Key Position set up for next year

[daveyboy3]

This all basically depends on the continual improvement of Johns and his ability to play CHF, but basically i'd like to see the following.

Lloyd at FF, Johns at CHF ( thought he looked good as a leading target up the ground vs Geelong) then one of Hille/Laycock being a big target behind a leading Lloyd.
This allows Lucas to CHB where he gives lots of drive, Fletcher obviously at Full Back and then for Lee to learn his craft on the oppositions third tall rather than their CHF. Also frees Bradely up to play pretty freely from Hb/wing where i think he plays far better than when he has a quality opponent to beat.

I think that set up, with the possibility of a hansen or Gumbleton as well could work pretty well for us.

 

[DaSawx]

Good post, although I'm not sure taking Lucas away from CHF is the best thing, he's 50-60 goals a year are too important.

I'm not sure what the best way to address CHB is. I'd love to draft Gumbleton but not sure how he would start in the AFL playing CHB, might be good for his learning curve. Then if he was to turn out a gun CHF then maybe try Lucas back there.

Thoughts?

 

[daveyboy3]

Good post, although I'm not sure taking Lucas away from CHF is the best thing, he's 50-60 goals a year are too important.
Thoughts?

I know moving Lucas away from CHF isn't the ideal option. But if Johns turned out to be good enough to kick 30-35 goals from CHF compared to Lucas' 50 i think that whilst we may be losing around 1 goal a game up foward we would probably be saving 2-3 down back. Could also eliminate the potential problem of having lloyd and Johns, both leading left footers, competing with each other in the 50.

 

[Merv]

This would be my foward line

Johns Lloyd M.Johnson
Lovett Lucas Midfielders rotate through this position

I would prefer John to lead straight out and mark hence why i prefer him in FP
M.johnson can fly for a mark but will also add a lot of toughness to the forward line and fight for every contest making it harder for defenders to get easy clearances.
The others speak for themselves and i would use the HFF as a midfielder rotation like dyson,stanton,J.johnson,campo etc

 

[Daytripper]

I know moving Lucas away from CHF isn't the ideal option. But if Johns turned out to be good enough to kick 30-35 goals from CHF compared to Lucas' 50 i think that whilst we may be losing around 1 goal a game up foward we would probably be saving 2-3 down back. Could also eliminate the potential problem of having lloyd and Johns, both leading left footers, competing with each other in the 50.

Don't think Courtney's got the engine to play CHF.
They do a lot of running these days - just look at the amount of ground Lucas covers in a game. He's down at the HB line quite often.

Johns looks a pure full forward to me.
I'd even give him a shot at full back. He's got speed, strength and a decent footy brain.

Anything other than those two positions would be doubtful at this stage in his development unless he does a heap of aerobic work over the next three summers.

 

[daveyboy3]

This would be my foward line

Johns Lloyd M.Johnson
Lovett Lucas Midfielders rotate through this position

I would prefer John to lead straight out and mark hence why i prefer him in FP
M.johnson can fly for a mark but will also add a lot of toughness to the forward line and fight for every contest making it harder for defenders to get easy clearances.
The others speak for themselves and i would use the HFF as a midfielder rotation like dyson,stanton,J.johnson,campo etc

I think that would work well unless you take into account the resting ruckman. While it wont happen every week im sure there will be times when all of Ryder, Laycock and Hille play. One in the ruck, one on the bench and one up foward. This is when Id push johns out of the 50, and Lucas back. We would be too top heavy otherwise.

 

[DaSawx]

Don't think Courtney's got the engine to play CHF.
They do a lot of running these days - just look at the amount of ground Lucas covers in a game. He's down at the HB line quite often.

Johns looks a pure full forward to me.
I'd even give him a shot at full back. He's got speed, strength and a decent footy brain.

Anything other than those two positions would be doubtful at this stage in his development unless he does a heap of aerobic work over the next three summers.

Johns doesn't have the nouse to play down back. He cant move sideways and would struggle with the quick forwards moving around everywhere.

Try him up forward with Lloyd, he doesn't have to play all 22 games and his body may not let him anyway.

 

[Longy413]

No thoughts of pushing Lloydy further up the ground?

People forget how much time he spent away from the goal-square in 2000 because we had other options. With Johns and also Lovett/Lucas we now have more options.

As I've mentioned before, one of Lloyd's greatest qualities is his ability to sacrifise his own game for the greater good. If he recognises Johns/Lucas have a physical advantage over their opponent he'll push up the ground to exploit that.

Wouldn't at all suprise me to see Lloyd playing infront of Johns next season.

 

[Daytripper]

Johns doesn't have the nouse to play down back. He cant move sideways and would struggle with the quick forwards moving around everywhere.

Try him up forward with Lloyd, he doesn't have to play all 22 games and his body may not let him anyway.

Most modern day full backs are ex full forwards.

I reckon its worth a try in the practice matches. Just gives us another option if Fletch goes down.
He's too good a player to be left out of the side due to team balance and the fact he can only play one position at this stage.

 

[DaSawx]

No thoughts of pushing Lloydy further up the ground?

People forget how much time he spent away from the goal-square in 2000 because we had other options. With Johns and also Lovett/Lucas we now have more options.

As I've mentioned before, one of Lloyd's greatest qualities is his ability to sacrifise his own game for the greater good. If he recognises Johns/Lucas have a physical advantage over their opponent he'll push up the ground to exploit that.

Wouldn't at all suprise me to see Lloyd playing infront of Johns next season.

Yeah, I remember him saying last year he wanted to play more CHF and do get involved like the Tredrea's and Reiwoldts.

But only if Lovett and Johns are kicking enough goals, he's too valuable there otherwise

 

[koc#41]

Good post, although I'm not sure taking Lucas away from CHF is the best thing, he's 50-60 goals a year are too important.

quote]

although in the past i may have agreed with you on this, but i think Johns is a great prospect for the club and could fill the spot of Lucas at CHF, potentially johns could kick 40-60 goals next year, if we are up and running.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Ideally: Lloyd at CHF where he can use his run and nous, and Johns at FF, steaming out of the goal square, splitting packs and hurting opposition defenders

 

[DaSawx]

although in the past i may have agreed with you on this, but i think Johns is a great prospect for the club and could fill the spot of Lucas at CHF, potentially johns could kick 40-60 goals next year, if we are up and running.

It's possible, he certainly has the potential. Just have to hope he has a good run with injuries.

I suppose a question could be asked, if Johns kicked Lucas' score on the weeknd and Lucas played on Reiwoldt would we have won? quite possibly.

A lot depends on if Johns could stay fit for 22 games, can handle CHF/FF every week and live up to his potential and stay consistent, if yes then we could play Lucas at CHB and fill that position untill we blood an Andrew or a Scott Gumbleton or a Lachlen Hansen.

Would love to be able to free Bradley and McPhee to a HBF/wing/midfield role and keep them there. The best teams have a role for every single player that they can play most weeks unless a change is needed.

 

[go_the_bombers]

I rather Lucas up forward than down back

 

[Broady Poker Tour]

Although I am a big fan of Scott Lucas, it annoys me how he lacks the vision and skill to be able to assist his team-mates or to dish off a quick handball to a player running past. On the weekend in the last 10 mintues of the game with St. Kilda leading, McPhee was running for a loose ball in the forward 50 without anyone within 20 metres of him. Lucas was also running to that same ball but with Max Hughton right behind him. If he had shepparded and shielded the ball from Max, and allowed Mcphee to gather the loose ball- who knows? Instead the Saints cleared and the rest is history. The number of times he has just totally disregarded his team-mates in better positions has started to annoy me. I'd like to know what his hand-ball stats are compared to other CHF in the competition.

His best season was at CHB, he won a best an fairest there because he had to find a team-mate because he was more than 100 metres from goal. I'd either like to see him there, or possibly traded to somewhere like Geelong for a first round draft pick and a mid-fielder (like Kelly, or Bartel).

If no trade- it would be Johns (FF), Lloyd (CHF), Hille, Lucas (CHB) until Gumbleton is able to take over, and Fletcher (FB). Lloyd was starting to look really good when he was moving further out of the goal-square and John's would be better with Lloyd around

 

[Daytripper]

If no trade- it would be Johns (FF), Lloyd (CHF), Hille, Lucas (CHB) until Gumbleton is able to take over, and Fletcher (FB). Lloyd was starting to look really good when he was moving further out of the goal-square and John's would be better with Lloyd around

This is what I don't like about going for another KPP in the draft.

With a realistic line up like the one above it will mean we are going to have players of the calibre of Gumbleton (for example), Laycock and Ryder sitting on the pine or playing for Bendigo. Our second tier of Lee and Lucy will never get a game and will eventually get delisted. Thats just wasteful drafting !

Not to mention there's no spots for Kepler or McPhee.

We have got an awful number of KPP types already.
Don't need any more for the moment.

 

[DaSawx]

This is what I don't like about going for another KPP in the draft.

With a realistic line up like the one above it will mean we are going to have players of the calibre of Gumbleton (for example), Laycock and Ryder sitting on the pine or playing for Bendigo. Our second tier of Lee and Lucy will never get a game and will eventually get delisted. Thats just wasteful drafting !

Not to mention there's no spots for Kepler or McPhee.

We have got an awful number of KPP types already.
Don't need any more for the moment.

Word within the club is they think Gumbleton may be too good to refuse, a marking moster ala Jon Brown.

Ryder, Lee and Lucy are still some time off being ready. Lee and Lucy may get chances when they are ready or may end up being depth players, who knows, they were late picks so there are no gaurentees.

There are definately spots for McPhee and Bradley, either in midfield/wing or taking the 3rd tall in defense, we do need 6 defenders a game remember.

 

[Daytripper]

Word within the club is they think Gumbleton may be too good to refuse, a marking moster ala Jon Brown.

Ryder, Lee and Lucy are still some time off being ready. Lee and Lucy may get chances when they are ready or may end up being depth players, who knows, they were late picks so there are no gaurentees.

There are definately spots for McPhee and Bradley, either in midfield/wing or taking the 3rd tall in defense, we do need 6 defenders a game remember.

What about Laycock ?

We really have to have a rethink about the way we draft players. Its not a big mans game anymore yet the club still has this theory that you take the best available tall man.

If Bradley can't play CHB then we have basically wasted a top 6 pick and three years of development on him.

I know its all hindsight but we need to be a bit more cleverer in the way we draft.

 

[Darealrath]

Ideally: Lloyd at CHF where he can use his run and nous, and Johns at FF, steaming out of the goal square, splitting packs and hurting opposition defenders

Sounds good. I'd like them to keep swapping between the two positions though. Lloyd is too deadly to be getting most of his footy 70m out, while Johns imo has more of a natural physical presence than Lloyd and could be the better option at CHF at times.

I'd keep Lucas forward. Keeps getting the job done and with the hopeful continued emergence of Johns and the return of Lloyd he'd do very nicely on the oppositions probable 3rd defender (as Johns plays closer to goal he'd prolly get one of the better 2). Would need crumbers though because those 3 can struggle when they don't mark it.

Fletcher FB obviously.

CHB still the worry. Hopefully Lee or Bradley can put their stamp on it. Solly isn't a bad option. I've been pretty happy with his defensive work lately, just wish he was a bit taller. I don't like McPhee playing on a gun forward.

 

[Philzsay]

I would have all three of Lloyd, Johns and Lucas in the forward line.

I would alternate between Lloyd and Johns starting out of square. The player not in the square would start at centre bounces on the 50m arc.

Then I would have Lucas playing as the leading CHF. He would start at bounces on the 50m arc but he would essentialy run deep down the ground providing the long lead and mark from when we kick the ball out of the backline.

So in a couple of different types of the play the following could happen:

Centre Bounce: Lucas and Lloyd on the 50m arc, Johns in the square. They are positioned in a triangle like formation. A hurried kick out of the square and you would have either Lloyd or Lucas contesting the mark. Or a break from the centre square and the player can kick to Johns on the lead. (so swap Johns and Lloyds positions at different centre bounces as well).

Kick from Full Back or defensive 50: Lucas leads deep and marks say 60/70 metres from defensive goal. He kicks to Lloyd who has lead from the 50m arc to take the mark near the centre of the ground. He kicks (or handballs to a running player who then kicks) to Johns who marks the ball about 40m from goal after having lead from the square. Goal.

The best thing about playing all 3 as forwards is that it would give us some structure. Also I think it would also help with our decision making skills, with the players always knowing that they can kick it long to one of Lucas, Lloyd or Johns if they cant find an immediate short pass.

As for the issue of being too tall up forward if a resting ruckman was to push forward I don't think it would be too much of an issue. Firstly it is likely that often one of the 3 of Lloyd, Lucas or Johns could be resting on the bench due to injury, resting or poor form or they could have been pushed down back. Secondly I doubt all 3 will play all 22 games (and 3 finals ).
And finally in the rare instance where all 4 would be forward it will stretch the opposition as long as it wasn't a wet day.

As for the Key backman, Fletch at Full back most would agree. Then CHB I would have Lee. You would also have McPhee, Bradley and Solomon who would all help out at times. It depends on how the opposition line up, but hopefully those 5 players should be able to handle most situations without having to take Lucas from a forward leading role.

 

[Daytripper]

I would have all three of Lloyd, Johns and Lucas in the forward line.

I would alternate between Lloyd and Johns starting out of square. The player not in the square would start at centre bounces on the 50m arc.

Then I would have Lucas playing as the leading CHF. He would start at bounces on the 50m arc but he would essentialy run deep down the ground providing the long lead and mark from when we kick the ball out of the backline.

So in a couple of different types of the play the following could happen:

Centre Bounce: Lucas and Lloyd on the 50m arc, Johns in the square. They are positioned in a triangle like formation. A hurried kick out of the square and you would have either Lloyd or Lucas contesting the mark. Or a break from the centre square and the player can kick to Johns on the lead. (so swap Johns and Lloyds positions at different centre bounces as well).

Kick from Full Back or defensive 50: Lucas leads deep and marks say 60/70 metres from defensive goal. He kicks to Lloyd who has lead from the 50m arc to take the mark near the centre of the ground. He kicks (or handballs to a running player who then kicks) to Johns who marks the ball about 40m from goal after having lead from the square. Goal.

The best thing about playing all 3 as forwards is that it would give us some structure. Also I think it would also help with our decision making skills, with the players always knowing that they can kick it long to one of Lucas, Lloyd or Johns if they cant find an immediate short pass.

As for the issue of being too tall up forward if a resting ruckman was to push forward I don't think it would be too much of an issue. Firstly it is likely that often one of the 3 of Lloyd, Lucas or Johns could be resting on the bench due to injury, resting or poor form or they could have been pushed down back. Secondly I doubt all 3 will play all 22 games (and 3 finals ).
And finally in the rare instance where all 4 would be forward it will stretch the opposition as long as it wasn't a wet day.

As for the Key backman, Fletch at Full back most would agree. Then CHB I would have Lee. You would also have McPhee, Bradley and Solomon who would all help out at times. It depends on how the opposition line up, but hopefully those 5 players should be able to handle most situations without having to take Lucas from a forward leading role.

A back 6 comprising Fletcher, Lee, McPhee, Bradley, Solomon and one of Welsh/McVeigh/Lovett-Murray is iceberg slow.
Where is the run ?
Who breaks the lines ?

And you've got Lucas running down to help out. That won't be helping at all.

How on earth would they match up on a Bulldog forward line comprising Murphy, Johnson, Giansiracusa, Eagleton, Darcy.

We've got a 2006 squad built for football in the 1980s unfortunately.

 

[Audemars Piguet]

This is what I don't like about going for another KPP in the draft.

With a realistic line up like the one above it will mean we are going to have players of the calibre of Gumbleton (for example), Laycock and Ryder sitting on the pine or playing for Bendigo. Our second tier of Lee and Lucy will never get a game and will eventually get delisted. Thats just wasteful drafting !

Not to mention there's no spots for Kepler or McPhee.

We have got an awful number of KPP types already.
Don't need any more for the moment.

I agree that taking Gumbleton would be a mistake. We are already top-heavy in the forward line with Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, aswell as Laycock, Ryder and Hille.

We need a versitile key backman like Hansen or Thorpe. That would give us a nice spread of genuine key backs and forwards, versitile KPPs and rucks.

2007 (If we take Hansen/Thorpe)

Key Forwards : Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, Hille, Laycock, Ryder.

Key Backs : Fletcher, Lee, Bradley, Hansen/Thorpe.


2007 (If we take Gumbleton)

Key Forwards : Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, Hille, Laycock, Ryder, Gumbleton.

Key Backs : Fletcher, Lee, Bradley.

 

[Philzsay]

A back 6 comprising Fletcher, Lee, McPhee, Bradley, Solomon and one of Welsh/McVeigh/Lovett-Murray is iceberg slow.
Where is the run ?
Who breaks the lines ?

And you've got Lucas running down to help out. That won't be helping at all.

How on earth would they match up on a Bulldog forward line comprising Murphy, Johnson, Giansiracusa, Eagleton, Darcy.

We've got a 2006 squad built for football in the 1980s unfortunately.

I didn't mean to have all 5 of those players in the backline at the same time. The title of this thread is "key position set up" so I only talked about the key position players. You would only have 2 or 3 of them as your key position players at any one time. Was merely suggesting that you would select the keys backs from those players.
And obviously for the Bulldogs you would have a completly different set up.

As for Lucas I have always thought of him to be a hard working player. He plays best when he keeps running around and presenting himself as a target. That is what I want him to do, present himself as a target. And with Lloyd and Johns in the forward line, he should be able to work his way down the ground when need be.

 

[Broady Poker Tour]

I agree that taking Gumbleton would be a mistake. We are already top-heavy in the forward line with Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, aswell as Laycock, Ryder and Hille.

We need a versitile key backman like Hansen or Thorpe. That would give us a nice spread of genuine key backs and forwards, versitile KPPs and rucks.

2007

Key Forwards : Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, Hille, Laycock, Ryder.

Key Backs : Fletcher, Lee, Bradley, Hansen/Thorpe.

I believe Gumbleton is more a CHB than a CHF but is versatile enough to play both. who knows, after we beat the Blues and avoid the spoon, we might end up with Gibbs instead. Assuming the Blues take a KPP

Either way, i think we Essendon supporters can be guilty of over-rating our own. I don't think Solly, Bradley or McPhee will ever be KPP's. Laycock is a ruckman not a forward, and hopefully Ryder will develop into an Adam Goodes type.
I think Lee might be the man who can fill Fletcher's boots when he retires in 2008.

 

[Merv]

I believe Gumbleton is more a CHB than a CHF but is versatile enough to play both. who knows, after we beat the Blues and avoid the spoon, we might end up with Gibbs instead. Assuming the Blues take a KPP

Either way, i think we Essendon supporters can be guilty of over-rating our own. I don't think Solly, Bradley or McPhee will ever be KPP's. Laycock is a ruckman not a forward, and hopefully Ryder will develop into an Adam Goodes type.
I think Lee might be the man who can fill Fletcher's boots when he retires in 2008.

According to all reports i have read Gumbleton is more of a CHF than a CHB.I havent seen him so am only going on all the reports i have read.

I think Laycock will be a very good Ruckman/Forward, just as Hille is.
They are both capable of resting in the forward line and kick 2-4 goals a game.

From what i have seen of him i don't believe Ryder is as mobile or as fast as Goodes,still early of course