitz
  • Poll
Review Round 1, 2024 - Fremantle vs. Brisbane Lions
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
214
Views
9K
On the quiet
O
ZoBlitz
  • Locked
Game Day Round 1, 2024 - Fremantle vs. Brisbane Lions
32 33 34 35 36
Replies
887
Views
17K
Jivlain
Jivlain
Tom14
  • Locked
Preview Round 13 Preview
2 3 4 5
Replies
124
Views
5K
ZoBlitz
ZoBlitz
Nathan Barley
  • Locked
Round 13 changes
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
202
Views
7K
dlanod
dlanod

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top