Preview Round 3 - West Coast v Geelong, Sunday 4:40pm, Optus Stadium

[iameviljez]

No chance. A player like Dangerfield is worth a couple of goals on average. These differences are a matter of points, if that.

It depends, IMO, on how the rest of the match pans out and the position that the player plays.

Ruckmen in particular can be worth a hell of a lot or worth nothing, depending on the quality of your clearance players. If we'd managed to even up with McEvoy last week, the game would have looked substantially different. Swapping Murdoch for Parsons is worth very little IMO.

 

[catempire]

It depends, IMO, on how the rest of the match pans out and the position that the player plays.

Ruckmen in particular can be worth a hell of a lot or worth nothing, depending on the quality of your clearance players. If we'd managed to even up with McEvoy last week, the game would have looked substantially different. Swapping Murdoch for Parsons is worth very little IMO.

That’s the point though. People make out like Smith is Ottens and Stanley is Street (in quality) but it’s far closer than that.

 

[Cattery]

We do have players with X-factor + as you say, it's hugely rated + makes for great excitement, once there is cohesion.

Our X-factor players:
Jellwood
Ablett
Dangerfield
Cockatoo (need him fit + exploding)

Wash your mouth out Kitty, even mentioning him in the same breath as those three is sacrilegious.

I know Murdoch’s a whipping boy, but surely to god he’d offer more than Parsons did last week

Yep, been kept in the side numerous times after playing far worse then he did against Melbourne, yet now can't get in ahead of the likes of Gregson and Cockatoo who offered next to nothing last week, biggest non selection surprise of the week, well second biggest really, behind Smith being overlooked.

 

[iameviljez]

Yep, fair enough. But Stanley?

My guess is that, having flipped the switch after round one, they aren't keen to flip it back again immediately after round two.

They did that a bit in the first half of last year, where Stanley got beaten up by Preuss so they switched to Smith until Grundy got a hold of him, so back to Stanley who was belted by Witts, and so on...

 

[iameviljez]

That’s the point though. People make out like Smith is Ottens and Stanley is Street (in quality) but it’s far closer than that.

Yeah, I agree with you there. Smith is generally competitive, but can get absolutely monstered on occasion by Gawn, Goldstein, Jacobs and Grundy. Stanley generally isn't competitive enough as a first-string ruckman at AFL level - he's just too small now. He would have done better in the era where you could come off the long run a la Barnes/Jeff White.

 

[JohnZ]

Is the 787 8FE the same as the 787/350?
Like you said they'd have to fly really low.
Wouldn't it actually be too low to fly a passenger aircraft that size to get any real sort of pressure difference?

787 made by boeing, 350 made by airbus. Both have high amounts of composite and carbon materials compared to older a/c with aluminium alloys.

aluminium aircraft are pressurised to the eqv of over 10,000ft. 787 and I assume the 350 pressurise to eqv of ~7,000ft. Makes a huge difference. The likelihood of a 737 flying from Perth(?) to Melbourne at 7,000ft is extremely unlikely.

 

[Phoenix_9]

What's L. Fogarty's job security like?

Duncan and S. Selwood to come in? So wouldn't be too great, would it?

 

[iameviljez]

What's L. Fogarty's job security like?

Duncan and S. Selwood to come in? So wouldn't be too great, would it?

I'd probably see Gregson and Parsons come out of that side first.

 

[Daniel McL]

 

[Spazz Cat]

787 made by boeing, 350 made by airbus. Both have high amounts of composite and carbon materials compared to older a/c with aluminium alloys.

aluminium aircraft are pressurised to the eqv of over 10,000ft. 787 and I assume the 350 pressurise to eqv of ~7,000ft. Makes a huge difference. The likelihood of a 737 flying from Perth(?) to Melbourne at 7,000ft is extremely unlikely.

Oh cool. So if they take the the 787 (which I think we are) we still fly at 10,000 but pressurised at 7000?

 

[STPer18]

Just the two this week? That's lame. O'Connor and Murdoch are probably stashed in the luggage compartment - we need all four of them over there to pull some more nifty late change shenanigans.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Just the two this week? That's lame. O'Connor and Murdoch are probably stashed in the luggage compartment - we need all four of them over there to pull some more nifty late change shenanigans.

Selwood's been dragging enough of them along for years he might as well check em in as carry on.
Gregson's in the overhead department.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

The way I see it is that the ruck is our worst position on the ground and although Stanley is worse than Smith, he offers more around the ground in other roles if needs be. I don't like it either, but I haven't been happy with a ruck selection at Geelong since Ottens retired.

Smith is the better ruckman between the two. Just play him I reckon. He was good for us last year and shouldn't have been dropped after playing one poor game.

It's another classic case of Scott trying to be too cute and in the process out smarting himself once again.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Yeah dunno what to say bout that one.
I think there's a fair chance Smith is injured though.

If Smith is injured then he shouldn't have been playing VFL last weekend.

 

[cynical]

No chance. A player like Dangerfield is worth a couple of goals on average. These differences are a matter of points, if that.

Doesn't work like that.

The difference between Dangerfield and someone like Menegola is less than Murdoch and a kid. The kid isn't going to be able to apply the physical pressure or have the same stamina as a 5+ year player.

Having Smith and Stanley as rucks against 2 very good rucks is a significant upgrade over Stanley and Sav.

Even if Sav is a better forward(theoretically) the dominance that Naitanui/Lycett will have over him in the ruck will way surpass that. If Blicavs is forced to ruck then you get the same situation in their forwardline. If Stewart ends up on Darling then we have lost the game.

If you play too many kids then you are more likely to have extremely exploitable matchups.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

My guess is that, having flipped the switch after round one, they aren't keen to flip it back again immediately after round two.

They did that a bit in the first half of last year, where Stanley got beaten up by Preuss so they switched to Smith until Grundy got a hold of him, so back to Stanley who was belted by Witts, and so on...

They shouldn't have dropped Smith after one poor game in round 1. Problem solved.

 

[frggr]

Oh cool. So if they take the the 787 (which I think we are) we still fly at 10,000 but pressurised at 7000?

You'd fly higher (30,000ft isn't uncommon for international, I assume Perth is similar).

Most planes = fly at 30k but pressurise to 10k

787/350 = fly at 30k but pressurise to 7k

 

[ShaunWDT]

Love it!

I'm generally critical of Blicavs but I think he has the potential to be quality down back.

Personally I like his work when he plays key position, showed a far bit as a forward when we gave him the chance in the JLT and looks very solid down back, he's always been s**t as a midfielder/wingman for mine just doesn't get enough of the ball.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Smith is the better ruckman between the two. Just play him I reckon. He was good for us last year and shouldn't have been dropped after playing one poor game.

It's another classic case of Scott trying to be too cute and in the process out smarting himself once again.

Smith was a victim of Max Gawn's last minute mark I reckon.

 

[MacStradbroke]

Have you actually watched Menegola the first two weeks? There is more daylight between him and Danger than Winx and her next group of victims. You'll need to produce better than that.

 

[dazbroncos]

If Smith is injured then he shouldn't have been playing VFL last weekend.

I think he got dropped to the VFL the hurt his knee - if it happened at all - in that game.
Based on what was reported that's what I got out of it anyway.

GO Catters

 

[catempire]

Doesn't work like that.

The difference between Dangerfield and someone like Menegola is less than Murdoch and a kid. The kid isn't going to be able to apply the physical pressure or have the same stamina as a 5+ year player.

Having Smith and Stanley as rucks against 2 very good rucks is a significant upgrade over Stanley and Sav.

Even if Sav is a better forward(theoretically) the dominance that Naitanui/Lycett will have over him in the ruck will way surpass that. If Blicavs is forced to ruck then you get the same situation in their forwardline. If Stewart ends up on Darling then we have lost the game.

If you play too many kids then you are more likely to have extremely exploitable matchups.

Doesn't work like Murdoch and Smith being worth 2-5 goals.

 

[ShaunWDT]

That’s the point though. People make out like Smith is Ottens and Stanley is Street (in quality) but it’s far closer than that.

This is something I've always been baffled by, Smith gets belted more often than he wins the ruck duel, Stanley is exactly the same but at the end of the day I'm not convinced either are good enough or necessarily that much better than the other.

 

[dazbroncos]

Smith was a victim of Max Gawn's last minute mark I reckon.

You may very well be right but youd hope that decisions are not made that whimsically....

but you never know...

Footy clubs.. egos... car washing....

GO Catters

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Doesn't work like Murdoch and Smith being worth 2-5 goals.

I disagree to an extent. Murdoch doesn't get pushed off the ball by Smith as easily as Gregson did on a few occasions last week with the last one leading to Roughies match winning point. Smith also doesn't allow McEvoy to get his first hand to the ball like Stanley did last week and he most certainly would have followed McEvoy up the ground rather than jogging by himself on a wing like I seen Stanley doing.

We'd have won with those changes.