darcy, jackson and the media

[RonnieRaven]

Where the anti two-ruck brigade might have a point is whether two of the highest paid players in the club should be in those two positions.
That’s a point that is still up for debate in my view.
It’s possible that Darcy and Jackson will play very well together.
One a a primary Ruck (Darcy) and one a forward ruck with small stints elsewhere (jackson).
Both players could be earning $900k and playing very well for their positions.

However that is still $1.8m tied up in two positions - the questions being are they the two best positions to allocate that money? In reality it’s one less elite player we can play elsewhere on the ground and pay $900k to. That might be an explosive burst mid, or an elite medium forward or whatever.
I guess we will find out if the two boys win a flag together for freo.

It’s possible for Darcy and Jackson to play exceptionally well together, but it still not to be the best use of a limited resource (salary cap).

Calling Jackson a ruck is under selling him
His 22 goals would of won freos leading goal kicker in 2018
Call me crazy but I still have hopes for him being a 15+disposals 2 goals a game fwd that can be like Pav and plug holes in ruck/ ruck rover/ CHB /FF when required

 

[Dockeroo]

The only question to me is whether we think Darcy is value at the price he requires.

yes I agree. LJ is more versatile and provides value in numerous areas.
The question is, could be get a run of the mill ruck for $350k per annum that gives us 75% of the value Darcy adds to the entire team and costs a third of the price?
Darcy will be a $900k per annum player.

Then use that extra $$ elsewhere on the field to upgrade an additional position.
Time will tell.
I like Darcy’s fit culturally so that’s an important intangible that needs to be accounted for too.

 

[Dockeroo]

Calling Jackson a ruck is under selling him
His 22 goals would of won freos leading goal kicker in 2018
Call me crazy but I still have hopes for him being a 15+disposals 2 goals a game fwd that can be like Pav and plug holes in ruck/ ruck rover/ CHB /FF when required

All true but beside the point - could we have all that but still $600k in-the primary ruck position by putting in a run of the mill guy there instead of Darcy and using the saved $ and trade capital elsewhere?

It’s a fair argument but I still like keeping Darcy.

 

[oldgoat]

I feel there's a couple of factors at play here:

1) The Gawn/Grundy experiment failed, so surely we must be moving on one of our rucks as well.

2) We have a s**t-hot A-Grade Victorian ruckman and how dare we.

How VERY dare we?

 

[RonnieRaven]

All true but beside the point - could we have all that but still $600k in-the primary ruck position by putting in a run of the mill guy there instead of Darcy and using the saved $ and trade capital elsewhere?

It’s a fair argument but I still like keeping Darcy.

Darcy is heart and soul and an amazing ruckman.
I’d happily sacrifice an acres or griff to make up the difference of a 600k ruck and Darcy.
We are getting older players off the books and cap rises by 30%+ over the next few years.
If Astronaut was offered 1.2 x 10 by Sydney and McKay getting 800k to go to bombers then LJs pay will be unders the last half of his deal.
We also don’t need to pay overs to attract mids because we’ve got our own through the draft

 

[oldgoat]

Where the anti two-ruck brigade might have a point is whether two of the highest paid players in the club should be in those two positions.
That’s a point that is still up for debate in my view.
It’s possible that Darcy and Jackson will play very well together.
One a a primary Ruck (Darcy) and one a forward ruck with small stints elsewhere (jackson).
Both players could be earning $900k and playing very well for their positions.

However that is still $1.8m tied up in two positions - the questions being are they the two best positions to allocate that money? In reality it’s one less elite player we can play elsewhere on the ground and pay $900k to. That might be an explosive burst mid, or an elite medium forward or whatever.
I guess we will find out if the two boys win a flag together for freo.

It’s possible for Darcy and Jackson to play exceptionally well together, but it still not to be the best use of a limited resource (salary cap).

Except if Jackson is actually a GUOAT * foal.
Then... an absolute, dead set, start the car, toad in the hole bargain!

*Greatest Unicorn Of All Time.

 

[Joao]

Yeah i think you're getting much closer to the real reason for the speculation at the end there. Blicavs was payed well, but never a top 5 earner at Geelong. Whereas Jackson and Darcy are both right towards the top for us. That's very unusual in guys that both can play ruck, and the thoughts are, wouldn't our salary cap possibly be better spent elsewhere, especially given how many teams win premierships spending diddly squats on their rucks.

I don't think we'll really need to answer that question for at least 2 years, that's when the cap squeeze will be on in earnest, as our young list should really be beginning to hit it's straps. In the meantime, stay the course. Let's face it, it's rare for Darcy to play more than 15 games in a season anyway, and i don't like the track record on 110kg athletes who have injury problems from a young age. Jackson is a great secondary option, who adds value in so many other ways on-field.

I think the fact that a lot of premiership teams don't have great ruckman is partly due to whatever style is dominant at the time and partly due to the fact there are usually only 3-4 A grade ruckman at any given time. The odds the premiers have one is pretty low.

My point is thinking of Jackson as a ruckman is incomplete. He can play just as well in a number of places and can do thing literally no other player in the comp can. Getting value out of him is exploiting that.

I think you can make a case against Darcy for sure, but I think it is independent of Jackson because if Darcy goes I don't want Jackson becoming the ruck.

yes I agree. LJ is more versatile and provides value in numerous areas.
The question is, could be get a run of the mill ruck for $350k per annum that gives us 75% of the value Darcy adds to the entire team and costs a third of the price?
Darcy will be a $900k per annum player.

Then use that extra $$ elsewhere on the field to upgrade an additional position.
Time will tell.
I like Darcy’s fit culturally so that’s an important intangible that needs to be accounted for too.

Possibly. I don't really know how to analyse the data of ruckman and their effect on games (and we don't have access to it anyway).

Darcy can certainly look dominant at times, whether that is actually helping us win I don't know.

 

[Dockeroo]

In actual fact, if LJ was not at freo at all, the same argument is plausible.
The debate has nothing to do with Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

22

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

.
It’s simply a question - do you pay sean Darcy

4

Sean Darcy

Age

25

Ht

203cm

Wt

111kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.1

3star

K

3.4

1star

HB

6.6

4star

CL

2.4

4star

HO

28.8

5star

D

6.8

1star

K

2.0

1star

HB

4.8

3star

CL

1.8

4star

HO

20.3

5star

D

11.4

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

6.8

5star

CL

2.6

5star

HO

32.0

5star

$900k to be a ruck, or do you replace him with a cheap ruck and save the $ for elsewhere?
That’s it.



Luck jackson has absolutely nothing to do with the decision or question, and it would be the exact same dilemma if Jackson was still at the Dees and we had traded in a elite small forward last season instead of him.

 

[dropbear101]

darcy is worth it if he gets back to his down the line marks.

the reality about jackson is he is only 198cm. he is simply to small for some rucks.

 

[Sully90]

darcy is worth it if he gets back to his down the line marks.

the reality about jackson is he is only 198cm. he is simply to small for some rucks.

His GF performance is what we're aiming for. He destroyed Stefan Martin at ground level, despite giving up height and ruck taps.

 

[Big Animal]

it's easy for me. Mid season when Darcy and LJ played together and LJ had warmed up to the team, we beat the top 3 teams at the time convincingly and even away. Our structure forward of TAJ at each line, looked hot. It worked very well. IMO, Darcy is integral and worth the $$

 

[DeanS]

In actual fact, if LJ was not at freo at all, the same argument is plausible.
The debate has nothing to do with Luke Jackson.
It’s simply a question - do you pay sean Darcy $900k to be a ruck, or do you replace him with a cheap ruck and save the $ for elsewhere?
That’s it.



Luck jackson has absolutely nothing to do with the decision or question, and it would be the exact same dilemma if Jackson was still at the Dees and we had traded in a elite small forward last season instead of him.

$900k is way too much for a ruckman IMHO. Just for a comparison, I wonder if this year's premiers are paying $900k for Cameron and Cox combined?

 

[Dockeroo]

$900k is way too much for a ruckman IMHO. Just for a comparison, I wonder if this year's premiers are paying $900k for Cameron and Cox combined?

Reasonable argument.

We need Darcy to be winning at least 2 AA awards as the number one ruck, to justify the deal IMO.

He is capable.

 

[Sully90]

Reasonable argument.

We need Darcy to be winning at least 2 AA awards as the number one ruck, to justify the deal IMO.

He is capable.

The only thing we need to do justify our salary cap is win the premiership. All other individual accolades can can get stuffed after that.

 

[Purple Suit]

You are forgetting that the purple reign guys are idiots

I think it's just Duck who has been banging on about it for the whole year. Oz is a believer in unicorns.

 

[Big Animal]

$900k is way too much for a ruckman IMHO. Just for a comparison, I wonder if this year's premiers are paying $900k for Cameron and Cox combined?

are you talking $900K pre CBA or post CBA?

 

[nurries]

I think it's just Duck who has been banging on about it for the whole year. Oz is a believer in unicorns.

He’s been licking ‘em

 

[Piggy Smalls]

All true but beside the point - could we have all that but still $600k in-the primary ruck position by putting in a run of the mill guy there instead of Darcy and using the saved $ and trade capital elsewhere?

It’s a fair argument but I still like keeping Darcy.

Personally I think the intangible cost of having another established player walk out the door would be more than the extra $250-300K we pay Darcy to stay. He might not look it after being in a moon boot but he is a competitive beast who wills himself to contest after contest. That behavior drives standards in a young group, especially when we clearly need a lift in training intensity this season.

 

[ozzie69]

It is all really just a narrative that if Gawn and Grundy can't work as a combination, then how could any other team make a success of two tall guys in the one team? We value Jacko as more than a ruck, but the narrative is there for the media.

 

[anchor man]

there seems to be this weird thing where the media (including the purple reign boys), seem to think the darcy jackson experiment doesn't work.

silly things, bless them. but, they need to watch more of our games. the thing about this combo is that darcy is a better tap ruckmen than jackson. having darcy in the team means we can do what ever we want with jackson. clearances, goals, marks down the line, the unicorn does it all. jackson with darcy means he can walk into the centre square in the 3rd quater of a grand final relatively fresh, whilst the opposition will have battled darcy for the match.

the question is; how much of this kerfuffle is because of a media driven narrative.


oh and haselby is a bit of a crim at this as well.

A good post DB. But do we expect any different from the media, mostly here in WA?
Most of the alleged journalist are Fijuts, one has I believe a place on the sandy hill on the South side of VJKO. I refer to him as TFOTH.If puzzled, refer to the Beatles. Day after day....

 

[dropbear101]

A good post DB. But do we expect any different from the media, mostly here in WA?
Most of the alleged journalist are Fijuts, one has I believe a place on the sandy hill on the South side of VJKO. I refer to him as TFOTH.If puzzled, refer to the Beatles. Day after day....

honestly these days i sometimes the media will come out and say we made a mistake picking nathan fyfe.

 

[Big Animal]

It is all really just a narrative that if Gawn and Grundy can't work as a combination, then how could any other team make a success of two tall guys in the one team? We value Jacko as more than a ruck, but the narrative is there for the media.

I don't understand how that can be a narrative in the media when the year before last, the same Jackson and the same Gawn dominated and won a cup. Just bizarre.

 

[Purple Jesus]

I don't understand how that can be a narrative in the media when the year before last, the same Jackson and the same Gawn dominated and won a cup. Just bizarre.

The media has a goldfish memory.

 

[greatgatsby]

Two rucks work, as they always have. Gawn-Grundy didn't work primarily because Grundy has zero forward craft (both Darcy and Jackson have plenty) and partly because Gawn is unique as a roaming ruck presence who crowds out other tall players.

 

[s_wd6]

Two rucks work, as they always have. Gawn-Grundy didn't work primarily because Grundy has zero forward craft (both Darcy and Jackson have plenty) and partly because Gawn is unique as a roaming ruck presence who crowds out other tall players.

Did they not try playing Gawn predominantly forward in games? I'll never forget that prelim they played in Perth when he kicked 5 and the crowd had a Gawny chant going