Analysis 2021 trade thread

[a mayes ing]

? What has that to do with it? We would not play them all at the same time.

You don't think having a ready to go big man - in reserve- on our list is worthwile?

Of course l do, thats why l wrote "lookat who l was replying to". The poster said "Why not have both? The 2 ruck system has always been a winner for us over many years ". That is implying that we would have 3 KPFs and the 2 rucks all at the same time...

 

[davemc_lions]

with smaller lists I do wonder why you draft a 18 year old ruck now.
Let them play to 24 and see who available in the state leagues.
If lists keep small might be what happens with a few development players
Which will be sad as a few be lost to the game

 

[briztoon]

with smaller lists I do wonder why you draft a 18 year old ruck now.
Let them play to 24 and see who available in the state leagues.
If lists keep small might be what happens with a few development players
Which will be sad as a few be lost to the game

It’s two senior lists and a rookie spot gone from the old list sizes.

The reason to draft one is, other teams will continue to draft the better talented junior rucks, and develop it in their reserves, while you’re picking up a lesser talented player who is probably reserve grade at best.

As recruiters and coaches keep saying, the best place to develop talent is on an AFL list. Stephen Conole our own head recruiter said as much, near word for word, last year.

 

[jackess]

with smaller lists I do wonder why you draft a 18 year old ruck now.
Let them play to 24 and see who available in the state leagues.
If lists keep small might be what happens with a few development players
Which will be sad as a few be lost to the game

I think they’d have to play ok as a forward or project to be an A grade ruck. You wouldn’t take one if they’re likely to just be an ok ruck at AFL level

 

[dlanod]

Yes ,because the were the only team who had 2 credible rucks.

It's clear to see most of the others wanted to if they had someone else decent.

The Dogs were desperate.

That's A successful team then

 

[dlanod]

If they’re any good they’ll probably want to explore opportunities in a couple of years

Everything you've said about these guys could've been said about Oscar...

 

[Section 5]

I prefer a one ruck set up if possible.
This gives you more bench options and also makes the 18 on the field at any given time a faster combination
Due to a combination of injuries, list spots & cap space the Lions main issue before the 2022 season starts is ruck depth for a top 4 side

I think a few on our list will be fighting or trialing for the 3rd tall forward spot. Could be Payne/Lester but their will be others.
The third tall forward will really help out Joe until Hippy returns later in the year should they go down that path

However i can still see us going in with a 3 tall forward structure & 2 rucks as long as one ruck only covers those three tall forwards when they are on the bench
Remainder of the time they share the ruck duties off the bench. That at least keeps a bit more pace on the field at any given time
Will mean a bit more TOG for midfield which can come from the younger brigade
TOG for 2021 younger guys: McCluggage 82.62%, Bailey, 81.38%, Rayner(78.53% in 2020), Robertson 70.06%, Prior 66.62% & J Berry way behind at 61.91%

Plan A: Three tall forwards if one shows enough preseason, one ruck with Oscar getting his TOG up from 82.57%, Jo and others pinch hitting ruck relief.
This gives you one extra utility/mid on the bench

Plan B: Two rucks (Fort/Fullarton/others) as mentioned above with one less utility/mid on the bench

 

[jackess]

Everything you've said about these guys could've been said about Oscar...

He was best 22 in his second season

 

[martinson]

That's A successful team then

Every premiership team in memory bar one in the short season 2020 has played 2 rucks.

Just because a number of unsuccessful teams in 2021 didn't or couldn't do it validates my argument I would've thought.

Logically.

I was initially referring to successful teams. Not necessarily the microcosm of 2021.

But whatever.

 

[briztoon]

I think they’d have to play ok as a forward or project to be an A grade ruck. You wouldn’t take one if they’re likely to just be an ok ruck at AFL level

At 18/19 years old, you don’t know if they project as an A grade ruck most of the time.

It will be interesting watching next year’s U19 championships and draft. There’s a lot of talk already about how good the ruck and KPF/Rucks are.

 

[davemc_lions]

It’s two senior lists and a rookie spot gone from the old list sizes.

The reason to draft one is, other teams will continue to draft the better talented junior rucks, and develop it in their reserves, while you’re picking up a lesser talented player who is probably reserve grade at best.

As recruiters and coaches keep saying, the best place to develop talent is on an AFL list. Stephen Conole our own head recruiter said as much, near word for word, last year.

I agree you want the talent on your list rather than be one of 6 clubs trying to get the best out there
44 now was 47 so only 3.
Maybe more to do with our bad luck injury wise in 2021
2021 we had Rayner/Answerth the whole year does not help. So we played with 20 depth players and 21 when Lane joined.
We also had a lot who where injured for chunks.. Neale, Gardiner, CEY, E Smith, Adams, Sharp, Madden, Cockatoo, Berry, Payne etc even
Most of these are top 30 players.. which ate away in depth.
Add that to players missing 1-3 weeks and no VFL from COVID
We played players under done as well

Not just us a few other clubs who had injuries struggled.
It also meant our VFL side a lot of time was under age top ups with development players mainly
Hence some of the big losses.

 

[Clarkythelion]

yawn - tap, tap, tap, tap. I hope something happens this week. 97 pages of the same stuff over and over, covid19, Neale and the strategy of how many rucks are enough. Im off to watch re-runs of Neighbours, the drama is a marginally better than reading the imploding Lions supporters having cracks at each other out of boredom while we wait.

 

[davemc_lions]

yawn - tap, tap, tap, tap. I hope something happens this week. 97 pages of the same stuff over and over, covid19, Neale and the strategy of how many rucks are enough. Im off to watch re-runs of Neighbours, the drama is a marginally better than reading the imploding Lions supporters having cracks at each other out of boredom while we wait.

I know most boring trade period ever

 

[lioninthesand]

yawn - tap, tap, tap, tap. I hope something happens this week. 97 pages of the same stuff over and over, covid19, Neale and the strategy of how many rucks are enough. Im off to watch re-runs of Neighbours, the drama is a marginally better than reading the imploding Lions supporters having cracks at each other out of boredom while we wait.

I actually think that it's more just suggestions get thrown up - Fort, Mitchell, Omera, Cox what ever.. then debates breakout about our needs and best 22. I agree, the actual trade discussion is boring - however, the chat itself ain't that bad. Better than thousands of rolling trade hypotheticals anyway lol

 

[dlanod]

He was best 22 in his second season

He is 7 - 7 1/2 years older than Smith and Lane, so he was best 22 after four years more development than we're allowing Smith or Lane?

 

[dlanod]

Every premiership team in memory bar one in the short season 2020 has played 2 rucks.

Just because a number of unsuccessful teams in 2021 didn't or couldn't do it validates my argument I would've thought.

Logically.

I was initially referring to successful teams. Not necessarily the microcosm of 2021.

But whatever.

Usually people are referencing current trends - sorry, it wasn't obvious you only meant premiership teams by using "successful" instead of "premiership". Top 8 seems a reasonable marker for success, hence why I bothered looking through those teams.

Using premiership teams:

• Zero rucks - Bulldogs 2016
• One ruck - Richmond 2020, Richmond 2017
• One and a half rucks - West Coast 2018, Hawthorn 2013-2015
• Two rucks - Richmond 2019

Hale and Vardy probably fit into what you'd consider two rucks if you're arguing that premiership teams use them, but three out of the last five premiership teams didn't fit this pigeonhole - Hawthorn's threepeat using Hale throws out the stats a bit and arguably was in a different evolution of game style given their use of pure rucks like Bailey.

 

[jackess]

He is 7 - 7 1/2 years older than Smith and Lane, so he was best 22 after four years more development than we're allowing Smith or Lane?

4 years development that occured before we drafted him.

I might not have explained myself well but you’re kind of proving my point.

 

[Lazza16]

Had a few bourbons last night but this morning I seem to recall reading WC interested in Archie Smith

44

Archie Smith

Age

30

Ht

203cm

Wt

104kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.5

2star

K

2.6

1star

HB

6.9

4star

CL

2.1

4star

HO

14.4

5star

D

4.7

1star

K

1.7

1star

HB

3.0

2star

CL

2.0

4star

HO

11.3

5star

D

12.4

4star

K

3.4

2star

HB

9.0

5star

CL

3.0

5star

HO

17.8

5star

. It could have been a dream?

 

[dlanod]

4 years development that occured before we drafted him.

I might not have explained myself well but you’re kind of proving my point.

Your repeated point over the last few months has been "Lane and Smith aren't going to be good so they should be delisted".

You're making this proclamation when they're of an age that our last two rucks weren't even in the AFL.

If someone showed you footage of Oscar or Stef at the same age, I doubt you'd be complementary of their AFL ruck prospects.

So nah, not proving that point. Lane and Smith may turn out to be delisting bait, but your definitive and repeated opinion that we should delist them based off a few months in an AFL environment can't be based of some real insight you have based off their play. The most likely cause for them to be delisted this early will be lack of effort or inability to be coached and thankfully you're not making any claims to that effect.

I know you love to shift goalposts when challenged on a POV, so I did note the shift to saying stuff like "well they'll just leave anyway". Most of the ones that do are average at best - after all they're by definition not good enough to beat out a potentially middling ruck in the seniors. Developing the ruck in-house makes them more likely to stay in-house after that development. In our case since Oscar was a mature option Lane would be about the right age to step right in, if he develops like would be hoped. If he doesn't, then we get to keep trying to find a similar prospect?

 

[jackess]

Your repeated point over the last few months has been "Lane and Smith aren't going to be good so they should be delisted".

You're making this proclamation when they're of an age that our last two rucks weren't even in the AFL.

If someone showed you footage of Oscar or Stef at the same age, I doubt you'd be complementary of their AFL ruck prospects.

So nah, not proving that point. Lane and Smith may turn out to be delisting bait, but your definitive and repeated opinion that we should delist them based off a few months in an AFL environment can't be based of some real insight you have based off their play. The most likely cause for them to be delisted this early will be lack of effort or inability to be coached and thankfully you're not making any claims to that effect.

I know you love to shift goalposts when challenged on a POV, so I did note the shift to saying stuff like "well they'll just leave anyway". Most of the ones that do are average at best - after all they're by definition not good enough to beat out a potentially middling ruck in the seniors. Developing the ruck in-house makes them more likely to stay in-house after that development. In our case since Oscar was a mature option Lane would be about the right age to step right in, if he develops like would be hoped. If he doesn't, then we get to keep trying to find a similar prospect?

Thats 3 different issues; 1 I don’t rate them, 2 there’s no point sinking years of investment in them unless you think they’re going to be something special and 3 is especially dumb to sink several years into 2 of them. If as most believe that the majority of rucks are poor at 18-22 then why waste a list spot on them?

We’re going back to the Schache argument that because established most key forwards struggled at 20 then the struggling, current 20 year old key forwards will likely end up as good key forwards.

It’s not shifting the goal posts if you have 2 different but not conflicting opinions on a topic like our ruck stocks

 

[Johnny Bananas]

He was best 22 in his second season

Oscar was four years older than Smith and Lane currently are.

 

[BangyBangy]

I know most boring trade period ever

Yeah agree. Nowhere near as exciting as the 2013 trade period

 

[Dalions]

Yeah agree. Nowhere near as exciting as the 2013 trade period

It is pretty shit!

 

[martinson]

Usually people are referencing current trends - sorry, it wasn't obvious you only meant premiership teams by using "successful" instead of "premiership". Top 8 seems a reasonable marker for success, hence why I bothered looking through those teams.

Using premiership teams:

• Zero rucks - Bulldogs 2016
• One ruck - Richmond 2020, Richmond 2017
• One and a half rucks - West Coast 2018, Hawthorn 2013-2015
• Two rucks - Richmond 2019

Hale and Vardy probably fit into what you'd consider two rucks if you're arguing that premiership teams use them, but three out of the last five premiership teams didn't fit this pigeonhole - Hawthorn's threepeat using Hale throws out the stats a bit and arguably was in a different evolution of game style given their use of pure rucks like Bailey.

Fair enough. I don't agree in totality with your summation of the ruck stocks of those sides but just a moot point. If you have 2 good rucks you play them. Particularly if one of them is capable of marking when not rucking. Melbourne now have the luxury of resting Gawn on the ground , rather than on the bench if they so choose. They're an extreme case, but in our situation we were found out this year with very little help for Oscar resulting in him getting tired which is perhaps why he chose to manouvre rather than front on jump in that last ruck contest . Which probably cost us a spot in a PF. In hindsight.

 

[dlanod]

We’re going back to the Schache argument that because established most key forwards struggled at 20 then the struggling, current 20 year old key forwards will likely end up as good key forwards.

Nope. We're going back to the argument that "it's too early to tell whether they're good or bad", therefore anyone making broad claims to either is about as unfounded as the other.