Draft Expert Knightmare's 2021 Draft Almanac

[Euku]

Anyone who watches dogs games knows naughton is great at ground level his 2nd and third efforts after a contest are a massive part of what makes him good, stats dont always show what's really happening

 

[Knightmare]

Thoughts on type of player Ben Hobbs is and which comparison you can see?

Hobbs has really impressed me these past two weeks.

My expectation was that he would be just a strong ball winning mid, but he has a lot more diversity to his game. From scoreboard impact (2 goals on the weekend and 2 the week before on return to NAB League), he's finding it around the ground and reads the ball really well. Skills seem sound. He's not quick though. He's looking like one of the very lowest floor prospects in this draft and is a year one ready mid.

I've heard comparisons to Jacob Hopper, and that's the type of game you're going to get, though possibly not as reliant on finding it inside and perhaps slightly better forward of centre if the signs on the weekend is any indication.

 

[maverick001]

I'll cover Sam Darcy as my focus player for this week.

Darcy is definitely at least top-3 for me now. The question I'm now asking myself is whether he should be #1, 2 or 3.

That was easily the most dominant game I've seen from any of the juniors so far this year. If Darcy replicates that level of play, he's beyond question in my mind, my new #1. And as we speak, he's not far off, looking already pretty clearly like this year's most talented and to have the highest ceiling in this draft pool. He's not just ticking the boxes for me, he's emphatically ticking the boxes. From rate of improvement (he has been growing rapidly and may still be growing and his football is coming along in a hurry from all reports of his play prior to this season), to production (has been good all season but yesterday as a key forward was on another level), to points of difference (he's not only tall, but uses his body so well, such a strong mark overhead and a threat on such a level even at his light weight he's drawing free kicks at will, one touch at ground level, creates separation on the lead, so agile, has goal sense and the bonus is because he reads the ball so well in flight he can play key defence and at his height as he gets stronger he could also play some ruck). So he's across the board looking like an absolute monster and one of those talls who fits in that rare category by my assessment.

How is his leading game?
There's been many a highly touted KPF who dominates underage levels but doesn't translate to the big time because they don't have a leading game - which needs to be a KPF's bread and butter with contested marking complimenting it.

 

[cairo tiger]

when is your phantom coming out?

 

[Warhorse]

Hawkins natural talent is being under-rated here. Was a freak athlete. Much much more athletic than Naughton. Cleared 200cm in the high jump as a junior. Had massive back issues and feet issues. Had to completely change the way he runs and kicks. Injuries stopped him from becoming a great of the game. As a junior prospect he was one of the best I have seen.

I agree with knightmare regarding naughton. Bulldogs much better served with naughton racking up 10 marks a game as a defender. He could be an all time great defender like a better Brian Lake. It makes sense with the other prospects on the list and with Darcy incoming. They have something special brewing if they go in that direction

 

[Holy Rioli]

Hawkins natural talent is being under-rated here. Was a freak athlete. Much much more athletic than Naughton. Cleared 200cm in the high jump as a junior. Had massive back issues and feet issues. Had to completely change the way he runs and kicks. Injuries stopped him from becoming a great of the game. As a junior prospect he was one of the best I have seen.

I agree with knightmare regarding naughton. Bulldogs much better served with naughton racking up 10 marks a game as a defender. He could be an all time great defender like a better Brian Lake. It makes sense with the other prospects on the list and with Darcy incoming. They have something special brewing if they go in that direction

I think generational football brains get disregarded too quickly here. Lake (and modern day McGovern) are not elite athletes, not possess any above average athletic traits. Yet they have a skill most defenders don't have and that is the moment a ball leaves a boot they know the exact drop point they need to get to. Lake more so with his body, McGovern with timing his run and jump.

I'm sure Naughton would make a great key defender, but he hasn't proven he's got that elite football brain yet.

 

[Knightmare]

How is his leading game?
There's been many a highly touted KPF who dominates underage levels but doesn't translate to the big time because they don't have a leading game - which needs to be a KPF's bread and butter with contested marking complimenting it.

Darcy is nice on the lead and creates separation at will routinely.

How he goes on multiple leads will be something I'll be watching for, as he rarely has to lead up at the footy a second time, just getting it the first lead.

when is your phantom coming out?

Once the season is over I'll complete one. I'll talk to ESPN about whether they're open to me producing one before the trade period, but if not then it would be immediately after trades conclude.

I think generational football brains get disregarded too quickly here. Lake (and modern day McGovern) are not elite athletes, not possess any above average athletic traits. Yet they have a skill most defenders don't have and that is the moment a ball leaves a boot they know the exact drop point they need to get to. Lake more so with his body, McGovern with timing his run and jump.

I'm sure Naughton would make a great key defender, but he hasn't proven he's got that elite football brain yet.

I completely agree with your assessments of Lake and McGovern.

Interesting you're not as convinced Naughton has that elite footy brain yet. Do you believe that's something he will develop? For me it's one of those components that comes with time and experience, and experience in a given position, and until you see him there at this age/stage it's hard to know if he has it, but looking at his mix of attributes, other than his kick, he's just about as close to the model of perfection that a key defender could be as that intercepting centre half back.

 

[Virgin Dog]

Is the fewest points conceded a function of a great key defenders? Or down to having a great midfield and a good mix of smalls and mediums? I'd argue strongly the latter.

Fair enough on Lewis Young if he's not as strong in the other components of the game, he has impressed as a reader of the ball in defence, intercepter and contested mark, so he has intrigued me in that much at least as someone who might be playable.

Gardner however does nothing for me. 1 intercept mark per game. 0.3 contested marks, 2.8 intercept possessions. 80 metres gained per game. He's unplayable. They're among the very worst numbers in the competition by position in each of those most essential categories by position. His contested defensive loss percentage is only average at 25%. So there isn't one thing about him that appeals, he's someone I wouldn't be willing to play at AFL level, and would rather go small if I had to, so as to avoid having to play him.

This honestly sounds like the kind of take you'd get from not watching the actual games and instead making judgements on stats (no offence). Gardner gets very little of the ball but he plays his role well enough. You're picking out stats that are only relevant for interceptors, which Gardner is not.

Against West Coasts 3 talls, we conceded 3 goals total. Geelong's 3 kicked 5 against us (well below their average). Ports talls kicked 4 against us.

The fact is, no talls are kicking bags against us. The biggest number conceded was actually Eddie Betts, which is not the fault of Gardner/Keath/Cordy. Young wouldn't improve us as his kicking is well below average, he gets outbodied easily despite his size, and he has shown a habit of panicking at times. The Brisbane game this year was a serious outlier. In reality, much like Schache, he struggles to translate his brilliant VFL form to the seniors, so wouldn't be any improvement on Gardner.

 

[Knightmare]

This honestly sounds like the kind of take you'd get from not watching the actual games and instead making judgements on stats (no offence). Gardner gets very little of the ball but he plays his role well enough. You're picking out stats that are only relevant for interceptors, which Gardner is not.

Against West Coasts 3 talls, we conceded 3 goals total. Geelong's 3 kicked 5 against us (well below their average). Ports talls kicked 4 against us.

The fact is, no talls are kicking bags against us. The biggest number conceded was actually Eddie Betts, which is not the fault of Gardner/Keath/Cordy. Young wouldn't improve us as his kicking is well below average, he gets outbodied easily despite his size, and he has shown a habit of panicking at times. The Brisbane game this year was a serious outlier. In reality, much like Schache, he struggles to translate his brilliant VFL form to the seniors, so wouldn't be any improvement on Gardner.

If a key defender isn't a high level intercepter, they're irrelevant and the game has moved past them.

It's that simple. It's VFL stuff if you're not an at least reasonable intercepter at AFL level. And having those who can't are a sharp net negative towards winning.

On a good team there should be no room for Gardner or Cordy.

The better you are at intercepting and the more ways you can intercept and the higher the frequency, the better you are by position.

Games today are won and lost based on scoring off of turnovers. It starts with the forwards applying forward pressure and it's up to the defenders and in particular key defenders to intercept and get things started, and if they're great ball users, bonus, if not, you better have them on the same side.

Goals conceded to direct opponent with key defenders is a long way down my list of priorities. I'm much more interested when measuring their defensive effectiveness to look at their 1v1 win rate and looking at how often they can turn those opportunities into 1v1 marks, as an even more valuable added component.

You might have a Gardner defending a guy, and if he spoils and brings the ball to ground, it's probably not the key forward ending up with the ball, but it allows the other side the opportunity to lock the ball into their front half, harass, and force turnovers. You want to be taking intercept marks in defence at the highest possible frequency so that it doesn't bring the ground level players into the game from the other team. Gaining possession back through intercepting and then looking to score off the turnover is by far and away the most valuable functions of the whole group in the back half as a collective.

 

[Boristown]

If a key defender isn't a high level intercepter, they're irrelevant and the game has moved past them.

It's that simple. It's VFL stuff if you're not an at least reasonable intercepter at AFL level. And having those who can't are a sharp net negative towards winning.

On a good team there should be no room for Gardner or Cordy.

The better you are at intercepting and the more ways you can intercept and the higher the frequency, the better you are by position.

Games today are won and lost based on scoring off of turnovers. It starts with the forwards applying forward pressure and it's up to the defenders and in particular key defenders to intercept and get things started, and if they're great ball users, bonus, if not, you better have them on the same side.

Goals conceded to direct opponent with key defenders is a long way down my list of priorities. I'm much more interested when measuring their defensive effectiveness to look at their 1v1 win rate and looking at how often they can turn those opportunities into 1v1 marks, as an even more valuable added component.

You might have a Gardner defending a guy, and if he spoils and brings the ball to ground, it's probably not the key forward ending up with the ball, but it allows the other side the opportunity to lock the ball into their front half, harass, and force turnovers. You want to be taking intercept marks in defence at the highest possible frequency so that it doesn't bring the ground level players into the game from the other team. Gaining possession back through intercepting and then looking to score off the turnover is by far and away the most valuable functions of the whole group in the back half as a collective.

Again, someone should probably tell the coach of the team who sits at #1 for points scored and #1 for points conceded.

 

[Knightmare]

Again, someone should probably tell the coach of the team who sits at #1 for points scored and #1 for points conceded.

All teams have weak links, no best-22 is perfect.

It's not the Dogs' defence that makes the team, it's the midfield and front half as per the illustration provided by LittleG on the previous page that are the strengths and zones of the field they rate as the competition's best. The Dogs' defence is only reasonable because the mix of small and medium size pieces are excellent and are helped by the quality further afield.

And those strong lines still have weak components too. The Dogs lack in the way of a great ruckman to put that midfield group over the top and the front half lacks a great crumber who can apply elite forward pressure. They're just areas of relatively less weakness in comparison to what is one of the very worst groups of key defenders in the competition.

 

[Virgin Dog]

If a key defender isn't a high level intercepter, they're irrelevant and the game has moved past them.

It's that simple. It's VFL stuff if you're not an at least reasonable intercepter at AFL level. And having those who can't are a sharp net negative towards winning.

On a good team there should be no room for Gardner or Cordy.

The better you are at intercepting and the more ways you can intercept and the higher the frequency, the better you are by position.

Games today are won and lost based on scoring off of turnovers. It starts with the forwards applying forward pressure and it's up to the defenders and in particular key defenders to intercept and get things started, and if they're great ball users, bonus, if not, you better have them on the same side.

Goals conceded to direct opponent with key defenders is a long way down my list of priorities. I'm much more interested when measuring their defensive effectiveness to look at their 1v1 win rate and looking at how often they can turn those opportunities into 1v1 marks, as an even more valuable added component.

You might have a Gardner defending a guy, and if he spoils and brings the ball to ground, it's probably not the key forward ending up with the ball, but it allows the other side the opportunity to lock the ball into their front half, harass, and force turnovers. You want to be taking intercept marks in defence at the highest possible frequency so that it doesn't bring the ground level players into the game from the other team. Gaining possession back through intercepting and then looking to score off the turnover is by far and away the most valuable functions of the whole group in the back half as a collective.

Ben McKay is below average for intercept possessions, yet is widely hailed as one of the next big KPDs. It's also very misleading to consider Gardner's intercept possession average when he came off within the first 20 seconds of one game, and early in another. 2 out of 6 games with reduced game time are going to skew the stats.

I feel you're making generalised statements on defensive work under the assumption that every team plays the same strategy. If playing Gardner was causing issues with our ability to score, then that would be clearly reflected by our scoring. In reality, we are the number 1 scoring team, and also number 1 for scores conceded.

You say a good team wouldn't have room for a Gardner or Cordy, and yet look where the Dogs sit on the ladder while playing both these guys regularly.

 

[Holy Rioli]

Darcy is nice on the lead and creates separation at will routinely.

How he goes on multiple leads will be something I'll be watching for, as he rarely has to lead up at the footy a second time, just getting it the first lead.



Once the season is over I'll complete one. I'll talk to ESPN about whether they're open to me producing one before the trade period, but if not then it would be immediately after trades conclude.



I completely agree with your assessments of Lake and McGovern.

Interesting you're not as convinced Naughton has that elite footy brain yet. Do you believe that's something he will develop? For me it's one of those components that comes with time and experience, and experience in a given position, and until you see him there at this age/stage it's hard to know if he has it, but looking at his mix of attributes, other than his kick, he's just about as close to the model of perfection that a key defender could be as that intercepting centre half back.

It's just lack of exposure down back there that's all. I'm sure he'll be a great key defender if he went back full time. He'll have to play within his limitations as far as his kicking go, but Lake did it well.

I just don't know if he possesses that raw ability to know where the ball will drop when the opposition are attacking. He might have it we just haven't been given a chance to see it.

 

[Knightmare]

Ben McKay is below average for intercept possessions, yet is widely hailed as one of the next big KPDs. It's also very misleading to consider Gardner's intercept possession average when he came off within the first 20 seconds of one game, and early in another. 2 out of 6 games with reduced game time are going to skew the stats.

I feel you're making generalised statements on defensive work under the assumption that every team plays the same strategy. If playing Gardner was causing issues with our ability to score, then that would be clearly reflected by our scoring. In reality, we are the number 1 scoring team, and also number 1 for scores conceded.

You say a good team wouldn't have room for a Gardner or Cordy, and yet look where the Dogs sit on the ladder while playing both these guys regularly.

I view McKay as a below average key defender at this time. He's above average 1v1 and is a good stopper but remains poor as an intercepter, as an intercept mark, as a contested mark. He's not a rebounder. So he's not someone I'd be building around.

The Dogs score fine because the small and medium guys intercept and rebound at above average rates, the midfield is top of the competition and so is the front half. Put a good key defender in the place of Gardner/Cordy and that's going to lead to the greatest boost in performance in terms of impact over replacement of anyone on the team. As I've been saying, the Dogs are so strong elsewhere, that they've been able to carry Gardner and Cordy.

From a list management perspective, the best way to improve is having an unrelenting view toward enhancing the best-22 to the greatest possible degree and aggressively upgrading upon those weakest links.

It's just lack of exposure down back there that's all. I'm sure he'll be a great key defender if he went back full time. He'll have to play within his limitations as far as his kicking go, but Lake did it well.

I just don't know if he possesses that raw ability to know where the ball will drop when the opposition are attacking. He might have it we just haven't been given a chance to see it.

In defence as a junior and in season one for the Dogs, Naughton was reading the ball drop to an already very good level. I'd expect that to be one of his greatest strengths. I'd back him to read the game and know where to go. I've seen those instincts from him.

 

[flipper83]

If a key defender isn't a high level intercepter, they're irrelevant and the game has moved past them.

It's that simple. It's VFL stuff if you're not an at least reasonable intercepter at AFL level. And having those who can't are a sharp net negative towards winning.

On a good team there should be no room for Gardner or Cordy.

The better you are at intercepting and the more ways you can intercept and the higher the frequency, the better you are by position.

Games today are won and lost based on scoring off of turnovers. It starts with the forwards applying forward pressure and it's up to the defenders and in particular key defenders to intercept and get things started, and if they're great ball users, bonus, if not, you better have them on the same side.

Goals conceded to direct opponent with key defenders is a long way down my list of priorities. I'm much more interested when measuring their defensive effectiveness to look at their 1v1 win rate and looking at how often they can turn those opportunities into 1v1 marks, as an even more valuable added component.

You might have a Gardner defending a guy, and if he spoils and brings the ball to ground, it's probably not the key forward ending up with the ball, but it allows the other side the opportunity to lock the ball into their front half, harass, and force turnovers. You want to be taking intercept marks in defence at the highest possible frequency so that it doesn't bring the ground level players into the game from the other team. Gaining possession back through intercepting and then looking to score off the turnover is by far and away the most valuable functions of the whole group in the back half as a collective.

I don't think there are that many key defenders in the AFL that can intercept, rebound and defend all to a high level and definitely none that would be easy to acquire.

It's also not necessary that every key defender can do all those things. In our defensive system the key defender needs to engage the opposition tall forward so a small can come 3rd man in to intercept. Keith has actually had to sacrifice his intercept game since becoming our number 1 defender so if Gardner can take his role Keith can intercept more.

Gardner was prone to horrible clangers in his first few games but his disposal is actually pretty good now.

He's by no means a finished product but again he's played less than 20 games so it's fairly early to be writing him off.

 

[Chris25]

Darcy is nice on the lead and creates separation at will routinely.

I wouldn’t say that. His leading patterns are good, but separation on the lead is one of his bigger weaknesses for me. And most I’ve spoken to.

Heading into the Champs I’d be surprised if teams didn’t look to expose him with a faster defender. A speed/strength combo, as opposed to height is how I’d play him. When they play WA, I’d be tempted to put Jack Williams back instead of going with Rhett Bazzo for instance.

 

[Dogsman16]

Hawkins natural talent is being under-rated here. Was a freak athlete. Much much more athletic than Naughton. Cleared 200cm in the high jump as a junior. Had massive back issues and feet issues. Had to completely change the way he runs and kicks. Injuries stopped him from becoming a great of the game. As a junior prospect he was one of the best I have seen.

I agree with knightmare regarding naughton. Bulldogs much better served with naughton racking up 10 marks a game as a defender. He could be an all time great defender like a better Brian Lake. It makes sense with the other prospects on the list and with Darcy incoming. They have something special brewing if they go in that direction

Naughton won't move back to defence whilst Bev is coach. Bev has made a point of moving our best ball users (Daniel, Dale etc) from other positions into the backline. He also moved Johannisen out of defence into the forward line because his ball use was becoming a problem. Naughton isn't just a below average user of the footy but he's also extremely gung ho. He operates at a ballistic fashion and that weakness in his game is papered over the further forward he is.

In 2 years time Naughton, JUH and Darcy (and darcy won't be physically ready to compete at AFL level for a couple of seasons) can all operate in our forward line. Bruce will have completed his 4 year deal and be 31 going on 32. English can play in the ruck or even he could be pushed into defence.

You also consider the KPD's we have had whilst Bev has been coach. Adams, Hamling, Morris, Roberts, Cordy, Keath. Not one has been a top 30 selection. All have been traded in or rookie/delisted free agent picks. Keath cost a bit but he himself was a category b rookie when he was drafted. I assume we will stick to a similar list philosophy.

 

[Knightmare]

I don't think there are that many key defenders in the AFL that can intercept, rebound and defend all to a high level and definitely mine that would be way to acquire.

It's also not necessary that every key defender can do all those things. In our defensive system the key defender needs to engage the opposition tall forward so a small can come 3rd man in to intercept. Keith has actually had to sacrifice his intercept have since become our number 1 defender so if Gardner can take his role Keith can intercept more.

Gardner was prone to horrible clangers in his first few games but his disposal is actually pretty good now.

He's by no means a finished product but again he's played less than 20 games so it's fairly early to be writing him off.

I don't look at most key defenders as being able to rebound, they're few and far between. It's a bonus when they can.

I'm looking first for intercept marks, contested marks, intercept possessions. Those key defenders doing that are the most valuable at their position as those most valuable involvements by position.

Keath I'd like to see intercept more than he does, but I'd be looking at a model more like at Gold Coast where Sam Collins can take the best key forward, but he's intercepting at a high rate and was doing particularly well at that last year, then you have Ballard there intercepting at a high rate, and a Lukosius all in that same back half. There shouldn't be any key defenders who are just there to stop their opponents. I'd be saying of taggers who don't win their own ball or have an impact going the other way. It's not a formula I would be going with, or see as capable of consistently helping towards winning as stoppers are hit and miss with their capabilities to stop their opponents and the only constant is you're a net negative in that you're contributing no value going the other way. You want to be winning your matchups in each position and having more influence than your opponents. The more positions you get influence and superior influence by comparison to their opponent, the better your winning chances as a broader methodology.

I wouldn’t say that. His leading patterns are good, but separation on the lead is one of his bigger weaknesses for me. And most I’ve spoken to.

Heading into the Champs I’d be surprised if teams didn’t look to expose him with a faster defender. A speed/strength combo, as opposed to height is how I’d play him. When they play WA, I’d be tempted to put Jack Williams back instead of going with Rhett Bazzo for instance.

Watching Darcy on the weekend as a forward, and that's the first time I saw him up forward, he was getting 2-3m clear on the lead. We'll need to see a larger sample size to see against more opponents whether he continues doing that, but I felt encouraged seeing him on the lead on the weekend.

No key defender in the u18s has the height or length to go with Darcy to my knowledge, so teams will have to look for other ways to play him. Williams I'm keen to see the capabilities of in defence as I've only seen him forward. Even perhaps more than Williams, Jacob Van Rooyen I'm also keen to see in defence and might be another alternative. Bazzo I don't see at either end of the field as being likely to be as effectual as either, with his play so far this season lackluster.

 

[Boristown]

I don't look at most key defenders as being able to rebound, they're few and far between. It's a bonus when they can.

I'm looking first for intercept marks, contested marks, intercept possessions. Those key defenders doing that are the most valuable at their position as those most valuable involvements by position.

Keath I'd like to see intercept more than he does, but I'd be looking at a model more like at Gold Coast where Sam Collins can take the best key forward, but he's intercepting at a high rate and was doing particularly well at that last year, then you have Ballard there intercepting at a high rate, and a Lukosius all in that same back half. There shouldn't be any key defenders who are just there to stop their opponents. I'd be saying of taggers who don't win their own ball or have an impact going the other way. It's not a formula I would be going with, or see as capable of consistently helping towards winning as stoppers are hit and miss with their capabilities to stop their opponents and the only constant is you're a net negative in that you're contributing no value going the other way. You want to be winning your matchups in each position and having more influence than your opponents. The more positions you get influence and superior influence by comparison to their opponent, the better your winning chances as a broader methodology.

There is no doubt the Bulldogs could do with some more intercept marking in D50, but you would look at other options beside taking the best young key forward in the game and sending him back there. For example, David Astbury is a FA. If he played at the Bulldogs, he'd become the main defensive stopper and allow Keath to then be that intercepting 2nd defender.

 

[Knightmare]

There is no doubt the Bulldogs could do with some more intercept marking in D50, but you would look at other options beside taking the best young key forward in the game and sending him back there. For example, David Astbury is a FA. If he played at the Bulldogs, he'd become the main defensive stopper and allow Keath to then be that intercepting 2nd defender.

Astbury would be a reasonable get and certainly an substantial upgrade, and as you say would enable Keath to intercept more which is what he does best, though the question would be whether Astbury would leave Richmond, and I can't say I'm privy to his plans or otherwise.

Astbury has been only okay this season, with his best play coming 2016-2019, so he's no longer prime Astbury which is the first essential note for anyone looking to add him. His average this year of 2 intercept marks per game this year is only reasonable and again he's another low volume intercepter. His 30% contested defensive loss % isn't all that good either and has him a good way away from the better stoppers also on form this year. So he's not someone to pay top dollar on, that's for sure.

Liam Jones as a point of comparison at this age/stage is dramatically better than Astbury, and for someone around that 30 year old mark is a lot more appealing to me at least if I had the choice.

 

[Sphynx]

I view McKay as a below average key defender at this time. He's above average 1v1 and is a good stopper but remains poor as an intercepter, as an intercept mark, as a contested mark. He's not a rebounder. So he's not someone I'd be building around.

Let me return the favor with a slight edit. Good god.

Doesn't sound like you've seen McKay if that's your view.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

I view McKay as a below average key defender at this time. He's above average 1v1 and is a good stopper but remains poor as an intercepter, as an intercept mark, as a contested mark. He's not a rebounder. So he's not someone I'd be building around.

Richmond could’ve used McKay tonight. Ultimately King was the difference between them winning or losing.

Last week McKay kept King to 5 possessions, 2 marks. You don’t need intercepts when you are stopping the influence of key forwards who have the potential to win games off their own boot.

I’m not sure you’ve actually watched Ben play this year.

 

[Knightmare]

Richmond could’ve used McKay tonight. Ultimately King was the difference between them winning or losing.

Last week McKay kept King to 5 possessions, 2 marks. You don’t need intercepts when you are stopping the influence of key forwards who have the potential to win games off their own boot.

I’m not sure you’ve actually watched Ben play this year.

I made the comment 3 posts ago before the start of tonight's match that Astbury isn't going great this year with his best years past him and he really struggled tonight. Absolutely a reduced output of opponent outcome is better than strong output to the opponent and nothing in the way of your own from Astbury tonight. Comparatively there is no one who will disagree with you.

The problem with McKay and others key defenders who are spoil first or don't intercept a lot is they rarely ever win their matchups, with the best outcome being a breakeven where neither the defender nor forward have an impact. It's like for those watching Prestigiacomo going back 10+ years ago. That's a neutral outcome. That's the best he was ever really able to get due to the nature of how he played. I'd say the same of a tagger who doesn't ever seek out the ball himself. By position, in as many positions as possible, you want to create winning outcomes. When you're a shutdown defender first, it's very difficult to create those winning outcomes because all you're doing is spoiling the ball which brings the opposition's ground level types into games. Today the best key defenders will on average be able to restrict their opponents to below average output, but they'll be able to convert 1v1s into intercept marks, take their share of intercept marks and rebound, and overall have a greater baring on the outcome of games than their opponents.

That's where the value of the Harris Andrew's, the Darcy Moore's, the Jeremy McGovern's, the Liam Jones', the Tom Stewart's and the Jake Lever's become ever more apparent. Tom Stewart may be the best defender in the competition at the moment broadly because he's not only of the non key defenders the best for intercept marks, intercept possessions and contested marks, but he has on top of that an elite contested defensive loss % at sub 17% and on top of that is a high metres gained player who uses it beautifully. When you've got guys like that in defence where they're great in each of those areas it's a delight to watch, and when you've even got two of those areas ticked, you've got yourself a high level piece.

Even if you take away that rebounding component which the vast majority of key defenders don't have anyway, I look at Liam Jones as one of the absolute premier key defenders in the competition and edging close to that top-5. He's #1 in the competition for intercept marks, he averages an equal competition high contested marks among key defenders and his contested defense loss % is only 11.9% which is better than the entire cohort of key defenders in the All-Australian conversation, roughly twice as good even. So he's one I'd have in my personal favourites basket and view as perhaps the competition's most underrated key defender because the way he plays in my view at least contributes mightily towards winning, because he's elite in each of those categories I'd be targeting.

I'm not going to speak for others as it's plainly obvious the majority have a contrasting view here, but in every position on the field as a fundamental principle, I want to create win conditions and have the averages in my favour whereby I have players in every position on the field who can and most often win the matchups in their position and have a greater contribution towards team success than their direct opponent.

With key defenders to achieve that, intercepting capabilities is that component that leads with the highest frequency to those outcomes. Through the midfield that's contested ball winning and the highest volume of that possible. From key forwards, you're looking for goals kicked. There are different areas I'd have in the non-negotiables category by positions, and different coaches, different list managers will have their own philosophies and views towards what makes for winning football, just as I have my own. And over time that should evolve and adjust as the capabilities of different footballers evolve. I know for me with key defenders with every passing season I've become more staunch in my view that key defenders must be high end intercepters and intercept marks with strong 1v1 capabilities in order to be able to create those wins at their position routinely.

 

[mattsmob]

Tom Stewart may be the best defender in the competition at the moment broadly because he's not only of the non key defenders the best for intercept marks, intercept possessions and contested marks, but he has on top of that an elite contested defensive loss % at sub 17% and on top of that is a high metres gained player who uses it beautifully

I’ll admit I don’t watch a lot of Geelong but in the game against Brisbane last week he was matched up on Charlie Cameron for the first half and in my opinion was well beaten and didn’t have his usual output. Not disputing he’s a gun player but could the reason his defensive loss % is so good be that most weeks he isn’t on the best forwards. Again I haven’t watched every Geelong game so correct me if I’m wrong but I feel as though Bews, Henry and O’Connor (when he’s in defence) take the more lockdown roles leaving Stewart on less threatening forwards. Personally I still think lockdown defenders that don’t particularly intercept or rebound are still valuable as it allows the intercept players to do that more freely.

 

[dinnaz]

I’ll admit I don’t watch a lot of Geelong but in the game against Brisbane last week he was matched up on Charlie Cameron for the first half and in my opinion was well beaten and didn’t have his usual output. Not disputing he’s a gun player but could the reason his defensive loss % is so good be that most weeks he isn’t on the best forwards. Again I haven’t watched every Geelong game so correct me if I’m wrong but I feel as though Bews, Henry and O’Connor (when he’s in defence) take the more lockdown roles leaving Stewart on less threatening forwards. Personally I still think lockdown defenders that don’t particularly intercept or rebound are still valuable as it allows the intercept players to do that more freely.

The same with Moore & Rance. They only became "All Australian" level once they had the freedom to be 3rd man up every contest, essentially playing as the spare.