Current list - A to Z

[The Dr]

Here's a thread that could keep us going for a while in the offseason. I just thought we could take a look at every player on our list alphabetically.

Anyone can have a go, or comment on someone else's thoughts, but I thought it'd be good to go through each player on our list from Rohan Bail to Wona. Posters might rate their 2010 season and what they hope for next year and so forth, or whether they're in our best 22, but I'll leave the format open.

I'll start with Rohan Bail. I scratched my head when he was drafted but imo he was one of our major successes last year. Missed a large chunk of the season mid-year through injury, but his run and carry and tenacity was really eye-catching, and I can see him improving plenty in the years to come.

Not sure of his best position long-term - he's deceptively solid (183cm/81kg) so he could slot in at half-back, or be a true winger, or just a general midfielder. But I really liked the look of him last year and have high hopes he will establish himself as one of our better and versatile, and probably unheralded running players.

In our best 22? I think so, but he wouldn't want to rest on his laures.

 

[Timmy Houlihan]

Rohan Bail interrupted year with injury, remember him streaming forward against Collingwood in Round 2 kicking that fateful last kick to Petterd. Good season overall and as noted above I too am unsure of his position, maybe involved in a tussle for a position at half back? could generate a lot of run out of half back

 

[master bate]

Not sure of his best position long-term - he's deceptively solid (183cm/81kg)

That weight was wrong. It's what he was listed at from day 1 he's been at the club and it might be right now (he looks bigger this preseason) but I wouldn't say he's solid yet.

I was really impressed by his year. He came from nowhere to be a handy player who can play back flank, wing or half forward. Has strong endurance which is great. Doesn't lack for courage and has a bit of mongrel in him which is nice.

I'd start him half back but his hands are good enough to play a high half forward role (like Beams and Sidebottom for the pies). He and Bennell rotated during games a few times last year and I have no problem with that idea. Can also go onto a wing. A valuable player to have with the new substitute rule.

 

[Gazza_11]

Probably going to have to work hard, but if he does he's quite capable of staying in the 22 each week. Especially around the back flank, and release Grimes into the midfield. Could rotate with Bennell.

 

[Headless]

Bail is one of my favourite players. I like him on the half forward flank but he would also be used well as a running, rebounding defender.

Rohan Bail interrupted year with injury, remember him streaming forward against Collingwood in Round 2 kicking that fateful last kick to Petterd. Good season overall and as noted above I too am unsure of his position, maybe involved in a tussle for a position at half back? could generate a lot of run out of half back

Even thinking of this makes me cry.

 

[cannons]

When I think of Bail I think hard at it, competitive, versatile and a great athlete.

Would be a good sub.

 

[stretcharmstrong]

Let's get this ball rolling again:

Clint Bartram

Honestly, at the start of the year, he was one of a handful of players on our list that I had very little love for, and I really couldn't see him being a big part our future. However, after being involved in numerous conversations with other people in the early rounds of 2010, I decided to pay closer attention to his games.

I'm not sure whether he improved significantly, or whether I just opened my eyes a bit, but I think Clint had a very solid 2010 and it is now hard for me to envision our back-line without him. He seems to play the small back pocket role very well, hounds his opponents all day long and usually doesn't get ahead of himself and try to play too loose. He has a good grip in a tackle and chases well, although I don't think he's exactly quick. He doesn't give away too many free kicks, and his judgment/vision has either improved or isn't as bad as I thought it was. Overall he seems to concede very few goals (although I can't find a stat to confirm), most weeks at very worst breaking even with his op, just seems really good at not letting ops score on him.

He can be inefficient by foot and doesn't have a particularly long kick. He'll never be a rebounding defender, but plays his role well and is a required part of our back six in my opinion.

I'd mark him at 8/10 for season 2010 (not that that really means anything... )

Other comments?

 

[The Dr]

Very much agree with you stretch. I too thought Bartram was on borrowed time, but i was super impressed with his 2010.

He's probably more valuable to us than anyone realised -we don't have many other smaller back pocket options.

His kicking can be an issue but he plays within his limitations and does a good job most weeks.

Hopefully he can keep improving

 

[turtz]

Completely agree with you stretch! I think apart from the big russian and frawley, bartram was our most improved player last year!

Learning to kick short to a target instead of blazing away and turning it over makes me think it's clicked for him. Sure he has a brain snap every now and again but more often than not he made the right decision with the footy. Rearly gets beaten 1 on 1 anymore and is maturing nicely!

Good solid player that gives 110% every time he pulls on the jumper.

Definately didn't think i'd write that about clint bartram this time last year! Glad he's proved his doubter's, including myself, wrong!

 

[eskimo]

Just a quick comment on everyone who keeps talking about releasing Grimes into the midfield. Why???


I've never understood this idea. He is fantastic floating across half back. He reads the play better than everyone else in our backline, plays tall and small, is good at shutting down, and also rebounding. He is courageous enough to fly across in front of a pack and take a mark, but also has the judgement to know when to do it. We have a plethora of highly skilled midfielders coming through, so there is no NEED to have him in the midfield. He is probably the most important cog in our defensive half, and why anyone would want to shift him from there I find baffling.

Sure he was drafted as a midfielder, but Garland was drafted as a forward, and does anyone remember where David Neitz started out? He was played in the back half out of neccessity early on, but I don't see why you would want to tamper with a very very good thing. We need him more in defence than we do in the middle, and IMHO he would be wasted in the midfield.

 

[Captain Jack]

Bartram is definitely a required player at this point given his defensive skills. But if someone like Strauss or Bennell can develop his own set of defensive attributes, that would be preferable given the amount of run and drive (and kicking skills) that they would provide.

But for now, Bartram is the starting BP player.

 

[d33my]

Just a quick comment on everyone who keeps talking about releasing Grimes into the midfield. Why???


I've never understood this idea. He is fantastic floating across half back. He reads the play better than everyone else in our backline, plays tall and small, is good at shutting down, and also rebounding. He is courageous enough to fly across in front of a pack and take a mark, but also has the judgement to know when to do it. We have a plethora of highly skilled midfielders coming through, so there is no NEED to have him in the midfield. He is probably the most important cog in our defensive half, and why anyone would want to shift him from there I find baffling.

Sure he was drafted as a midfielder, but Garland was drafted as a forward, and does anyone remember where David Neitz started out? He was played in the back half out of neccessity early on, but I don't see why you would want to tamper with a very very good thing. We need him more in defence than we do in the middle, and IMHO he would be wasted in the midfield.

These are my thoughts exactly. Good post.

 

[Captain Jack]

Just a quick comment on everyone who keeps talking about releasing Grimes into the midfield. Why???


I've never understood this idea. He is fantastic floating across half back. He reads the play better than everyone else in our backline, plays tall and small, is good at shutting down, and also rebounding. He is courageous enough to fly across in front of a pack and take a mark, but also has the judgement to know when to do it. We have a plethora of highly skilled midfielders coming through, so there is no NEED to have him in the midfield. He is probably the most important cog in our defensive half, and why anyone would want to shift him from there I find baffling.

Sure he was drafted as a midfielder, but Garland was drafted as a forward, and does anyone remember where David Neitz started out? He was played in the back half out of neccessity early on, but I don't see why you would want to tamper with a very very good thing. We need him more in defence than we do in the middle, and IMHO he would be wasted in the midfield.

I agree that Grimes is amazing on the half back line, but wouldn't it be better if we did have the option to release him through the middle? IMO he should be playing a Hodge-like role... mostly off HB, but able to go into the guts when needed and when he'll be most effective.

And he definitely wouldn't be wasted in the middle.

 

[stretcharmstrong]

Overall I think he would be an asset in the middle, but there are aspects of his game that would be wasted. His brilliant ability to read the play and intercept opposition kicks would be pretty mutch useless if he were constantly on the ball, rather than being behind it and able to watch the game.

However he has a great ability to win one-on-ones at ground level and usually always choses the correct option when in traffic, which could make him a very handy clearence player.

I tend to agree with you though (dcrock) with the idea that he could be very well suited to a Hodge type role playing maybe a 60/40* split between HB and Mid.

*Just pulled that number from my arse.

 

[KickLongTackleHard]

IMO he should be playing a Hodge-like role... mostly off HB, but able to go into the guts when needed and when he'll be most effective.

And he definitely wouldn't be wasted in the middle.

Agreed. He'll be able to play both roles well, so should be in on the midfield rotations in time. He's a gun.

 

[Captain Jack]

I tend to agree with you though (dcrock) with the idea that he could be very well suited to a Hodge type role playing maybe a 60/40* split between HB and Mid.

*Just pulled that number from my arse.

83% of statistics are made up... but yes I agree with your random percentage.

 

[eskimo]

Wasted was probably the wrong word to say with regards to Grimes in the midfield. Was more making the point that he would be overkill in there. I agree, he probably would be a great midfielder, but we already have some great midfielders comiong through. His biggest asset as mentioned before is his ability to read the play and cut off the oppositions route to goal, which isn't something you can teach very easily. I don't see the need to play him in the middle with Scully, Trengove, Jizz, McKenzie, Jones, Sylvia, Moloney, Davey, etc all rotating through there as it is. Our defence has worked great with him in it, and I think he is a very important part of it.