Opinion Best side 2018

[cynical]

Fair enough.

My responses below:

1. He doesn't have to ruck very well, he just has to relieve Smith, and he rucks well enough for that.
2. I wouldn't have him as a forward either.
3. Only spot needed for him in the midfield now is as second ruck.
4. I disagree. He is ranked 16th for the Cats on turnovers, and his disposal efficiency and clanger ranks are in the middle of the pack. I am not saying there isn't room for improvement, but if you are going to hack on a player you should probably apply the razor to everybody who is worse than him, right? I mean Dangerfield and Tuohy are turnover merchants, by comparison.
5. Just the same as point 3. We don't need to run him through the middle other than as back up ruck.
6. Clearly you are incorrect here. He is ranked 4th in the team for total contested marks this year. He can play the third man up role to chop out big defenders - he was the best in the league against the biggest players on the ground a year ago.
7. **** finals records. They mean jack shit - they are a tiny sample size and the ease with which you assume you can play against the best teams of the competition indicates you probably have never played finals yourself. That should cover that point on its own - but in finals where we have been smashed as a team, you blame one player? Why is the whole list not delisted next year, then?

1. Relieving Smith would be fine if he was good in another position, he isnt.
4. Don't throw useless stats at me, Blicavs mostly stops and handballs backwards or does low risk kicks. He is the lonergan of the midfield. Danger and Touhy have higher risk disposal and they aren't that good at it either.
5. Needs to do something besides backup ruck.
6. Being a tall midfielder allows you to mark over small opponents, doesn't mean he is a good contested mark against tall players. 3rd man up to ruck and playing as a 3rd tall defender who comes in to take marks are different roles. He is unproven at the 2nd.
7. I guess home and away is what matters. Tiny sample size, dont measure a player on the most important games... makes sense. Out of 10 finals he has 2 that were good. That shows that at the highest level he isnt up to it. If each player has 10 finals with 2 good games then they should all be delisted but I dont think that is the case.

 

[Ricketz]

1. Relieving Smith would be fine if he was good in another position, he isnt.
4. Don't throw useless stats at me, Blicavs mostly stops and handballs backwards or does low risk kicks. He is the lonergan of the midfield. Danger and Touhy have higher risk disposal and they aren't that good at it either.
5. Needs to do something besides backup ruck.
6. Being a tall midfielder allows you to mark over small opponents, doesn't mean he is a good contested mark against tall players. 3rd man up to ruck and playing as a 3rd tall defender who comes in to take marks are different roles. He is unproven at the 2nd.
7. I guess home and away is what matters. Tiny sample size, dont measure a player on the most important games... makes sense. Out of 10 finals he has 2 that were good. That shows that at the highest level he isnt up to it. If each player has 10 finals with 2 good games then they should all be delisted but I dont think that is the case.

1. So Smith rucks it alone next year? Or you put Buzza in there - who can't play forward either, and is a far worse ruck than Blicavs. Good job. This goes for point 5 too.
4. Don't throw useless stats - just trust your totally objective judgement? No thanks, in the absence of any evidence on your part I will trust the stats and my own judgement. I don't think he is a turnover merchant, and its up to you to prove why he is - otherwise you are just banging on about your bias.
7. I am fine with you judging players based on their finals performances - as utterly silly as it is to do so - as long as you do it to everyone else as well. So, cynical, delist the whole list next year?

 

[candiehappy]

So, cynical, delist the whole list next year?

that seems to be his point, as best as I can make out. Like him throwing a snide barb at Loners - I wonder if any backman has as good a record on Franklin?

 

[Ricketz]

that seems to be his point, as best as I can make out. Like him throwing a snide barb at Loners - I wonder if any backman has as good a record on Franklin?

That's what their position pretty much implies - but really, it is because of their lack of objectivity when assessing these players. There is no solution to getting rid of Blicavs that is a better option than retaining Blicavs. As much as people think Buzza is an exciting prospect, he cannot do the second ruck role - and unless Stanley has some form reversal, we won't be using him as second ruck either. And that leaves Hawkins or one of the untested VFL players, which is simply not going to happen next year.

 

[candiehappy]

And that leaves Hawkins or one of the untested VFL players,

God forbid that we ever needed Hawkins to go back in to the ruck. IMO ( which I would acknowledge is not worth a lot of currency), Hawkins should be standing 60 out and go from there.

 

[Ricketz]

God forbid that we ever needed Hawkins to go back in to the ruck. IMO ( which I would acknowledge is not worth a lot of currency), Hawkins should be standing 60 out and go from there.

Lol, yeah, that most definitely would not happen. I reckon we would throw Bews in before Hawkins.

 

[cynical]

1. So Smith rucks it alone next year? Or you put Buzza in there - who can't play forward either, and is a far worse ruck than Blicavs. Good job. This goes for point 5 too.
4. Don't throw useless stats - just trust your totally objective judgement? No thanks, in the absence of any evidence on your part I will trust the stats and my own judgement. I don't think he is a turnover merchant, and its up to you to prove why he is - otherwise you are just banging on about your bias.
7. I am fine with you judging players based on their finals performances - as utterly silly as it is to do so - as long as you do it to everyone else as well. So, cynical, delist the whole list next year?

Buzza is 21 and is a better forward than Blicavs.

I never said he is a turnover merchant (you seem to be good at making up things) I said he has poor disposal under pressure/decision making and generally goes for the low risk option, much like lonergan.

Can delist all the players who have a finals record of 2 good games out of 10, I think you'll find that it would only be Blicavs. Menegola with 2 good games and 3 shockers will want to improve.

that seems to be his point, as best as I can make out. Like him throwing a snide barb at Loners - I wonder if any backman has as good a record on Franklin?

Another person good at making things up. Lonergan was a great defender but has always had limited disposal, as a tall defender that is fine as a midfielder who normally plays on the wing (blicavs) it isn't.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[candiehappy]

Lonergan was a great defender but has always had limited disposal, as a tall defender that is fine as a midfielder who normally plays on the wing (blicavs) it isn't.

you seem to be comparing apples and oranges

 

[candiehappy]

Another person good at making things up

PS please provide quotes for reference.

 

[Ricketz]

Buzza is 21 and is a better forward than Blicavs.

I never said he is a turnover merchant (you seem to be good at making up things) I said he has poor disposal under pressure/decision making and generally goes for the low risk option, much like lonergan.

Can delist all the players who have a finals record of 2 good games out of 10, I think you'll find that it would only be Blicavs. Menegola with 2 good games and 3 shockers will want to improve.



Another person good at making things up. Lonergan was a great defender but has always had limited disposal, as a tall defender that is fine as a midfielder who normally plays on the wing (blicavs) it isn't.

Bollocks Buzza is a better forward. He shows promise, but his forward line stats are horrible. He scored 0.2 more goals per game and that was predominantly as forward, whereas Blicavs was rarely there. This is an irrelevant point though, because he can't ruck so you still need a backup for Smith, so who is it going to be?

So he has poor decision making and skills, but doesn't turn the ball over? You would prefer the opposite, I guess.

You would never be a list manager. Footy is way more complex than you are thinking it is and you judge on emotion rather than evidence. Ffs, sack them if they don't meet cynical's arbitrary ratio of approval in finals.

Anyway, who is second ruck for Smith? If you can name a better option than Blicavs, I will stop criticising your emotion laden judgement.

 

[cynical]

Bollocks Buzza is a better forward. He shows promise, but his forward line stats are horrible. He scored 0.2 more goals per game and that was predominantly as forward, whereas Blicavs was rarely there. This is an irrelevant point though, because he can't ruck so you still need a backup for Smith, so who is it going to be?

So he has poor decision making and skills, but doesn't turn the ball over? You would prefer the opposite, I guess.

You would never be a list manager. Footy is way more complex than you are thinking it is and you judge on emotion rather than evidence. Ffs, sack them if they don't meet cynical's arbitrary ratio of approval in finals.

Anyway, who is second ruck for Smith? If you can name a better option than Blicavs, I will stop criticising your emotion laden judgement.

Buzza provides better forward pressure as he tackles hard like Cocky does. Don't know why Blicavs isnt a ruck/forward why dont the coaches play him in that role?

Another thinly veiled insult, you are completely wrong btw. To say I judge on emotion is laughable.

I would play Buzza as second ruck and recruit some new ruck/forwards in the future. As a ruck/forward Stanley is a superior option to Blicavs. The problem with Stanley like Blicavs is that he has reached his peak and it's not that good.

Better to play kids when you cant win a flag instead of list cloggers.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

That's what their position pretty much implies - but really, it is because of their lack of objectivity when assessing these players. There is no solution to getting rid of Blicavs that is a better option than retaining Blicavs. As much as people think Buzza is an exciting prospect, he cannot do the second ruck role - and unless Stanley has some form reversal, we won't be using him as second ruck either. And that leaves Hawkins or one of the untested VFL players, which is simply not going to happen next year.

Abbott is some possibility given he is a mature age player if he shows good form and develops his forward game but other than that it's unlikely so i agree with the rest of what you say.

I agree Stanley and Buzza aren't great replacement options.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Buzza provides better forward pressure as he tackles hard like Cocky does. Don't know why Blicavs isnt a ruck/forward why dont the coaches play him in that role?

Another thinly veiled insult, you are completely wrong btw. To say I judge on emotion is laughable.

I would play Buzza as second ruck and recruit some new ruck/forwards in the future. As a ruck/forward Stanley is a superior option to Blicavs. The problem with Stanley like Blicavs is that he has reached his peak and it's not that good.

Better to play kids when you cant win a flag instead of list cloggers.

Buzza has nice potential forward but his technical ruckwork is terrible. If we had a ruck coach to improve this i might agree with you but we don't.

 

[Beanstalk]

Bit slow for mine. Especially the forward line. 0 defensive pressure outside of Cockatoo and unproven Crameri. Parsons easiest omission here.

Fogarty looks a likely type for that type of role.

 

[ChookNorris]

Fogarty looks a likely type for that type of role.

I’m feeling a similar but slightly better first year than Gregson for him.

 

[Catsmaninamerica]

I don't think anyone will take you up on that bet because he is a shoe-in to play...and that's what exasperates those that don't rate him.

No. What is exasperating is idiotic halfwits making ridiculous statements like "he won't play afl post 28" as cynical did, and then when they're called to account on those stupid posts, They go vanish like A Crows supporter on GF night.

 

[Shai]

Bit slow for mine. Especially the forward line. 0 defensive pressure outside of Cockatoo and unproven Crameri. Parsons easiest omission here.

Addressing the bolded, if he (Crameri) isn't proven at the tail end of his career, & in his 3rd club, when will he ever be.?

Parso is not 1 I would look @ as an easy omission in our fwd line but if you believe he is, that's gr8 for the club overall, right.?

 

[DanA]

Addressing the bolded, if he (Crameri) isn't proven at the tail end of his career, & in his 3rd club, when will he ever be.?

Parso is not 1 I would look @ as an easy omission in our fwd line but if you believe he is, that's gr8 for the club overall, right.?

I'd not have a problem removing Parson's from the forward line given who we've brought in. Actually, I hope the coaching staff look to push him up the ground and have him compete with the likes of Murdoch and Kelly for that outside midfield role rather than as a forward. I don't think we've got a lot of genuine outside mids in the squad and IMO he's got a better chance of making a regular contribution in that sort of role. As a small forward he's done alright but I don't think he has a long-term future in the position. Whereas I do think some of the others we've brought in are better suited to that role and will help us improve.

 

[DanA]

1. Relieving Smith would be fine if he was good in another position, he isnt.
4. Don't throw useless stats at me, Blicavs mostly stops and handballs backwards or does low risk kicks. He is the lonergan of the midfield. Danger and Touhy have higher risk disposal and they aren't that good at it either.
5. Needs to do something besides backup ruck.
6. Being a tall midfielder allows you to mark over small opponents, doesn't mean he is a good contested mark against tall players. 3rd man up to ruck and playing as a 3rd tall defender who comes in to take marks are different roles. He is unproven at the 2nd.
7. I guess home and away is what matters. Tiny sample size, dont measure a player on the most important games... makes sense. Out of 10 finals he has 2 that were good. That shows that at the highest level he isnt up to it. If each player has 10 finals with 2 good games then they should all be delisted but I dont think that is the case.

You said he isn't good in another position, why can't his 2nd position be to tag big slow midfielders and drag mismatched small midfielders forward and take marks over them?

 

[cynical]

You said he isn't good in another position, why can't his 2nd position be to tag big slow midfielders and drag mismatched small midfielders forward and take marks over them?

Not every team has big slow midfielders, I mean successful tag jobs from Blicavs includes Pendles and Kennedy, I cant think of many others.

The problem with our midfield is it lacks outside class so when Blicavs gets gifted a spot on the wing it diminishes our outside run and disposal. He really needs to be an inside midfielder but as an inside mid he doesnt get enough of the ball. 16.2 disposals a game for an inside mid is terrible.

For a mid to be getting those kinds of numbers you'd want their possessions to be something special.

As far as him dragging small mids forward and out marking them it's a useful attribute but he just doesnt have the breakaway pace or the silky skills our midfield is lacking. If we had a heap of outside players but lacked size in the midfield then Blicavs would be suited but we already have enough big bodies in there.

I'd rather have the likes of Kelly or Thurlow playing on the wings over Blicavs.

 

[Matthew Jelley]

From what I've seen/read of Abbot id love him to get some JLT games to show what he can do.
Pretty excited about the new recruits too, if anyone warrants selection then good times ahead

 

[DanA]

Not every team has big slow midfielders, I mean successful tag jobs from Blicavs includes Pendles and Kennedy, I cant think of many others.

The problem with our midfield is it lacks outside class so when Blicavs gets gifted a spot on the wing it diminishes our outside run and disposal. He really needs to be an inside midfielder but as an inside mid he doesnt get enough of the ball. 16.2 disposals a game for an inside mid is terrible.

For a mid to be getting those kinds of numbers you'd want their possessions to be something special.

As far as him dragging small mids forward and out marking them it's a useful attribute but he just doesnt have the breakaway pace or the silky skills our midfield is lacking. If we had a heap of outside players but lacked size in the midfield then Blicavs would be suited but we already have enough big bodies in there.

I'd rather have the likes of Kelly or Thurlow playing on the wings over Blicavs.

Not all have the ideal matchup but most teams have somebody:
Adelaide: Gibbs
GWS: Ward
Dogs: Bontempelli
Sydney: Kennedy
Collingwood: Pendlebury
Port: Wines
Melbourne: Oliver
etc

There's probably not a natural one for Richmond or the Saints but most other contenders have that bigger bodied slow midfielder. They're not all jets like Danger and Dusty. And 16.2 possessions isn't high enough for an offensive inside mid but it is for a tagger and that primarily what Blicavs has done. Ben Jacobs and Crowley averaged 14.5 possessions per game or thereabouts, Blicavs is kind of the norm. As long as he can shut down a good player and kick a few (he kicked 12 last season) then I think he's adding value.

I agree we need more outside pace enough and that things need to change from last years setup which I think was overly tall. I'd just address it differently. I'd be happy with Menzel at FF, Hawkins at CHF and then a bunch of smaller pacey guys surrounding them, they generally push up the ground anyway so whether they start on the wing or flank isn't a big factor IMO.

But what I'd advocate would be only one KPF (Hawkins), one ruck (Smith) and two KPD's (Henderson, Taylor) which creates a situation where Blicavs can push forward and create a mismatch. You can't put a KPD on him because he's going to win that battle as an inside mid and you can't have a small midfielder on him because he's going to drift forward and dominate in the air.

I'd set a benchmark for Blicavs next season of 18 possessions, 9 hit-outs, 5 tackles and 1 goal average a game. IMO for a player that is playing a fair bit in a run with role, that would be a highly successful output.

 

[ChookNorris]

Addressing the bolded, if he (Crameri) isn't proven at the tail end of his career, & in his 3rd club, when will he ever be.?

Parso is not 1 I would look @ as an easy omission in our fwd line but if you believe he is, that's gr8 for the club overall, right.?

Unproven in regard to his body and wether or not he can reach his previous levels of football.

 

[foxdog50]

Well here my thought
FB Jed Bews Lachie Henderson Jake Kolodjashni
HB Zach Tuohy Harry Taylor Tom Stewart
C Mitch Duncan Gary Ablett Cam Guthrie
HF Nakia Cockatoo Tom Hawkins Tim Kelly
F Dan Menzal Stewart Crameri Lincon McCarthy
R Zac Smith Patrick Dangerfield Joel Selwood
Int Scott Selwood Mark Blicavs Sam Menegola Brendan Parfitt
EMG Wylie Buzza Corey Gregson Jordan Murdoch George Horlin Smith (Still love you George )

Interchange spots don't really me much as there on the field with in 5 min

Why i put Tim Kelly in there, just by what i read on him, haven't seen him play but need a bit of leg speed on the flank

I really hope to see they play Ryan Gardner and Time House a few games next year as we really need to give these guys time as they could be our KDF in years to come

Play Zac Smith as our main ruck with Blitz as our 2nd Ruck

I really hope Rhys Stanley proves us all wrong and has a break out year, we all know he could be something.

Plus also Buzza gets a few games as if Hawkins gets injured or rubbed out we need to give him games