Team Mgmt. 2017 Team selections, injuries and availability

[Lore]

So you're probably aware of the spreadsheets I keep posting everywhere. Well this will be something of a home for it I guess.

Spoiler: 2016 version

 

[eth-dog]

If Ambrose was playing against Sydney I daresay he would have been tagging Kennedy

I think he would have been playing on Reid to allow Hurley to go into loose man boss mode

 

[Killer_Mike]

Even the rucks change over the weeks, there was a game where Leuey's was centre circle and defensive end, pretty much exclusively. Another one he had a hotspot in the centre and a forward pocket. Not sure if that's a directive or a result of a lot of ball-ups in particular parts of the ground that day, but it's interesting and goes some way to explaining who was actually down there, if most of the usual defenders were up the ground (for example).

Ambrose still has about 3 weeks of injury/recovery left plus probably will spend more time in the VFL too now. Mitch Brown came back from injury last weekend in the VFL, sooner or later he will probably be available for senior selection.

Gleeson has played a bit on the wing, but I don't know if he's good enough in that position to hold a spot in the 22 there. As a small defender he won't get a rebounding spot over McGrath or McKenna, and I don't really see him as a stopper in a Baguley role or a leader in the Kelly mould either. If we go for an extra defender, he could get a spot there (instead of one of the mids playing defence).

Gleeson is really probably in that mix with Dea and Ambrose for one spot though, as it stands. Hartley and Brown are taller and compete for the KPD spot alongside Hurley. Hurls is clear best 22 and isn't budging for anyone or anything.

My guess would be that either the pseudo-tall (Gleeson/Dea) makes way for Ambrose in the third tall role, when he's eventually fit or they select depending on match-ups. Brown is a swingman, so you could see him coming in as a forward possibly as well. I'd suggest he's probably behind Stewart for that spot though.

And for all that, I quite like Gleeson, it's just that others are probably ahead of him.

This year is definitely a development year (exciting considering we are still managing to push for a place in the finals) in regards to the gameplan.

A few weeks back Woosha mentioned that they were just finishing off a five week "block". They have obviously laid out a development plan for individuals but also team structures and looking at where it will lead us over a five week window.

I'm hesitant to criticize players off the back of one or two bad games for that reason. They are adapting to new roles and new structures and one week they me the primary focus of a gameplan and then the next week they may be playing a different role within a similar structure.

It's really going to be difficult for opposing teams to isolate somebody who they may think is the engine room when they could quite easily be the decoy.

I noticed a few weeks back in a game that I thought Joe was being used as the decoy and then Stewart stood up and kicked a couple of goals. Against Port they were certainly kicking deeper forward and that resulted in Hooker kicking a bag. At the start of the year the tall forwards were all working up the ground and the smalls were doubling back towards an open forward line for easy goals with little pressure. Different structures for different grounds and opponents.

For all that to work it's heavily reliant on all of the forwards knowing there particular role but also the midfielders need to know when and where to push up the field. Adelaide is probably the other side that has a similar functioning setup but not to many others.

The advantage we have over Adelaide is that our side is younger in the important roles so still have time on their side to get some quality mids to continue to develop the gameplan.

 

[Vindicater]

Side is rounding out nicely.

Will turn over another 6-8 this trade period and see us add more needs.

 

[eth-dog]

We need an inside mid, yep. I'm still not convinced our team balance is right, why have 3 small forwards?

 

[Lore]

Where to now? Even RoCo is calling to play the kids;

 

[PhoenixBonez]

Hartley? Experienced?

 

[Lore]

Hartley? Experienced?

Yeah I don't think he directly answered the question Colyer isn't as experienced as he should be for the years in the system either. I think he more focused on the second part of the question, i.e. 'who to drop to bring in kids that deserve a go'.

Who would come in for Hartley though? Brown is 27 I think, and there's rumours he got injured again. Francis has played defence for the last couple of weeks but was considered unfit, not sure if that has changed. Ambrose still injured, Dea can play tall, but not that tall. I'm not sure what position Ridley plays, but I don't think he's up to scratch yet anyway.

Green would have to be for Begley, with J.Merrett as an outside chance in that role.

Colyer... Mutch? J.Merrett? I don't think Merrett is a like for like replacement of Colyer though, both having played on a wing notwithstanding. Merrett's not particularly young anymore either.

Jobe... Mutch again? Clarke? People complain about Jobe's kicking but I wonder if Clarke's is worse. Bird, Hocking, Howlett, Myers are all older players (though Jobe is older still), so I'm not sure if they'd count under a 'youth' policy.

 

[BrunoV]

Hartley? Experienced?

He's played 20 games.

 

[Teflon Dons]

This year is definitely a development year (exciting considering we are still managing to push for a place in the finals) in regards to the gameplan.

A few weeks back Woosha mentioned that they were just finishing off a five week "block". They have obviously laid out a development plan for individuals but also team structures and looking at where it will lead us over a five week window.

I'm hesitant to criticize players off the back of one or two bad games for that reason. They are adapting to new roles and new structures and one week they me the primary focus of a gameplan and then the next week they may be playing a different role within a similar structure.

It's really going to be difficult for opposing teams to isolate somebody who they may think is the engine room when they could quite easily be the decoy.

I noticed a few weeks back in a game that I thought Joe was being used as the decoy and then Stewart stood up and kicked a couple of goals. Against Port they were certainly kicking deeper forward and that resulted in Hooker kicking a bag. At the start of the year the tall forwards were all working up the ground and the smalls were doubling back towards an open forward line for easy goals with little pressure. Different structures for different grounds and opponents.

For all that to work it's heavily reliant on all of the forwards knowing there particular role but also the midfielders need to know when and where to push up the field. Adelaide is probably the other side that has a similar functioning setup but not to many others.

The advantage we have over Adelaide is that our side is younger in the important roles so still have time on their side to get some quality mids to continue to develop the gameplan.

[emoji736]

Agree Michael. Versatility is really important for today's game, we are well and truly in the thick of developing our young guys in multiple roles and will take a little bit more time than a St. Kilda but the benefit outweighs the immediate inconsistency. Parish has been played fwd and back this year but last year he averaged the 4th most clearances of any rising star, more than Hopper*, I think he'll end up spending the majority of his time as a clearance beast. Have a feeling Joe will spend a lot more time in the ruck and around the ground given he nearly won the Sydney game by himself, dominated playing that role as a junior did he not?

*Darcy did it in a compromised team, but over 20 games compared to Hoppers 10.

 

[Killer_Mike]

[emoji736]

Agree Michael. Versatility is really important for today's game, we are well and truly in the thick of developing our young guys in multiple roles and will take a little bit more time than a St. Kilda but the benefit outweighs the immediate inconsistency. Parish has been played fwd and back this year but last year he averaged the 4th most clearances of any rising star, more than Hopper*, I think he'll end up spending the majority of his time as a clearance beast. Have a feeling Joe will spend a lot more time in the ruck and around the ground given he nearly won the Sydney game by himself, dominated playing that role as a junior did he not?

*Darcy did it in a compromised team, but over 20 games compared to Hoppers 10.

I'm probably one of very few on here that is confident we are building something very special. We do need to continue to add depth to our midfield of course but I think the most important roles are covered and I like the gameplan.

Our strength is our speed and also if we continue to add experience to guys like Langford and the such then we will also have versatility. I don't see the point in just adding all meatheads in the midfield and making it a contested ball winning side. Others do that already and are far more accomplished at it. If we continue to add versatile players and a gameplan that plays to our strengths then we will have something that few teams will be able to counter.

Most teams have a very rigid midfield structure with rotations designed mostly to give guys a rest. My thoughts are that we should aim to create mismatches all over the ground by rotating players through multiple positions and running the opposition into the ground. If the AFL puts further caps on rotations or continues to make the game faster through new rules it will hold us in good stead because we will have multiple players that can not only impact in midfield, but also rest forward and create a mismatch.

The most valuable players in the AFL are Martin, Ablett, Dangerfield, Fyfe and the Bont. The thing they all have in common is they all have a profound impact when going forward.

If we can develop Langford, Fantasia, Walla, Laverde, Begley and somebody like Kobe Mutch as midfielders, all of those guys would be a nightmare to line up on when resting forward rather than going to the bench for a rest. We just need to continue to develop and add depth.

 

[Teflon Dons]

I'm probably one of very few on here that is confident we are building something very special. We do need to continue to add depth to our midfield of course but I think the most important roles are covered and I like the gameplan.

Our strength is our speed and also if we continue to add experience to guys like Langford and the such then we will also have versatility. I don't see the point in just adding all meatheads in the midfield and making it a contested ball winning side. Others do that already and are far more accomplished at it. If we continue to add versatile players and a gameplan that plays to our strengths then we will have something that few teams will be able to counter.

Most teams have a very rigid midfield structure with rotations designed mostly to give guys a rest. My thoughts are that we should aim to create mismatches all over the ground by rotating players through multiple positions and running the opposition into the ground. If the AFL puts further caps on rotations or continues to make the game faster through new rules it will hold us in good stead because we will have multiple players that can not only impact in midfield, but also rest forward and create a mismatch.

The most valuable players in the AFL are Martin, Ablett, Dangerfield, Fyfe and the Bont. The thing they all have in common is they all have a profound impact when going forward.

If we can develop Langford, Fantasia, Walla, Laverde, Begley and somebody like Kobe Mutch as midfielders, all of those guys would be a nightmare to line up on when resting forward rather than going to the bench for a rest. We just need to continue to develop and add depth.

Yeah I love seeing those 2 run through (fantasia, tippa) because on top of those 5 you mentioned as most dangerous there are a lot of examples of small forwards going into the midfield and being just as dangerous if not more (Walters, Zorko, Wingard). Walters had 33 and kicked 6 on the weekend! They only learnt their midfield roles recently, I'm with you, very excited about the build. That vision isn't muddied by 2 bad but close losses.

 

[Mr_McBoogerBalls]

We do need to continue to add depth to our midfield of course but I think the most important roles are covered and I like the gameplan.

Agree with this 100%. When we're on, we're hard to slow down. Both our forward line and defence is filled with quality, lots of teams would want these players.

I don't see the point in just adding all meatheads in the midfield and making it a contested ball winning side.

I think the most successful teams have good balance and my view is, where we are unbalanced is with contested mids. We don't need to stack the team with meatheads and play a contested ball winning game, we just need them available in the event the game requires this (whether to match our opposition, or to slow things down etc).

The most valuable players in the AFL are Martin, Ablett, Dangerfield, Fyfe and the Bont. The thing they all have in common is they all have a profound impact when going forward.

Yes, but Dusty, Ablett and Danger are a rare breed of practically untaggable ball magnets. We don't have any players like this currently. As far as developing our existing youth to play these roles, I have no idea how achievable and/or complicated this is.

On the whole though, I agree with you. We have most gaps covered in our team, just need to fill a few small gaps.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Agree with this 100%. When we're on, we're hard to slow down. Both our forward line and defence is filled with quality, lots of teams would want these players.


I think the most successful teams have good balance and my view is, where we are unbalanced is with contested mids. We don't need to stack the team with meatheads and play a contested ball winning game, we just need them available in the event the game requires this (whether to match our opposition, or to slow things down etc).


Yes, but Dusty, Ablett and Danger are a rare breed of practically untaggable ball magnets. We don't have any players like this currently. As far as developing our existing youth to play these roles, I have no idea how achievable and/or complicated this is.

On the whole though, I agree with you. We have most gaps covered in our team, just need to fill a few small gaps.

Yeah, I didn't exactly mean that we don't need any, more so that I think we are better off having a balanced list. Some teams develop there gameplan around contested ball and some people assume that means its a finals ready gameplan. I think if we do that then we won't compete because those teams, like Sydney for example are stacked with some of the best contested players in the AFL. We don't have players that are at that level or better.

What I believe we need to do and which I think we are already seeing is develop a gameplan that will expose that style of play.

Using our game against Sydney as an example. It was a distinct case of two opposing styles and putting aside the last 4 minutes they took it to us for 2 and 1/2 quarters before mentally and physically they couldn't maintain that standard. That's when our gameplan took over and we broke them physically and mentally and really opened them up.

Our brand of football is tailor made for the skill and speed we have in the side and we need to continue to build on that rather than go to defensive. For mine the slowest part of the ground is actually our contested ball winning mids and they are coming to an end career wise. Once we replace them with the guys I mentioned in the first post and also add some more depth we are going to have a very good side.

 

[Mr_McBoogerBalls]

Yeah, I didn't exactly mean that we don't need any, more so that I think we are better off having a balanced list. Some teams develop there gameplan around contested ball and some people assume that means its a finals ready gameplan. I think if we do that then we won't compete because those teams, like Sydney for example are stacked with some of the best contested players in the AFL. We don't have players that are at that level or better.

What I believe we need to do and which I think we are already seeing is develop a gameplan that will expose that style of play.

Using our game against Sydney as an example. It was a distinct case of two opposing styles and putting aside the last 4 minutes they took it to us for 2 and 1/2 quarters before mentally and physically they couldn't maintain that standard. That's when our gameplan took over and we broke them physically and mentally and really opened them up.

Our brand of football is tailor made for the skill and speed we have in the side and we need to continue to build on that rather than go to defensive. For mine the slowest part of the ground is actually our contested ball winning mids and they are coming to an end career wise. Once we replace them with the guys I mentioned in the first post and also add some more depth we are going to have a very good side.

Good post, agreed.

I actually think another area where we are slow is kicking the ball out of our defensive 50. We've been ordinary at it for most of the year, but when at the game on Sunday, I noticed moments where even when we hit our targets, by the time we were ready to move the ball on, our mids and forwards had spread 65m away from the the player in posession, preventing us from moving the ball on quickly.

For some reason, I've always wanted to see Langford and Laverde as inside mids. Not saying it will def happen, but like you said, there's goign to be an opportunity for players to snag those roles soon.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Good post, agreed.

I actually think another area where we are slow is kicking the ball out of our defensive 50. We've been ordinary at it for most of the year, but when at the game on Sunday, I noticed moments where even when we hit our targets, by the time we were ready to move the ball on, our mids and forwards had spread 65m away from the the player in posession, preventing us from moving the ball on quickly.

For some reason, I've always wanted to see Langford and Laverde as inside mids. Not saying it will def happen, but like you said, there's goign to be an opportunity for players to snag those roles soon.

Yeah, transition from defence through the midfield is definitely something they need to continue to work on. We have been exposed greatly against teams like Richmond who pressure the ball once they have it inside there forward 50.

If there is any truth at all to the JJ rumours then that would assist greatly with that as he would clear the backline. Some believe he's not what we need but I disagree. I think he and McKenna would cause considerable headaches for any side as that would mean the mids would have to either press higher up into there forward 50 to assist the small forwards in isolating them or maintain a line across midfield and hope either JJ or McKenna don't get through.

Football is like anything, it's all about risk and reward. The more risks you take the greater reward if it comes off.

When we have looked our best we have played that attacking football and that's all without a good midfield and with great opportunity for further development in the players we have. We also have trading and drafts between now and 2019, which is when I believe we will be ready.

 

[Lore]

We need an inside mid, yep. I'm still not convinced our team balance is right, why have 3 small forwards?

Ta for inspiration. Also I know BrunoV has been banging on about it for ages.

Three small forwards? Midfield rotations? Could a change in structure help us to win clearances and get the ball forward??

Looking at heat maps tells me that Josh Green is the only small forward that seems to stay forward, the furthest down the ground he seems to get is a forward flank (although I guess he's part of the press, but he doesn't get possessions any further down the ground than that).

Fantasia and Walla have been going through the midfield for a few stints this year, as you can see in the position tab of the spreadsheet in the OP (yellow squares are where they've had the bulk of their possessions between the arcs, green squares for forward fifty).

And then there's Colyer, one of the 'four horsemen' so dubbed by the media folk at Essendon. Allegedly a 'small forward' and he occasionally kicks goals, but he's played predominantly on the wings all year.

So how many players should we have predominantly up forward, who should they be, and how does that impact the midfield?

Two/three smalls, three talls? What we've been running with at the moment, although the third small role seems to be a midfield rotation of Fantasia, Walla and some of the mids rotating forward.

Two/three smalls, a medium, two talls? This is how we started the year with Langford in the midfield and as a medium forward almost 50-50 and Hooker/Daniher as the talls.

Something else? Perhaps 5 players permanently forward and a larger midfield?

 

[faible]

Is the problem that we lack genuine wingmen? I'm thinking players of the Gaff / Scully mould that can run all day and accumulate possessions and provide that link from Half-Back to Half-Forward.

 

[BrunoV]

Is the problem that we lack genuine wingmen? I'm thinking players of the Gaff / Scully mould that can run all day and accumulate possessions and provide that link from Half-Back to Half-Forward.

Not in the sense that it has anything to do with playing too many small forwards but yes a lack of hard running wingmen is a problem.

 

[faible]

Not in the sense that it has anything to do with playing too many small forwards but yes a lack of hard running wingmen is a problem.

It was a little bit of a follow-up from Colyer being mentioned to clarify where that one came from, Colyer seems to be playing a winger but doesn't accumulate or appear to reliably do enough damage with the possessions he has.

I don't mind Green personally, I think he's been OK without being outstanding, if this is his ceiling then it would be nice to think Begley can overtake him fairly quickly as he appears to be more versatile. Tipungwuti and Fantasia both have the ability to run through the midfield and off half-back which I think is something Green doesn't - yet at least - appear to offer.

 

[blitzer]

In an ideal world I think we need an extra medium forward and 1 less small forward. I'm happy that Fantasia and Tippa can add to the midfield. I think we sometimes struggle with 2 small forwards that are not marking targets in Tippa and Green. If someone like Begley or Laverde took Green's spot I suspect they could not only help with midfield rotations but they would give us an extra target in the air which would make us even more dangerous.

 

[bjisgod9]

So the 3 small fwds has been used to provide more pressure when the balls in our f50, I get the need for fwds to rotate into the midfield, but we also require mids that are competent when fwd, including goal sense and fwd pressure, whilst Fantasia & Walla are going through the midfield. Who else in the team can provide fwd pressure and fwd craft deep fwd when these players are not in there? This is why Green has played, even though his performances haven't been great.

 

[Duckworth]

So the 3 small fwds has been used to provide more pressure when the balls in our f50, I get the need for fwds to rotate into the midfield, but we also require mids that are competent when fwd, including goal sense and fwd pressure, whilst Fantasia & Walla are going through the midfield. Who else in the team can provide fwd pressure and fwd craft deep fwd when these players are not in there? This is why Green has played, even though his performances haven't been great.

Green also ends up being a marking target, as he stays closer to goals. Perhaps a medium forward would take some of the marks that he isn't able to.

edit: and in writing this, it occurs to me that we have a young developing player that has a good goal sense, can tackle and a strong body (fridge-like) to hold position to take an overhead mark. Seems like a ready made Green upgrade.

 

[bjisgod9]

Green also ends up being a marking target, as he stays closer to goals. Perhaps a medium forward would take some of the marks that he isn't able to.

edit: and in writing this, it occurs to me that we have a young developing player that has a good goal sense, can tackle and a strong body (fridge-like) to hold position to take an overhead mark. Seems like a ready made Green upgrade.

Yeah I suppose the coaching staff weren't convinced that Begley could provide the same or better output than Green so far, but if he is ready, then get him in. This still doesn't help us with our lack of Mids, that are able to rotate FWD, which is why I'm glad that Langford is back in the team.

 

[Duckworth]

Yeah I suppose the coaching staff weren't convinced that Begley could provide the same or better output than Green so far, but if he is ready, then get him in. This still doesn't help us with our lack of Mids, that are able to rotate FWD, which is why I'm glad that Langford is back in the team.

The only mid capable of making a difference who isn't a kid is Myers (and he has been sent to the VFL for not making a difference). With that in mind, I would just take an upgrade on Green. In a game described by Heppell as the team playing 'selfish football', Green was probably the worst offender.

I would love for Walla to be able to have an impact at stoppages. If you look at him he is shaped like a human meatball. If he could get his hands on the ball at clearances he would be able to accelerate away like a young Judd. I get that he does't have the tank to run everywhere, so he could rotate forward after that.

 

[CBombers17]

I don't think we can effectively play Green and Coyler in the same 22, for a variety of reasons (or neither).

If that means 2 small forwards with Langford and Myers swapping as a medium sized forward mid (or Laverde when he's back) then drop both of them and get some size on the park.