Analysis 2018 List Management discussion Part 1 (continued in Part 2 - see OP for link)

[HARKER]

Well to be fair, you add in Williamson, Pickett, Lang and Murphy and suddenly the more attacking game style looks a lot more realistic.

But it has to function from head to toe.
The head may have been OK had have we lost no players, but the toe may have still had us with a back-line of:
Glass-McCasker Rowe Macreadie
O'Shea ASilvagni Mullett/Shaw

.......and even then if things didn't go so well, we may have been calling ourselves too tall with having Jones, Weitering, Marchbank and Plowman, all planted in the defensive 50.

Given we set out to play a faster and more attacking game at years start, I don't think we had a squad of 44/5 players to be able to do that properly given our list balance. We can't just hide the talls around the ground.

 

[F_therest]

Well, Rowe and ASOS are close to the end. When we took Macreadie, SOS thought he was just too good to pass on, and at that point there probably wasn't a person in the world who thought Jones would again become a best 22 player. The only reason he was still on the list was his contract. Since then, we've only taken TDK who is seen as a likely ruck (unless you count O'Shea as a tall, and I still can't get my head around that pick).

I think we've often selected teams that are too tall, and our midfield is obviously lacking depth, but I don't think we're really too tall heavy as a list.

I think SOS has done done the right thing, get the talls in first as they take longer to develop. Plus in 2015 there just happened to be a lot of talls in the top 15 or so and we had 3 picks...so Weitering, McKay & Curnow kind of just happened. Then of course we drafted Jack.

As you say, i think part of the surplus that SOS didn't necessarily plan was Jones reinventing himself as a defender and Macreadie being available. Two unexpected extra KPD's.

I'm fine with everything we've done, i just definitely don't want us to spend this years top 3 pick on ANOTHER tall...we've invested heavily in talls over the last 3 years, time to let them develop and stock up on mids/small half forwards. I'm confident SOS will - he's drafted mids with our first 2 picks of the last 2 drafts and i expect that to continue this year.

 

[Arr0w]

Arrow, it is not about year exactly. It is about number of teams changing from what was quite common, that is having (or trying to find) 3 quality talls up forward.

Some teams have changed their approach in 2017/18, most notably the Tigers (first) and now Pies. How both these teams fair in 2018 will play a large part on how the rest of the league react. Either they back in their own policy of 3 talls or change.

The Tigers winning a flag (and doggies before them - considered a smaller running side by perception) lends more credence to this change.

Plenty of clubs still going with 3 or more talls, Adelaide, Bombers to name two straight off.

But make no mistake, the gauntlet has been thrown down and clubs are monitoring what the Tigers and Pies can achieve with this set up. This 'might' have repercussions on drafting if the Tigers waltz in to another flag with the Pies not far behind.

No doubt Blue, I also watch with interest, as to how it plays out. At this stage I wouldn't buckle on the back of recent events and it seems most sides will also hold their position until there is more clarity behind these tactics/setups.

The Pies beat the Crows, think they played extremely well, apart from that, no one of note
Tigers lost to Adelaide and a close contest v Hawks, again apart from that, no one of note
WCE and GWS have tall setups at both ends and seem to also be travelling well

By round 16, we will get a fair indication as how things are progressing

 

[BlueRenaissance]

No doubt Blue, I also watch with interest, as to how it plays out. At this stage I wouldn't buckle on the back of recent events and it seems most sides will also hold their position until there is more clarity behind these tactics/setups.

The Pies beat the Crows, think they played extremely well, apart from that, no one of note
Tigers lost to Adelaide and a close contest v Hawks, again apart from that, no one of note
WCE and GWS have tall setups at both ends and seem to also be travelling well

By round 16, we will get a fair indication as how things are progressing

What is an interesting aside is that both of those clubs (Pies/Tigers) were considered woeful or laughing stocks before their structural/tactical play changes.

Having just said that above about laughing stock...what does that make the Blues..sigh!

 

[F_therest]

In 2018, we're probably moving on Rowe, ASOS and JGM, while we might move on Kerr (please no one ask me why, I've covered this and we might re-rookie him if we do so). In 2019, we'll probably bid farewell to Levi, Phillips and Lobbe, maybe even sooner to one of the rucks if they stay in their perpetual cycles of injury.

Additionally, Jones may turn into trade bait. I know some were howling that down earlier, but they now can see that execution of the system was an issue (and the coaches have confessed to this to varying extents over the last 3 weeks). Even before that point, Macreadie has a part to play, and will be under no pressure to push himself too hard to perform in a senior role for the team before he's ready.

Weitering's on-field position will have zero impact on Macreadie's senior opportunities by next year at the latest, but I suspect he's already making in-roads in the minds of the match committee since he's resumed from his quad injury. We'll get a better look at him on Channel 7 this weekend.

That we have two extra key talls in a transitional period when our senior depth sucks is hardly a shock, it's the selections of both O'Shea and Shaw that have compounded our midfield problems.


PS - Weitering is not a key forward. He's like someone secretly tried to clone Harry Taylor, ffs.

What you say is true about us losing a fair few KPP's soon, one thing i'll point out though is that i think it's important for us to spread out the age of our KPP's a little more.

Ultimately we prob don't want any more than 3 KPF's max and 4 KPD's max going forward in the senior 22.

Currently we have so many talls on our list both our AFL and VFL teams are slow and imbalanced, while we don't have enough mids to fill the positions available...that's an issue. Can't ignore the fact that if we have so many key talls around the same age in the one team, with a midfield that is struggling, it harms the development for ALL OF THEM.

 

[Arr0w]

What is an interesting aside is that both of those clubs (Pies/Tigers) were considered woeful or laughing stocks before their structural/tactical play changes.

Having just said that above about laughing stock...what does that make the Blues..sigh!

IMO, there are way more facets to sustained success than just the shape and size of a team. Way to many to mention at the moment

 

[Jimmae]

What you say is true about us losing a fair few KPP's soon, one thing i'll point out though is that i think it's important for us to spread out the age of our KPP's a little more.

Ultimately we prob don't want any more than 3 KPF's max and 4 KPD's max going forward in the senior 22.

Currently we have so many talls on our list both our AFL and VFL teams are slow and imbalanced, while we don't have enough mids to fill the positions available...that's an issue. Can't ignore the fact that if we have so many key talls around the same age in the one team, with a midfield that is struggling, it harms the development for ALL OF THEM.

I don't think Macreadie or JGM's development has been harmed to this point. HMac is tracking well and, IMO, JGM was a dud pick.

I also don't count Plowman, O'Shea, SOS, Schumacher, Williamson and Marchbank as KPDs, for the record. Some are running types, some are marking types, but they are all medium forwards/backs (though I can see Schumacher and SOS moving into midfield).

 

[F_therest]

But it has to function from head to toe.
The head may have been OK had have we lost no players, but the toe may have still had us with a back-line of:
Glass-McCasker Rowe Macreadie
O'Shea ASilvagni Mullett/Shaw

.......and even then if things didn't go so well, we may have been calling ourselves too tall with having Jones, Weitering, Marchbank and Plowman, all planted in the defensive 50.

Given we set out to play a faster and more attacking game at years start, I don't think we had a squad of 44/5 players to be able to do that properly given our list balance. We can't just hide the talls around the ground.

Was a farce when i looked at our VFL team a while ago and we had basically 5 KPD's and 4 KPF's in it...predictably got smashed.

Now we are seeing those numbers in our AFL team
When you're playing that many key position players you know your list has imbalance issues.

 

[Stamos]

But it has to function from head to toe.
The head may have been OK had have we lost no players, but the toe may have still had us with a back-line of:
Glass-McCasker Rowe Macreadie
O'Shea ASilvagni Mullett/Shaw

.......and even then if things didn't go so well, we may have been calling ourselves too tall with having Jones, Weitering, Marchbank and Plowman, all planted in the defensive 50.

Given we set out to play a faster and more attacking game at years start, I don't think we had a squad of 44/5 players to be able to do that properly given our list balance. We can't just hide the talls around the ground.

1) Given that we are still in the midst of a list rebuild, if the 1s were playing well, I don't think we would be overly worried about and extra tall or two in the 2s (although the debacle that is the Northern Blues, and the VFL in general, is another story).

2) I think that is 4 of our preferred back 6 (with Doc and Willo, and Simmo sweeping back from the wing).

3) We were going ok in the JLT and, until 2 of our starting centre square were injured, against the reigning Premiers/Premiership favourites . I can certainly understand the timing of Bolton wanting to introduce a more attacking gamestyle. It's amazing how a bit of luck and changes in momentum can derail a season. Our injury list has been truly horrible. Although I do think the club internally overestimated where we were, and together with some bad calls, our fragile depth and somewhat imbalanced list has really cost us.

 

[F_therest]

I don't think Macreadie or JGM's development has been harmed to this point. HMac is tracking well and, IMO, JGM was a dud pick.

I also don't count Plowman, O'Shea, SOS, Schumacher, Williamson and Marchbank as KPDs, for the record. Some are running types, some are marking types, but they are all medium forwards/backs (though I can see Schumacher and SOS moving into midfield).

Schumacher and Williamson i agree. Even O'Shea to an extent as he can run and does have decent speed.

But IMO, guys like Plowman, SOS & Marchbank should be counted as KPD's given the way they play. Yeah SOS & Marchbank may be considered 'third talls' but they are still talls who play a KPP style...they aren't running players like Williamson that's for sure.

 

[Stamos]

I'm fine with everything we've done, i just definitely don't want us to spend this years top 3 pick on ANOTHER tall...we've invested heavily in talls over the last 3 years, time to let them develop and stock up on mids/small half forwards. I'm confident SOS will - he's drafted mids with our first 2 picks of the last 2 drafts and i expect that to continue this year.

Ideally the best available player at our first pick is a mid, who goes on to be the best player in the draft, 5 time premiership player etc. etc...
However, if Lukosius is the best available, I would be ok with SOS picking him. Who knows what will happen? Maybe we get Gaff FA this year, and have Shiel fixed up for next year, and take a couple of mids in the 2nd round?

There's a lot to play out.

 

[Arr0w]

I was really just trying to play devils advocate to your claim that the smaller forward lines are a fad to be honest. Pretty easy to claim any trend in the game a fad to suit whatever argument you like.
Tigers won the flag with pressure and defending right up the ground. Need a lot of small runners to keep it up for 4 quarters, and to prevent the ball from rebounding in the first place. Not necessarily saying that Carlton should be trying to replicate them.

I am never flippant, when it comes to fads or trends, it is extremely relevant component

The Dogs had an amazing year, which I believe was strongly based around a unified mental/emotional commitment to what they wanted to achieve. It is difficult to base a prolonged strategy around such indicators

The Tigers, despite our longstanding rivalry (always want to beat them), have done extremely well to set in place their plan. Drafted safely, to avoid the errors of the past, then started to bring in the flair, in the likes of Rioli, Bolton etc. Again another side that is unified and committed

IMO, with both sides, team makeup plays only a "small" role, to what they have achieved.

Time will tell

 

[Jimmae]

Schumacher and Williamson i agree. Even O'Shea to an extent as he can run and does have decent speed.

But IMO, guys like Plowman, SOS & Marchbank should be counted as KPD's given the way they play. Yeah SOS & Marchbank may be considered 'third talls' but they are still talls who play a KPP style...they aren't running players like Williamson that's for sure.

You give them proper key position match-ups, and they're unlikely to win at their position on the day. They're there to help with mismatches and create mismatches.

I don't think Schumacher and SOS will be any good at that long term, so you look to give them inside midfield opportunities.

 

[BlueRenaissance]

IMO, there are way more facets to sustained success than just the shape and size of a team. Way to many to mention at the moment

Agree. But not to dismiss the point though as it is an obvious a change as anyone with a set of eyes watching can see.

In simplicity, the Pies have chosen better tackling, kicking, handballing speed, and linking skills over marking, collision and goal kicking skills.

 

[F_therest]

You give them proper key position match-ups, and they're unlikely to win at their position on the day. They're there to help with mismatches and create mismatches.

I don't think Schumacher and SOS will be any good at that long term, so you look to give them inside midfield opportunities.

Really, really can't see how SOS makes it as an AFL midfielder.

Sure he's tall, but he's not 'big bodied'...he's very slim.

He's also very slow which is not good for a midfielder...we'd have the slowest midfield in history with him, Crippa and Kennedy. People also want to see Charlie thrown in there and he's slow by midfield standards as well.

 

[Arr0w]

Agree. But not to dismiss the point though as it is an obvious a change as anyone with a set of eyes watching can see.

No doubt, but given your background Blue, you know there are way more important factors to success of a team

Let's watch how this one plays out

 

[Blue_Fusion]

I have never mentioned how any recruiter rates any kid.

You said this:

You ever questioned/doubted recruiters rating Lukosius the number one pick, that is bewildering Blue

So if it is so bewildering that I doubt their rating, show me the proof that it actually is their rating that I'm doubting vs what another poster 'thinks'...

 

[Arr0w]

You said this:



So if it is so bewildering that I doubt their rating, show me the proof that it actually is their rating that I'm doubting vs what another poster 'thinks'...

Whether it was a reply to another poster or a straight out post, you questioned/doubted that recruiters rated Lukosius, or any other kid for that matter at number one. And that is what I find bewildering

 

[Jimmae]

Really, really can't see how SOS makes it as an AFL midfielder.

Sure he's tall, but he's not 'big bodied'...he's very slim.

He's also very slow which is not good for a midfielder...we'd have the slowest midfield in history with him, Crippa and Kennedy. People also want to see Charlie thrown in there and he's slow by midfield standards as well.

He's 90 kgs, and midfielders don't bring him down in a tackle. That's exactly where he should be with his skills by hand and foot, especially with the pace at which he can play the game with the footy in hand.

 

[BlueRenaissance]

He's 90 kgs, and midfielders don't bring him down in a tackle. That's exactly where he should be with his skills by hand and foot, especially with the pace at which he can play the game with the footy in hand.

Given who we have currently in the backline (Mullet, sometimes cuningham, an out of form Plowman, and the not up to it O'shea), do you think it is worth trying him a bit more on the HBF? Cant be slower than O Shea surely. If he settles there and can tackle, is a good footy IQ.

 

[Malifice]

But we have 3 tall forwards? So why do you want another? We have Charlie, Harry, Casboult(for now), Kerr, we won't skip out on Ben. TDK can go forward.

2 of them are going really well. It would be stupid to ignore our midfield woes. We can't hope to woo free agents, we haven't got much trade value, where are they going to come from if not the draft? Later picks? Sorry, but that's low percentage and I'm not interested in that.

God I hate hearing this.

We have one tall forward that's shown anything and that's Curnow.

The rest have shown as much as Polson and Pickett and less than Cunners.

Unless you're counting Polson in our midfield going forward, don't count TDK, McKay or any of our other forwards in the discussion.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Whether it was a reply to another poster or a straight out post, you questioned/doubted that recruiters rated Lukosius, or any other kid for that matter at number one. And that is what I find bewildering

What are you on about? That had nothing to do with recruiters. The doubt was over his 'knowledge' of all the recruiters rating Lukosius #1.

You continuously misinterpret everything I say.

 

[Malifice]

Really, really can't see how SOS makes it as an AFL midfielder.

Sure he's tall, but he's not 'big bodied'...he's very slim.

He's also very slow which is not good for a midfielder...we'd have the slowest midfield in history with him, Crippa and Kennedy. People also want to see Charlie thrown in there and he's slow by midfield standards as well.

Needs size. Been saying this since day one.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

God I hate hearing this.

We have one tall forward that's shown anything and that's Curnow.

The rest have shown as much as Polson and Pickett and less than Cunners.

Unless you're counting Polson in our midfield going forward, don't count TDK, McKay or any of our other forwards in the discussion.

Did you even read what I was responding to? He said he wasn't specifically talking about GUN tall forwards. So, if we're not talking about quality and just their height alone, we already have 5 on the list with Ben a certainty to be added, making it 6. Adding Lukosius would bring it to 7, 6 of which will be younger than 22!

Meanwhile, our midfield group which is crying out for elite talent will miss out on one of the best mids in recent drafts in Rankine.

 

[Malifice]

Did you even read what I was responding to? He said he wasn't specifically talking about GUN tall forwards. So, if we're not talking about quality and just their height alone, we already have 5 on the list with Ben a certainty to be added, making it 6. Adding Lukosius would bring it to 7, 6 of which will be younger than 22!

Meanwhile, our midfield group which is crying out for elite talent will miss out on one of the best mids in recent drafts in Rankine.

Hey man I want Rankine.

I'm just annoyed with arguments that we don't need tall forwards. On exposed form our forward line is in worse nick than our midfield.

Cripps, Dow, SPS, Kennedy and Fisher have shown they will be good AFL players and are young.

Up forward only Curnow has shown anything. Jury's out on McKay till the end of the season.

Rankine is a mid/ HFF that has evasiveness mongrel and speed and kicks goals. He ticks both boxes for me.