Leon Davis the sub???

[Swooop]

I think if you get majority of your stats within 60 of goal you are bound to get assists.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2010&rt=LT&st=GA

Top of that list is dominated by players who spend considerable amount of time in the F50.

Agree with this...if you are the one small forward constant, in a dominant team, whose game plan revolves around forward pressure from all the other forwards aswell, it stands to reason you are going to be at the top of tackles inside 50 and goal assists.

These stats of Leon's are overrated and misleading IMO and he'd need to do a lot more next year to hold his place.

I'd love to see it but am not expecting it TBH.

 

[Ed D]

I think if you get majority of your stats within 60 of goal you are bound to get assists.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2010&rt=LT&st=GA

Top of that list is dominated by players who spend considerable amount of time in the F50.

Fair enough, and I agree with you Swoop, he does need to increase his output this year.

 

[Go_Brad_Dick]

Leon is too good for the sub role, he'll be playing full games consistently and just sub if injured or needing a rest. Word is he's shaken last years leg woes and will be back to his best. Can see the Davis, Dick, Krakeur, Didak combination causing mayhem this year, not many teams have deep enough back line to cope with all that flair, as well as the big unkos like Cloke and Dawes.
I don't think sub will be a huge strategy for us. Probably will just use it to rotate kids and get them some game time.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Agree Dave, pretty much my thoughts exactly. I wrote the following in a thread not that long ago;

Most people have suggested that we use a utility such as Goldsack or Tarrant in this position next year but I feel that this would be a mistake. Our on-field team is so versatile as it is that in the event that we need a structural change, we can make it using the players that are already on the field or the bench.

I feel that we should use a runner in that position who can be brought on half-way through the third quarter and used at every opportunity. We could really stretch teams this way and it could be a massive factor in final quarters against tired teams, especially if they are using the conservative method of putting a utility in this position as people are suggesting we should. Perhaps one of our young quick draftees or someone with goal-sense like Davis if he gets himself fit enough to play wing/half forward again.

We're the best team so we should be using the sub position as a weapon, not a contingency plan.

Thoughts?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=19617628#post19617628

Some posters agreed, some disagreed. I just think that having a utility as the sub is a contingency plan, i.e. it is a negative tactic. Having a quick guy who can turn a match is what we should look at considering the quality of our list.

 

[4#Didak#4]

I initially thought the sub rule would disadvantage us due to its effect on our rotations, which is one of our major weapons. However, the upside is that flexible sides with depth will have a big advantage.

Our ability to be interchangeable, which MM to his credit has focused on a lot the last 3 years, means we do not need to use the sub as a cover for a possible injury back or forward. Most sides will use the sub as insurance for injuries to key players.

By having an attacking sub such as a Dick, Krak or Davis or someone who can be very damaging, games can be won.

The question is who do you sub off? Do you remove a more dour midfielder that has been deliberately run hard early in the game (like a McCarthy) and unleash the sub. Or do you sub off a tall to provide more run. It will probably depend on the state of the game & who you play.

Our achilles heel is still the rucks. Jolly is so durable, however an injury to him could result in a change to how we use the sub as we may not be able to trust Wood to shoulder the load and we can't afford to have Wood clogging our bench.

 

[Bianconerri]

Leon Davis the donut sub dud

 

[DaVe86]

Agree Dave, pretty much my thoughts exactly. I wrote the following in a thread not that long ago;

Most people have suggested that we use a utility such as Goldsack or Tarrant in this position next year but I feel that this would be a mistake. Our on-field team is so versatile as it is that in the event that we need a structural change, we can make it using the players that are already on the field or the bench.

I feel that we should use a runner in that position who can be brought on half-way through the third quarter and used at every opportunity. We could really stretch teams this way and it could be a massive factor in final quarters against tired teams, especially if they are using the conservative method of putting a utility in this position as people are suggesting we should. Perhaps one of our young quick draftees or someone with goal-sense like Davis if he gets himself fit enough to play wing/half forward again.

We're the best team so we should be using the sub position as a weapon, not a contingency plan.

Thoughts?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=19617628#post19617628

Some posters agreed, some disagreed. I just think that having a utility as the sub is a contingency plan, i.e. it is a negative tactic. Having a quick guy who can turn a match is what we should look at considering the quality of our list.

Yep great post. We'll already have guys like Tarrant, Reid, O'Brien, Maxwell, Toovey, Shaw and Leigh Brown in our starting 21 and they can all play on a number of different opponents. No need to have another like GOldsack on the bench. Much better to use it attackingly and bring on pace.