Prediction Changes round five

[Apex36]

But Lions supporters assured us he wouldn’t front up?!

How could anyone possibly be happy not playing for the Bears? He has the mental healths, he does.

 

[Scodog10]

Stop Neale, we win, we might anyway but why chance it. I think Greenwood should play.

Great that Beams is back. But we still should get Greenwood in to tag Neale.

For his 155 possessions this year (38.8 per game) Neale is going at a remarkable rate of 50% of his possessions being contested and is also dominating clearances averaging 9 a game (next best Zorko 4.5 per game) and 3.8 centre clearances a game (next best Martin with 1.8 per game).

We can beat them with Neale playing unhindered... but cut Neale's influence in half and we are all but guaranteed of winning because they don't have another player who will step up and influence a game to the same level.

I’m really not convinced about this. I have a foot in the tag Neale camp, but there is absolutely no way it’s this cut and dried.

The match committee would be asking questions like what if we send Greenwood to Neale and he doesn’t nullify him? How do we then use Greenwood? What are Neale’s ball winning zones? Does he accumulate like Mitchell with one two’s or is it like Beamer where it’s contest to contest? What does locking down on one guy look like for the rest of our stoppage structure? Can we achieve the same result at the contest by going bigger around the ball?

The other question for me is can we deny him and the rest of their midfield enough ball with a different mix? For mine Neale is going to get 30 no matter who you sit on him because of how he wins the ball, but if you have him up against a Sier or Wills/ Beams/ Pendles at every stoppage he’s not going to have the influence he would otherwise have against a smaller midfield.

There’s lots of factors and analysis that go into a decision like this.

 

[nahnah]

I’m really not convinced about this. I have a foot in the tag Neale camp, but there is absolutely no way it’s this cut and dried.

The match committee would be asking questions like what if we send Greenwood to Neale and he doesn’t nullify him? How do we then use Greenwood? What are Neale’s ball winning zones? Does he accumulate like Mitchell with one two’s or is it like Beamer where it’s contest to contest? What does locking down on one guy look like for the rest of our stoppage structure? Can we achieve the same result at the contest by going bigger around the ball?

The other question for me is can we deny him and the rest of their midfield enough ball with a different mix? For mine Neale is going to get 30 no matter who you sit on him because of how he wins the ball, but if you have him up against a Sier or Wills/ Beams/ Pendles at every stoppage he’s not going to have the influence he would otherwise have against a smaller midfield.

There’s lots of factors and analysis that go into a decision like this.

Agree I don’t see the point in tagging him, he’s going to get his 35. Just put Adams head to head with Neale as he’s probably our best defensive mid that wins clearances too

 

[Anzacday]

The match committee would be asking questions like what if we send Greenwood to Neale and he doesn’t nullify him? How do we then use Greenwood?

Bucks said yesterday he has been trained up as a half back.

 

[Scodog10]

Agree I don’t see the point in tagging him, he’s going to get his 35. Just put Adams head to head with Neale as he’s probably our best defensive mid that wins clearances too

I think if I’m putting time into him and not going with Greenwood I’d choose Pendles.

He’s a guy that can defend one on one, won’t get lost in traffic and can punish him going the other way. It’s also not something Brisbane would be expecting and Pendles is an absolute pro so he’d get the job done.

The rider to either in that role for me is adding Beams and Wills/ Sier. I just can’t accept that we’re a better team with Brown in there ahead of either of them given our first month.

 

[Scodog10]

Bucks said yesterday he has been trained up as a half back.

Yet they used him fwd v WC to no effect. The next question would be why would we shoehorn a guy that was being beaten on the night into our best performing line?.. I would also add that ball use then becomes a huge question mark on him down back.

 

[Deleted member 133504]

Whilst we are pretty significant, I'm not sure if you, me and Unplugged can be descrijbed as Bigfooty.

Good point. Got to be the Carlton board. That's where all the laughs are at. The only thing keeps people coming back, no matter how sh!thouse your day has been

 

[Deleted member 133504]

Nope we won that game. Round 9, 2017 when Mitchell had 50 but we won in that massive 40 point comeback.

That game gave me priapism. Fair dinkum. Beating the Dawks will do that.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Stop Neale, we win, we might anyway but why chance it. I think Greenwood should play.

Cant argue with that line of thinking either.

I'd like Brown to get a chance to back up and I think our midfield depth will outnumber Brisbane.

Arguments both ways and the "pick Greenwood" argument is probably safer and more conservative.

 

[BringouttheGimp]

If we lose this man.. I f swear man.. I will shove 2 D size batteries up my nostrils.. and go.. 'hey everyone look at me man.. look at me man.. hahaha'.

I have f had it.. that's it for me man.

 

[magpies42]

Stephenson has upside

No doubt, players should still be picked on merit. Knowing you’re an automatic pick every week is not good for a developing player.

What’s not to say Aish has upside? He’s being played out of position.

Just saying the coaches know best, and if he’s picked I’ll back him in and especially since he ain’t doing all that much wrong. Nobody know what role he has been designated.

 

[sr36]

No doubt, players should still be picked on merit. Knowing you’re an automatic pick every week is not good for a developing player.

What’s not to say Aish has upside? He’s being played out of position.

Just saying the coaches know best, and if he’s picked I’ll back him in and especially since he ain’t doing all that much wrong. Nobody know what role he has been designated.

Aish has been solid. Boring, but solid. If he's our weakest link there's not much to worry about. But im not sure why you're pointing the finger at Stephenson. He isn’t yet setting the world on fire like we hope and think he will, but he's performed on par or above the other small forwards.

 

[mike123]

Aish has been solid. Boring, but solid. If he's our weakest link there's not much to worry about. But im not sure why you're pointing the finger at Stephenson. He isn’t yet setting the world on fire like we hope and think he will, but he's performed on par or above the other small forwards.

Being boring but solid is fine. The problem is we have allot of players who are boring but solid down back in Roughead, Maynard and Langdon and Howe(other than the odd hanger). As a boring but solid player he offers the least out of that group. We need more players with flair and take the game on and give us some run and carry. Aish is most logical one that should make way for one of those types.

 

[Thatsmyname]

2 players would transform us, a genuine key forward (can't do anything about that right now) and a quick playmaker off half back. It's time to put the gallop back in half back, it's Q time!

 

[sr36]

Being boring but solid is fine. The problem is we have allot of players who are boring but solid down back in Roughead, Maynard and Langdon and Howe(other than the odd hanger). As a boring but solid player he offers the least out of that group. We need more players with flair and take the game on and give us some run and carry. Aish is most logical one that should make way for one of those types.

I don't disagree, but to me we are top heavy in defence, so it it's Roughhead id replace, despite him playing perfectly solid footy.

 

[Thatsmyname]

I don't disagree, but to me we are top heavy in defence, so it it's Roughhead id replace, despite him playing perfectly solid footy.

He's a godsend to tell you the truth, no Dunn, Schaz back half of year and not a real key anyway.

 

[sr36]

He's a godsend to tell you the truth, no Dunn, Schaz back half of year and not a real key anyway.

View attachment 656070

No idea what that table is showing.

 

[Thatsmyname]

No idea what that table is showing.

AFL player ratings

https://twitter.com/AFLPlayerRating

And just by numbers alone he's a mobile 200cm 100kg key defender averaging over 13 disposals and 8 marks, god if we only had him last year.

 

[sr36]

AFL player ratings

https://twitter.com/AFLPlayerRating

And just by numbers alone he's a mobile 200cm 100kg key defender averaging over 13 disposals and 8 marks, god if we only had him last year.

I still don't know what those numbers mean, but if Roughhead is measured as the 3rd best Collingwood player this year and the 78th best player in the league, they are using a faulty ruler.

He's been solid.

Moore alone would have been enough for last year.

Considering we've been chipping the ball sideways and backwards so much in our defence, 13 possessions sounds pretty low to me.
He's fine, I just want an extra ground level player as I think we are looking really vulnerable at the fall of the ball and I prefer Moore and Howe to him and think Langdon is a very good medium whose biggest strength is in the air.

 

[CFC2010]

Our defense will not be changed irrespective of how boring it is people.

Aish ain’t getting dropped.

 

[Thatsmyname]

I still don't know what those numbers mean, but if Roughhead is measured as the 3rd best Collingwood player this year and the 78th best player in the league, they are using a faulty ruler.

He's been solid.

Moore alone would have been enough for last year.

Considering we've been chipping the ball sideways and backwards so much in our defence, 13 possessions sounds pretty low to me.
He's fine, I just want an extra ground level player as I think we are looking really vulnerable at the fall of the ball and I prefer Moore and Howe to him and think Langdon is a very good medium whose biggest strength is in the air.

It's pretty clear no matter what numbers you use he is playing good footy and won't be dropped. He's not the problem, he's playing his position perfectly. It's the run out of the back line that's killing us and replacing Roughy with the next best defender (which on form would be a slightly more mobile Appleby) does nothing to fix it.

 

[sr36]

It's pretty clear no matter what numbers you use he is playing good footy and won't be dropped. He's not the problem, he's playing his position perfectly. It's the run out of the back line that's killing us and replacing Roughy with the next best defender (which on form would be a slightly more mobile Appleby) does nothing to fix it.

I'm talking about mopping up ground ball spills as much as run. It's looking a weakness and that weve got too many blokes flying and not enough at ground level.

I agree that it doesn't look remotely likely that Roughhead will be left out and that he isn’t a problem. I just like the other aerialists more. It's just an area where I disagree with the coaches and I daresay most other Pie fans. The balance is wrong and we've gone overkill in the air and underkill at ground level. I'd be happy for us to cop an occasional extra contested mark by replacing Roughy with an extra ground ball player.

 

[Thatsmyname]

I'm talking about mopping up ground ball spills as much as run. It's looking a weakness and that weve got too many blokes flying and not enough at ground level.

I agree that it doesn't look remotely likely that Roughhead will be left out and that he isn’t a problem. I just like the other aerialists more. It's just an area where I disagree with the coaches and I daresay most other Pie fans. The balance is wrong and we've gone overkill in the air and underkill at ground level. I'd be happy for us to cop an occasional extra contested mark by replacing Roughy with an extra ground ball player.

Darce and Roughy are spot on for the two key positions, we took mediums like Langers, Howe and Schaz as far as we could last year, but a key needs a key. Where you and I disagree is you think we are top heavy and I think we are just slow. Langers Schaz Aish (all class) just how many laconic smooth medium paced players can you have in that backline without the afterburners to hand off to? Crisp is the only one that provides any oomph or chance of getting it over the top and it's murdering us.

 

[sr36]

Darce and Roughy are spot on for the two key positions.

I think Darce and Howe are. Against Kennedy and Darling thats who the coaches went with. They didn't against Lynch and Riewoldt, but I would have. I can't think of a team with a combination up forward that i wouldn't be comfortable with Darcy and Howe with Langdon playing on the second ruck and flying 3rd man up.

 

[Thatsmyname]

I think Darce and Howe are. Against Kennedy and Darling thats who the coaches went with. They didn't against Lynch and Riewoldt, but I would have. I can't think of a team with a combination up forward that i wouldn't be comfortable with Darcy and Howe.

You lose Howe's best weapon. And it's still not addressing the problem. The club is not stupid, they've tried to cover it with Murray and Quaynor but one is unavailable and the other I don't think isn't quite ready, but when he is it certainly won't be Roughy making way for him. There's no plan B for the goal square gorilla without him and no option to throw Moore forward if the opposition has anyone over 6ft.