List Mgmt. Re-Signing Jake Lever

[Elite Crow]

Rubbish.

Nothing is less important than a ruckman.

Hawthorn? Never had anyone decent. The Bulldogs? They played a defender and forward as their rucks. Sydney? Had mediocre Tippett and a bunch of scrubs. The Giants? The have Mumford, who is a five packages of sausages with legs.

Who gives a s**t? Jacobs at 90% or Jacobs at 60% doesn't impact our ability to win.

That's some serious undervaluing of Mumford there. When Mumford doesn't play GWS are no where as good a side.

Just because the Bulldogs used a different type of ruckman it doesn't mean they weren't a vital part of their premiership.

Our midfield relies on Jacobs, when he's not competitive in the middle we struggle.

You've conveniently cherry picked some ruckman and teams that you incorrectly think ruckman haven't played a crucial role at.

Ignoring those, how about Dean Cox and West Coast? Shaun Rehn and Adelaide? Darren Jolly at Sydney and Collingwood? Brad Ottens at Geelong, Clark Keating at Brisbane?

There are plenty of examples which show a good ruckman are a very important part of a successful side.

 

[TexanKnights]

That's some serious undervaluing of Mumford there. When Mumford doesn't play GWS are no where as good a side.

Just because the Bulldogs used a different type of ruckman it doesn't mean they weren't a vital part of their premiership.

Our midfield relies on Jacobs, when he's not competitive in the middle we struggle.

You've conveniently cherry picked some ruckman and teams that you incorrectly think ruckman haven't played a crucial role at.

Ignoring those, how about Dean Cox and West Coast? Shaun Rehn and Adelaide? Darren Jolly at Sydney and Collingwood? Brad Ottens at Geelong, Clark Keating at Brisbane?

There are plenty of examples which show a good ruckman are a very important part of a successful side.

We would have two less trophies in the cabinet if Rehn wasn't with us

 

[1970crow]

Rubbish.

Nothing is less important than a ruckman.

Hawthorn? Never had anyone decent. The Bulldogs? They played a defender and forward as their rucks. Sydney? Had mediocre Tippett and a bunch of scrubs. The Giants? The have Mumford, who is a five packages of sausages with legs.

Who gives a s**t? Jacobs at 90% or Jacobs at 60% doesn't impact our ability to win.

Yes and no. If rucking isn't important than we might as well select a bloke who is mobile and can get around the ground and block up defensive space. Then we can replace Dmac with someone who actually gets the ball as a midfielder. Really, if you're going to argue that ruckmen aren't important, then you're not arguining for a one trick pony, tap ruckman, lumbering type.

 

[Mego Red]

That's some serious undervaluing of Mumford there. When Mumford doesn't play GWS are no where as good a side.

Just because the Bulldogs used a different type of ruckman it doesn't mean they weren't a vital part of their premiership.

Our midfield relies on Jacobs, when he's not competitive in the middle we struggle.

You've conveniently cherry picked some ruckman and teams that you incorrectly think ruckman haven't played a crucial role at.

Ignoring those, how about Dean Cox and West Coast? Shaun Rehn and Adelaide? Darren Jolly at Sydney and Collingwood? Brad Ottens at Geelong, Clark Keating at Brisbane?

There are plenty of examples which show a good ruckman are a very important part of a successful side.

So - your way of making an argument is to go back 20 years?

You might as well have said mullets we're an important part of success.

Ruckmen are the most overrated players on a football field. Clearly teams DO win with mediocre ruckmen, and Max Gawn can play for a side that's terrible. Melbourne only start to look decent now that they have a decent midfield and some system in how they play.

 

[Mego Red]

Yes and no. If rucking isn't important than we might as well select a bloke who is mobile and can get around the ground and block up defensive space. Then we can replace Dmac with someone who actually gets the ball as a midfielder. Really, if you're going to argue that ruckmen aren't important, then you're not arguining for a one trick pony, tap ruckman, lumbering type.

Completely fine with that.

Frankly, Jenkins would be a very competitive first ruckman, and he's s**t at hitouts. But he'd be mobile and he'd work around the ground and he could at least nullify the other ruckman to a nil-all draw.

 

[Mego Red]

Anyway - I agree that we need bloody better mids. I don't think trading Lever for a ruck would help much.

Very happy to trade the Gov, Doedee and MAYBE Lever if it got us top shelf mids.

And just sign Rocky, FFS.

 

[baldandbroke]

Anyway - I agree that we need bloody better mids. I don't think trading Lever for a ruck would help much.

Very happy to trade the Gov, Doedee and MAYBE Lever if it got us top shelf mids.

And just sign Rocky, FFS.

I agree with Rockliff, he just seems like a guy looking for a way out of Brisbane ... but Martin is the one I want us putting all our eggs into.

But back to Lever ...

The best teams hang-on to players like Lever when they get close to the premiership - and then keep them throughout their successful periods. The one thing we can do to make Adelaide a destination is to win a premiership. Chicken and egg stuff really.

Keeping Lever is essential imo. Future captain, All Australian, Hall of Fame type player ... no pressure Snake

 

[baldandbroke]

no. put all the guys we've lost into our team and wow. if you don't believe that then you're in denial.

What has any of that got to do with Jake? How many players have we lost to the go-home factor (not the franchise $, or COLA, or FA)? Are you forgetting the ones we get back? So much wasted energy on worrying about the things that could go wrong - lots of you guys are gonna miss the good stuff.

 

[DD#23]

Rubbish.

Nothing is less important than a ruckman.

Hawthorn? Never had anyone decent. The Bulldogs? They played a defender and forward as their rucks. Sydney? Had mediocre Tippett and a bunch of scrubs. The Giants? The have Mumford, who is a five packages of sausages with legs.

Who gives a s**t? Jacobs at 90% or Jacobs at 60% doesn't impact our ability to win.

I wish that were true for us.

now let me get in before "correlation does not imply causation" but we get toweled in the midfield, particularly at centre clearances, when Jacobs can't win the ruck contest.

we've made the ruckman more important. We have strict structures at centre clearances based around where we're expecting the taps to go and it doesn't leave a lot of room for improvisation by the midfielders in there. Our tap ruckman approach is not comparable to the way Hawthorn or The Bulldogs go about it.

 

[RodnyDangrfield]

That's some serious undervaluing of Mumford there. When Mumford doesn't play GWS are no where as good a side.

Just because the Bulldogs used a different type of ruckman it doesn't mean they weren't a vital part of their premiership.

Our midfield relies on Jacobs, when he's not competitive in the middle we struggle.

You've conveniently cherry picked some ruckman and teams that you incorrectly think ruckman haven't played a crucial role at.

Ignoring those, how about Dean Cox and West Coast? Shaun Rehn and Adelaide? Darren Jolly at Sydney and Collingwood? Brad Ottens at Geelong, Clark Keating at Brisbane?

There are plenty of examples which show a good ruckman are a very important part of a successful side.

Yeah the thing with Jacobs is if he doesn't win the tap he's basically rendered useless. He has literally, besides a decent field kick, no other string to his bow. Can't go forward ala tippett/Roughead/hale, can't crush people like Mumford and won't scrap on the deck like Stefan Martin. They can play them there due to the other benefits they bring. Sauce doesn't, so when he can jump over a fleas dick he needs to be dropped. I wouldn't trade lever for grundy but it wouldn't be far off, especially if he said he wanted out (which he won't btw, so this convo is a moot point anyway)

 

[FR0GGY]

Sauce may not be vital to us, but that's because he's not great anywhere else, someone like lobb would be a great asset for us.

 

[Elite Crow]

So - your way of making an argument is to go back 20 years?

You might as well have said mullets we're an important part of success.

Ruckmen are the most overrated players on a football field. Clearly teams DO win with mediocre ruckmen, and Max Gawn can play for a side that's terrible. Melbourne only start to look decent now that they have a decent midfield and some system in how they play.

Well it seems your memory only extends to yesterday and you can't count. Besides Mumford and the Dogs ruckman are all important players in their teams

 

[Huntercrow]

Anyway - I agree that we need bloody better mids. I don't think trading Lever for a ruck would help much.

Very happy to trade the Gov, Doedee and MAYBE Lever if it got us top shelf mids.

And just sign Rocky, FFS.

I've never understood the need for ruckmen. They are only necessary because the AFL invent rules to keep them relevant.
Third man up rule for instance. They were being pushed out so this gem was brought in.
Players like Mumford and Nic Nat will always be relevant because of their other attributes.
My pet hate is frees from ruck infringements. usually no one understands what just happened and it never gets explained so most spectators scratch their heads why the opposing ruckmen is about to take a free kick in front of goal.

 

[Mego Red]

Well it seems your memory only extends to yesterday and you can't count. Besides Mumford and the Dogs ruckman are all important players in their teams

No, my memory was of the successful sides of the last decade, the majority of which had so-so ruckmen at best.

Mumford and the dogs ruckmen (Roughhead etc) are all very replaceable and those teams would keep winning.

You put Nankervis into GWS instead of Mumford and they go exactly as well. Wouldn't even notice he's gone.

The Bullies rotated ruckmen through all year and kept winning. Just needed a warm competitive body.

Ruckmen are completely overrated and their key stat - hitouts to advantage - is trivial. Maybe a quarter of hitouts actually go to a club's advantage.

What other sportsman gets by with a 25% success rate?

 

[Pdub]

No, my memory was of the successful sides of the last decade, the majority of which had so-so ruckmen at best.

Mumford and the dogs ruckmen (Roughhead etc) are all very replaceable and those teams would keep winning.

You put Nankervis into GWS instead of Mumford and they go exactly as well. Wouldn't even notice he's gone.

The Bullies rotated ruckmen through all year and kept winning. Just needed a warm competitive body.

Ruckmen are completely overrated and their key stat - hitouts to advantage - is trivial. Maybe a quarter of hitouts actually go to a club's advantage.

What other sportsman gets by with a 25% success rate?

West coast and Dean Cox probably the last elite, dominant ruckman in a premiership side. I think a dominant ruckman is easiest position on the field to nullify if a team relies on them to win.

 

[Elite Crow]

No, my memory was of the successful sides of the last decade, the majority of which had so-so ruckmen at best.

Mumford and the dogs ruckmen (Roughhead etc) are all very replaceable and those teams would keep winning.

You put Nankervis into GWS instead of Mumford and they go exactly as well. Wouldn't even notice he's gone.

The Bullies rotated ruckmen through all year and kept winning. Just needed a warm competitive body.

Ruckmen are completely overrated and their key stat - hitouts to advantage - is trivial. Maybe a quarter of hitouts actually go to a club's advantage.

What other sportsman gets by with a 25% success rate?

If you are only worried about successful sides of the last decade why are you dismissing Brad Ottens and Jolly?

 

[DD#23]

West coast and Dean Cox probably the last elite, dominant ruckman in a premiership side. I think a dominant ruckman is easiest position on the field to nullify if a team relies on them to win.

the reason you couldn't nullify Cox is because he had a dozen strings to his bow after the ability to win a tap.

Jacobs is a pure Doc Clarke tap specialist, which is why we're ****ed as soon as he can't compete in there because we're essentially playing a man down.

 

[Pdub]

the reason you couldn't nullify Cox is because he had a dozen strings to his bow after the ability to win a tap.

Jacobs is a pure Doc Clarke tap specialist, which is why we're ****** as soon as he can't compete in there because we're essentially playing a man down.

I think you couldn't nullify Cox because he had Judd, Cousins & Kerr at his feat which made him the least of your problems.

 

[Elite Crow]

I think you couldn't nullify Cox because he had Judd, Cousins & Kerr at his feat which made him the least of your problems.

Did you watch Cox play? He played like a very damaging midfielder too.

 

[Pdub]

Did you watch Cox play? He played like a very damaging midfielder too.

Just think about actual midfielders who you would give the tag "very damaging" to and his ball getting and ball use was nothing near their level, it was just good "for a ruckman". Teams were much more worried about stopping the around the ground work and ball use of Judd, Cousins and Kerr than they were Cox. In fact most teams would be happy for him to have 25 - 30 disposals if they could stop him from giving clean taps to his midfielders.

 

[DD#23]

Just think about actual midfielders who you would give the tag "very damaging" to and his ball getting and ball use was nothing near their level, it was just good "for a ruckman". Teams were much more worried about stopping the around the ground work and ball use of Judd, Cousins and Kerr than they were Cox. In fact most teams would be happy for him to have 25 - 30 disposals if they could stop him from giving clean taps to his midfielders.

Cox was a better outside runner and ball user than Mackay ffs

 

[Pdub]

Cox was a better outside runner and ball user than Mackay ffs

If you call Mackay a "very damaging" midfielder then you have low standards.

 

[Deaneus!]

)What other sportsman gets by with a 25% success rate?

The Marsh brothers?

 

[DD#23]

If you call Mackay a "very damaging" midfielder then you have low standards.

of course I don't, on a board full of his detractors I'd consider myself one of the biggest.

obviously Cox wasn't as good as Judd on the ball, but he could probably walk into most 22's in the AFL before you even consider the idea of putting him in the ruck. He was a way better and more complete player than you're trying to suggest.

 

[Bicks]

I think you couldn't nullify Cox because he had Judd, Cousins & Kerr at his feat which made him the least of your problems.

No, big Cox was pure class, sure they complemented his ruck work but he was by definition elite.