Opinion Best side 2018

[Cataholic]

Cockatoo averages 9.47 disposals a game over 3 years and 31 games that's his career so far to date.
Murdoch did 17 last year so he has improved by comparison stats v stats.
That's the comparison, are they improving yr by yr looking at stats.
Murdoch seems to be doing that.

JM is 25, NC is 21

JM was drafted 2011, NC in 2014

JM has played 92 games, NC only 32

 

[Partridge]

So its fair for Murdoch to be evaluated on his third season, but Cocky has to have his first and second seasons included in his numbers as well? Poor form.

No the point was both averaged a goal a game in their third season - Cockatoo this year and Murdoch in 2014. Both definitely indicate promise but you would hope for further improvement.

 

[Dawn to Dark]

Full Backs: Jake Kolodjashnijj - Lachlan Henderson - Jed Bews

Half Backs: Tom Stewart - Harry Taylor - Zac Thuoy

Centre/Wing: Nakia Cockatoo - Scott Selwood - Mitch Duncan

Half Forwards: Tim Kelly - Tom Hawkins - Sam Menegola

Full Forwards: Lincoln McCarthy - Stewart Crameri - Patrick Dangerfield

Rucks: Zac Smith - Joel Selwood - Gary Ablett

Interchange: Brandon Parfitt - Cameron Guthrie - Daniel Menzel - Mark Blicavs

 

[Landgraft]

No the point was both averaged a goal a game in their third season - Cockatoo this year and Murdoch in 2014. Both definitely indicate promise but you would hope for further improvement.

Excerpt of course that Murdoch had a clear run all season, never kicking more than 2 in a match and averaging less than one goal per game. Cocky averaged more than a goal a game and scored 3 in a game where he did injure himself. The similarities are pretty superficial imo.

 

[Ratcat]

Excerpt of course that Murdoch had a clear run all season, never kicking more than 2 in a match and averaging less than one goal per game. Cocky averaged more than a goal a game and scored 3 in a game where he did injure himself. The similarities are pretty superficial imo.

Cockatoo averages .74 of a goal per game over 31 games so far.

 

[Landgraft]

Cockatoo averages .74 of a goal per game over 31 games so far.

We are comparing numbers for third seasons, so that has no bearing on the discussion.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Right. Anyone with best 22's or more obsessed dribblings about Cocky being overhyped

 

[Seeds]

Right. Anyone with best 22's or more obsessed dribblings about Cocky being overhyped

If Cocky doesnt breakdown this year (including preseason) he will be in our top five players come seasons end.

 

[Cool Cat]

All analogies are flawed to some degree. Some get riled up when comparing sport to war etc. and again I can see there is a point where there is no comparison at all... my thinking in trying to impart with war analogy was simply how there is an action and a reaction and there is no go back. I disagree that it was a purely tech issue. The change in tech caused a change in tactics..yes ... and one may say that about training methods etc in footy. The tech involved , the k's monitored , the work loads , the rotations etc etc have changed what was once the seen as cutting edge.... but there is no doubt that tech directly affects combat more than footy. Its more indirect in footy. Could they play the modern game on grounds that were presented in the 60's or 70's? Wet and muddy games are rare these days and certainly changes game style.

The 2007 V 2017 debate is of course impossible to tell. Id say the 2007 side trying play as it did..V 2017 side trying to play as it did would cause us great issues. We tend to focus on the GF and the obliteration of Port ..and tend to forget how close a Malthouse side got to us. And Rich would most certainly be better than that Pies group.

I reckon we would paste them nine times out of ten on pure talent. And I think that Collingwood team was at least on the way to becoming a better side than any of the current contenders. I just think that the overall standards are a bit low at the moment. However, you may be right and the tactics may have brought us undone two or three times out of the ten fictional encounters, but I still think the great team full of great players (from the not too distant past) overcomes the average team.

However, I would never argue that tactics aren’t important. Cats 2007 list was ultra-talented and would probably have swept all before it if it were magically transported to 2016/17 and trained in the modern methods etc. - same with St Kilda, Collingwood, hawks etc from that period, it was just a stronger era with better teams than what we have been watching for the last four or five years, in my opinion anyway.

No problem with your military analogy btw, I thought it was interesting which is why I responded.

 

[Turbocat]

I reckon we would paste them nine times out of ten on pure talent. And I think that Collingwood team was at least on the way to becoming a better side than any of the current contenders. I just think that the overall standards are a bit low at the moment. However, you may be right and the tactics may have brought us undone two or three times out of the ten fictional encounters, but I still think the great team full of great players (from the not too distant past) overcomes the average team.

However, I would never argue that tactics aren’t important. Cats 2007 list was ultra-talented and would probably have swept all before it if it were magically transported to 2016/17 and trained in the modern methods etc. - same with St Kilda, Collingwood, hawks etc from that period, it was just a stronger era with better teams than what we have been watching for the last four or five years, in my opinion anyway.

No problem with your military analogy btw, I thought it was interesting which is why I responded.

Its always very difficult to compare different era due to what worked in one , did not in another. I think I could could say without doubt that Coleman would not have kicked goals now like he did in his era ..and he was probably as talented as any forward. One could look at dominant individuals in a lot of eras ..and some would transfer into todays footy well.. others not so much. Its speculation .. how much could they adapt to todays demands. Just like I doubt Bradman would have the 99 average in todays Cricket playing so often and all over the place .. some players from the past would just not cope with todays demands. How would Nichols and Polly go now..where would they play. Even Locket has said he would struggle today and he was the best FF I ever saw. What about GWilliams or Harvey being asked to rotate off when they based some of their game on just keep going and run the other guy off their game..... there would be a heap of ordinary players who would better today as well and some players today would have been better then. Hawkins for example.

And so many of the great teams in the past had those players. Never saw Melb in the 50's ... Hafeys Richmond was in an era of the vic mafia.. but it was a very low tech era then .. and the 70's were not much better.. the often used adage about long bomb to snake for eg. How about Carlton in 1979-1982 ... with their much vaunted mosquito fleet and well known off ground rebel rousing ... Haw in the 70's and 80s were close to an State team.. 88-91 .. and West Coast were talented but were certainly helped by some tech additives in the 90's ... and The Lions of 01-03 .. the closer it gets to todays era one gains perspective... but the game has changed at a brutal rate. I looked at some vision of the 07 GF recently and it was astounding at how big the ground seemed , how spread out the players still were.

So many players get recruited to play a certain style that pure football talent from days gone by might not even be able to play the high rotation velocity game of today...or at least not be as influential. How many players from today..would last in the one umpire square up type game that it was then...

That GWS as yet has not gone all the way probably demonstrates how much the tactics can reduce the input of talent. Im not saying the game is better for it. The final we played V Rich was awful to watch ..probably shows that although their style won , their talent was not enough to really make it entertaining( in my eyes)

All this go's back to my idea that I would not be surprised to see a Fogerty be in our "Best22" earlier than one may have thought. His defensive pressure and attacking defensive play will suit todays footy probably better than some more skilled taken before him in the draft.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yah... Best available is a cop out. Its such a fine line between players that 18 experts may well have 18 different players at the Rookie level.

Using the rookie list as a way to pick locally is frankly nonsense.
You pick the player you believe to be the best fit for YOUR club, regardless of any other factor.

 

[Nickoo]

Its always very difficult to compare different era due to what worked in one , did not in another. I think I could could say without doubt that Coleman would not have kicked goals now like he did in his era ..and he was probably as talented as any forward. One could look at dominant individuals in a lot of eras ..and some would transfer into todays footy well.. others not so much. Its speculation .. how much could they adapt to todays demands. Just like I doubt Bradman would have the 99 average in todays Cricket playing so often and all over the place .. some players from the past would just not cope with todays demands. How would Nichols and Polly go now..where would they play. Even Locket has said he would struggle today and he was the best FF I ever saw. What about GWilliams or Harvey being asked to rotate off when they based some of their game on just keep going and run the other guy off their game..... there would be a heap of ordinary players who would better today as well and some players today would have been better then. Hawkins for example.

And so many of the great teams in the past had those players. Never saw Melb in the 50's ... Hafeys Richmond was in an era of the vic mafia.. but it was a very low tech era then .. and the 70's were not much better.. the often used adage about long bomb to snake for eg. How about Carlton in 1979-1982 ... with their much vaunted mosquito fleet and well known off ground rebel rousing ... Haw in the 70's and 80s were close to an State team.. 88-91 .. and West Coast were talented but were certainly helped by some tech additives in the 90's ... and The Lions of 01-03 .. the closer it gets to todays era one gains perspective... but the game has changed at a brutal rate. I looked at some vision of the 07 GF recently and it was astounding at how big the ground seemed , how spread out the players still were.

So many players get recruited to play a certain style that pure football talent from days gone by might not even be able to play the high rotation velocity game of today...or at least not be as influential. How many players from today..would last in the one umpire square up type game that it was then...

That GWS as yet has not gone all the way probably demonstrates how much the tactics can reduce the input of talent. Im not saying the game is better for it. The final we played V Rich was awful to watch ..probably shows that although their style won , their talent was not enough to really make it entertaining( in my eyes)

All this go's back to my idea that I would not be surprised to see a Fogerty be in our "Best22" earlier than one may have thought. His defensive pressure and attacking defensive play will suit todays footy probably better than some more skilled taken before him in the draft.

Excellent post!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Turbocat]

Using the rookie list as a way to pick locally is frankly nonsense.
You pick the player you believe to be the best fit for YOUR club, regardless of any other factor.

Its non sense to say pick best available when there are so many different factors that divide opinions on players ... and unless there is such an outstanding candidate that has flyed under the radar somehow.. there will be an ants ear between 100's of choices... and if there is only slight hardly discernible difference between players I don't see why it makes sense to draft a WA kid for eg , if the local is there and may develop just as well.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Its non sense to say pick best available when there are so many different factors that divide opinions on players ... and unless there is such an outstanding candidate that has flyed under the radar somehow.. there will be an ants ear between 100's of choices... and if there is only slight hardly discernible difference between players I don't see why it makes sense to draft a WA kid for eg , if the local is there and may develop just as well.

You've clearly misunderstood me, I thought 'YOUR' was clearer but maybe I didn't articulate it well enough.
I meant your as in "in the opinion of individual clubs", so in practice if Stephen Wells deems an SA kid to be a better rookie prospect for HIS club than some local then pick best available.

The nepotism of selecting local isn't based on meritocracy as a way of thinking. Select local if that young kid is the best for what you're (i.e Wells) is after.

 

[Turbocat]

You've clearly misunderstood me, I thought 'YOUR' was clearer but maybe I didn't articulate it well enough.
I meant your as in "in the opinion of individual clubs", so in practice if Stephen Wells deems an SA kid to be a better rookie prospect for HIS club than some local then pick best available.

The nepotism of selecting local isn't based on meritocracy as a way of thinking. Select local if that young kid is the best for what you're (i.e Wells) is after.

I disagree with the thrust but what a loverly turn a phrase ... well done Dr.

We are talking only opinion and your / my opinion..its all just opinion. ..and mine is there are a multitude of criteria that a player is assessed on. You do not rate locality as a criteria worthy of consideration where as I do. When we are talking players at that end of the draft Id probably would prefer to try find the talent locally especially as its plus 100 odd players picked. Most will be hard pressed to get a game. ...unless there is a real slipper. Say if Kelly did not get picked ..obviously if Wells was prepared to use a pick in the 20's on him ..and a player of that worth misses getting picked somehow I could see how he would pick him .. I have concerns about us using our pick on him but they obviously think he is worth the risk.

Its all about degrees... I do not think we should pick a no talent local if we didn't even rate the player a chance just because he is a local .. but it seems more often than not Falcons or some VicC kid that was rated misses out.

 

[Cool Cat]

Its always very difficult to compare different era due to what worked in one , did not in another. I think I could could say without doubt that Coleman would not have kicked goals now like he did in his era ..and he was probably as talented as any forward. One could look at dominant individuals in a lot of eras ..and some would transfer into todays footy well.. others not so much. Its speculation .. how much could they adapt to todays demands. Just like I doubt Bradman would have the 99 average in todays Cricket playing so often and all over the place .. some players from the past would just not cope with todays demands. How would Nichols and Polly go now..where would they play. Even Locket has said he would struggle today and he was the best FF I ever saw. What about GWilliams or Harvey being asked to rotate off when they based some of their game on just keep going and run the other guy off their game..... there would be a heap of ordinary players who would better today as well and some players today would have been better then. Hawkins for example.

And so many of the great teams in the past had those players. Never saw Melb in the 50's ... Hafeys Richmond was in an era of the vic mafia.. but it was a very low tech era then .. and the 70's were not much better.. the often used adage about long bomb to snake for eg. How about Carlton in 1979-1982 ... with their much vaunted mosquito fleet and well known off ground rebel rousing ... Haw in the 70's and 80s were close to an State team.. 88-91 .. and West Coast were talented but were certainly helped by some tech additives in the 90's ... and The Lions of 01-03 .. the closer it gets to todays era one gains perspective... but the game has changed at a brutal rate. I looked at some vision of the 07 GF recently and it was astounding at how big the ground seemed , how spread out the players still were.

So many players get recruited to play a certain style that pure football talent from days gone by might not even be able to play the high rotation velocity game of today...or at least not be as influential. How many players from today..would last in the one umpire square up type game that it was then...

That GWS as yet has not gone all the way probably demonstrates how much the tactics can reduce the input of talent. Im not saying the game is better for it. The final we played V Rich was awful to watch ..probably shows that although their style won , their talent was not enough to really make it entertaining( in my eyes)

All this go's back to my idea that I would not be surprised to see a Fogerty be in our "Best22" earlier than one may have thought. His defensive pressure and attacking defensive play will suit todays footy probably better than some more skilled taken before him in the draft.

Great post. Yes unfortunately footy is definitely at its lowest ebb at the moment. I am mid-40s so can remember footy pretty well back to around 1980ish, and the game has never been poorer to watch. I’m still waiting for someone to revolutionise things, the 2007 cats did briefly but were eventually beaten by tactics, although the fact that they still squeezed that final flag out in 2011 at least suggests that their overwhelming talent, rather than just their game style, was central to their success.

Game styles were created to overcome ours (Collingwood and St Kilda), and then other teams beat them, and so it moves on. I don’t think that that necessarily means that all that has come before, tactically speaking, has been superseded though, just that one team found a way to beat another, then another team found a way to beat them. Rock, paper, scissors as you said.

I’m still waiting for someone to plonk a big mobile forward in the goal square and have them lead straight and hard, I’m not sure how effective zone defenders drifting back into space would go up against an unmanned Lockett type coming at them with a head of steam up. And of course Carey dominated an open forward line only one generation ago. Maybe this is a bit nostalgic and unrealistic, and coaches are obsessed with whole team defence at the moment, but eventually something will change and it can’t come soon enough as far as I’m concerned.

 

[Landgraft]

Great post. Yes unfortunately footy is definitely at its lowest ebb at the moment. I am mid-40s so can remember footy pretty well back to around 1980ish, and the game has never been poorer to watch. I’m still waiting for someone to revolutionise things, the 2007 cats did briefly but were eventually beaten by tactics, although the fact that they still squeezed that final flag out in 2011 at least suggests that their overwhelming talent, rather than just their game style, was central to their success.

Game styles were created to overcome ours (Collingwood and St Kilda), and then other teams beat them, and so it moves on. I don’t think that that necessarily means that all that has come before, tactically speaking, has been superseded though, just that one team found a way to beat another, then another team found a way to beat them. Rock, paper, scissors as you said.

I’m still waiting for someone to plonk a big mobile forward in the goal square and have them lead straight and hard, I’m not sure how effective zone defenders drifting back into space would go up against an unmanned Lockett type coming at them with a head of steam up. And of course Carey dominated an open forward line only one generation ago. Maybe this is a bit nostalgic and unrealistic, and coaches are obsessed with whole team defence at the moment, but eventually something will change and it can’t come soon enough as far as I’m concerned.

I think we saw the first glimpses of something like that when Danger played through injury against Hawthorn and stayed deep. A true full forward can drag his opponent too deep to remain connected with the team defence while still threatening the goals.

 

[Turbocat]

Great post. Yes unfortunately footy is definitely at its lowest ebb at the moment. I am mid-40s so can remember footy pretty well back to around 1980ish, and the game has never been poorer to watch. I’m still waiting for someone to revolutionise things, the 2007 cats did briefly but were eventually beaten by tactics, although the fact that they still squeezed that final flag out in 2011 at least suggests that their overwhelming talent, rather than just their game style, was central to their success.

Game styles were created to overcome ours (Collingwood and St Kilda), and then other teams beat them, and so it moves on. I don’t think that that necessarily means that all that has come before, tactically speaking, has been superseded though, just that one team found a way to beat another, then another team found a way to beat them. Rock, paper, scissors as you said.

I’m still waiting for someone to plonk a big mobile forward in the goal square and have them lead straight and hard, I’m not sure how effective zone defenders drifting back into space would go up against an unmanned Lockett type coming at them with a head of steam up. And of course Carey dominated an open forward line only one generation ago. Maybe this is a bit nostalgic and unrealistic, and coaches are obsessed with whole team defence at the moment, but eventually something will change and it can’t come soon enough as far as I’m concerned.

If Danger was abetter setshot ..he could be the guy who could break the paradigm. Generally even when a Bow and Arrow is considered primordial , under certain conditions it can still be a successful weapon ..but would it be sustainable?

 

[Deep]

Until I see genuine results Cockatoo is without a doubt overhyped. In saying that I do think he will be able to match that hype but it remains to be seen

 

[getgaff]

Pardon the intrusion Cattery but thought I'd offer an outsiders thoughts on the Cats Best 22 in 2018

FULL BACK: Jed Bews ~ Lachie Henderson ~ Jake Kolodjashnij
HALF BACK: Zach Tuohy ~ Harry Taylor ~ Tom Stewart
CENTRE: Mitch Duncan ~ Joel Selwood ~ Nakia Cockatoo
HALF FORWARD: Sam Menegola ~ Stewart Crameri ~ Gary Ablett
FULL FORWARD: Brandon Parfitt ~ Tom Hawkins ~ Tim Kelly
1st RUCK: Zac Smith ~ Scott Selwood ~ Patrick Dangerfield
INTERCHANGE: Daniel Menzel ~ Cameron Guthrie ~ Mark Blicavs ~ Jackson Thurlow/ James Parsons

• Defence is pretty settled with Guthrie able to play lock down back there as well. Zac Guthrie has shown promise as a lock down defender also and could be brought in if required.

• As tempting as it is to throw Dangerwoodlett into the starting midfield I don't think it's that neccesary especially with the natural progression of Cockatoo. Use Ablett in that second string midfield with Menegola and maybe Tim Kelly.

• Given Crameri first crack alongside Hawkins but that could well be Buzza as well.

• Parfitt and Kelly gets first crack at the small forward but AFL experienced players like McCarthy, Gregson will be around the mark as well as maybe the first year players like Lochie Fogarty and Gryan Miers

 

[Deep]

Pardon the intrusion Cattery but thought I'd offer an outsiders thoughts on the Cats Best 22 in 2018

FULL BACK: Jed Bews ~ Lachie Henderson ~ Jake Kolodjashnij
HALF BACK: Zach Tuohy ~ Harry Taylor ~ Tom Stewart
CENTRE: Mitch Duncan ~ Joel Selwood ~ Nakia Cockatoo
HALF FORWARD: Sam Menegola ~ Stewart Crameri ~ Gary Ablett
FULL FORWARD: Brandon Parfitt ~ Tom Hawkins ~ Tim Kelly
1st RUCK: Zac Smith ~ Scott Selwood ~ Patrick Dangerfield
INTERCHANGE: Daniel Menzel ~ Cameron Guthrie ~ Mark Blicavs ~ Jackson Thurlow/ James Parsons

• Defence is pretty settled with Guthrie able to play lock down back there as well. Zac Guthrie has shown promise as a lock down defender also and could be brought in if required.

• As tempting as it is to throw Dangerwoodlett into the starting midfield I don't think it's that neccesary especially with the natural progression of Cockatoo. Use Ablett in that second string midfield with Menegola and maybe Tim Kelly.

• Given Crameri first crack alongside Hawkins but that could well be Buzza as well.

• Parfitt and Kelly gets first crack at the small forward but AFL experienced players like McCarthy, Gregson will be around the mark as well as maybe the first year players like Lochie Fogarty and Gryan Miers

Solid post would be interested in you doing this for other teams also and if you have then for the links

Reward -freebie likes

 

[getgaff]

Solid post would be interested in you doing this for other teams also and if you have then for the links

Reward -freebie likes

Cheers Deep

Not that fazed for the likes, not why i do it really. Do it just through interest i guess and my footy brain that rarely isn't ticking over even in the off season.

Adelaide to Carlton

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/your-teams-best-22-round-1-2018.1181838/page-14#post-53682746

Some ideas may have changed since my thoughts in early December with feedback taken on board etc.

BRISBANE - IN: Robertson, OUT: Gardiner
IN: Lester (BENCH) ~ McStay CHB ~ Andrews FB, OUT: Frost

CARLTON - FB: Lachie Plowman ~ Liam Jones ~ Cairan Byrne
HB: Caleb Marchbank ~ Jacob Weitering ~ Kade Simpson
INT: Cam O'Shea/ David Cuningham/ Paddy Dow (1 of)

Not 100% set on Dale Thomas as best 22 anymore either.

 

[getgaff]

Solid post would be interested in you doing this for other teams also and if you have then for the links

Reward -freebie likes

Collingwood TO Fremantle

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/your-teams-best-22-round-1-2018.1181838/page-14#post-53715899

Collingwood are unchanged to what I've got except for Reid and Moore. Constantly chopping and changing them between CHB and CHF. Can understand the desire to play Moore as a defender on the better forwards of the game to improve his forward craft, almost a reverse Harry Taylor but think his best use is forward.

Essendon: The same except Kobe Mutch comes into the 22 (bench) for Guelfi.

Fremantle: Ethan Hughes to defence replacing Spurr/ Sutcliffe.
Tucker currently the last bench spot ahead of Ed Langdon.

 

[getgaff]

Geelong to GWS

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/your-teams-best-22-round-1-2018.1181838/page-15#post-53798192

Geelong: Unchanged to what I posted at the moment

Gold Coast: 22 is unchanged but may see some positional changes over the pre season.

GWS: Unchanged to what is there. Trying to find where Tomlinson best fits and hopefully settles.

 

[Cool Cat]

If Danger was abetter setshot ..he could be the guy who could break the paradigm. Generally even when a Bow and Arrow is considered primordial , under certain conditions it can still be a successful weapon ..but would it be sustainable?

He is our best option for full forward now that we have Garry in midfield. Not sure if Scott would be bold (or mad) enough to go with this as more than a once in a while thing though (kinda like a plan b ha ha), he is very invested in the whole team defence thing, as is the entire competition.