List Cull pre draft

[Fred Ziffel]

Do you reckon we will re-rookie young Wood to give him time?

It is possible.

 

[Taylor]

There may be a player in mind for the rookie pick, say Panos, but should he be gone then we might pick Wood again.

I feel bad for him, I let myself dream.

 

[purplerunsdeep]

Unless you pick up long term speculative ruckman as a rookie pick, most will be given 1 year to prove themselves worthy.

I'm ok with the churn on the rookie list.

I also want to see a few tougher decisions made of our main list - move a few more on who realistically wont be best 35. Go to the draft to keep the list moving

 

[Steinfreo]

As I stated quite a while ago ,my mate Phil gave us the good oil on Simpson and him remaining on our list .
I can't wait for the Preseason training to start so he can mesmerize us all over again with his skills .

There's good oil? That is great news.

I was watching Hogan highlights the other day and all i noticed was how sweet Simpson looked.

 

[ilikepotatoes]

Wood didn't look like making it to me. Was slow and seemed quite lazy, he also didn't get much of the ball.

 

[WAnchor]

Unless you pick up long term speculative ruckman as a rookie pick, most will be given 1 year to prove themselves worthy.

I'm ok with the churn on the rookie list.

I also want to see a few tougher decisions made of our main list - move a few more on who realistically wont be best 35. Go to the draft to keep the list moving

I too call for tough decisions but I look at it differently. Alex Pearce, for example may not currently be best 35. It is very likely that in two years, he will be best 18. Suban would now be top 25, and it is very possible that he will be top 25 in two years. Of the two, it is Suban that I would seek a trade for.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

Unless you pick up long term speculative ruckman as a rookie pick, most will be given 1 year to prove themselves worthy.

I'm ok with the churn on the rookie list.

I also want to see a few tougher decisions made of our main list - move a few more on who realistically wont be best 35. Go to the draft to keep the list moving

But that's the problem. We don't have many that fall outside the young and still developing category, that you would be comfortable with cutting from our list.
We have essentially, no spuds .

 

[Dockernut]

Wood didn't look like making it to me. Was slow and seemed quite lazy, he also didn't get much of the ball.

No, no, no. Kid has a lot of talent. Just never imposed himself, coz you know, he is a stick insect.

 

[nurries]

Wasn't Menegola elevated to the senior list?

 

[Aussiblood]

No, no, no. Kid has a lot of talent. Just never imposed himself, coz you know, he is a stick insect.

We took the insect and gave him a year on the same soup ol'Fyfey devoured ... but the test results have come back on Wood - and he's not even going to be close to touching to our resident God...

 

[Taylor]

Wasn't Menegola elevated to the senior list?

That was temp one during the season so he was available for selection.

 

[ilikepotatoes]

No, no, no. Kid has a lot of talent. Just never imposed himself, coz you know, he is a stick insect.

I never saw it. He struggled due to size, but I didn't see anything remarkable about him.

 

[Unique Name]

But that's the problem. We don't have many that fall outside the young and still developing category, that you would be comfortable with cutting from our list.
We have essentially, no spuds .

If I was to be brutal.... De Boer and Suban. Not because they are spuds, more because moving forward I just don't see them being more than depth. Crowley and McPharlin are both 30+, while both would be in the 22 next year a case could be made for retiring both.
Heck I reckon i could even make a case for Clarke to be number 1 ruck and retiring Sandi as well.

 

[yakamoto]

And Pav as well.

 

[PapaJ]

There may be a player in mind for the rookie pick, say Panos, but should he be gone then we might pick Wood again.

I feel bad for him, I let myself dream.

Or a 'downgrade', e.g. Simpson?

FWIW, I'm not chuffed about Wood either. Not that I'm convinced he would make it as a regular AFL player but, on the other hand, when you see a player who has that natural footy nous and some nice skills, at a young age - that raw material is always nice to have about the place before you're absolutely sure it's not worth it.

But, as others have said, we're a fair way from the coal face to know what's going on.

 

[Halfbaked]

If I was to be brutal.... De Boer and Suban. Not because they are spuds, more because moving forward I just don't see them being more than depth. Crowley and McPharlin are both 30+, while both would be in the 22 next year a case could be made for retiring both.
Heck I reckon i could even make a case for Clarke to be number 1 ruck and retiring Sandi as well.

Sandi, at the moment is the best there is. He is unlikely get any slower and will not get any shorter and could play at this standard for a couple more seasons.

 

[Unique Name]

Sandi, at the moment is the best there is. He is unlikely get any slower and will not get any shorter and could play at this standard for a couple more seasons.

Agreed on all accounts. Sandi > Competition

However is he holding back Clarke?

What we do know is that:

- Clarke was in career best form in 2013 when he was our no1 ruckman. Without Sandi we were still able to get into a top 4 position.

- Clarke is a spud forward - Sandi is also a spud forward.

- Sandilands being our no1 ruckman means Clarke spends 75% of a game as one of our forwards. This is not good.

- Our ability to score goals was compromised because our forward line was a shambles for the majority of the year.

- Opposition teams learned that all they had to was clog the backline because we have no forwards who can take a pack mark. (note how often we tried to clear the forward line so our smalls could be effective with the 'Chaos' ball)

- We have 2 genuine rucks rather than the more preferable 1 ruckman and one forward who can ruck for 15-20% of the game. Ideally IMO we would have Clarke as the main ruckman and Taberner to help out.

- Clarke will be 25 next year, he fits in the age bracket with the future of our midfield (Fyfe 23, Barlow 26, Hill 25, Mora 23, Neale 21) Sandi at 32 does not.

- I favour Clarke over Sandi because I think long term team prosperity is more important then flag hunting season by season. Remaining close to the top 4 on a consistent basis like Geelong does gives you more opportunities at winning a flag. Make the top 4 with a healthy team and you're a chance. With smart recruiting and player management we can avoid the pitfall of being 'in' the window of opportunity followed by the rebuilding stage. This means sometimes moving older players on before they are spent. Geelong moved Chappy and Pods on before they were done and still managed to make top 4 (just).

- Sandi is better than Clarke but he is also holding him back by not letting him take on the no1 ruck spot. A position we have seen Clarke excel at.

Look I'm not calling for Sandi's head or anything. I'll be happy if he's playing next year, I just know that him playing comes at a cost. We win a flag and it'll be worth it. We don't win a flag and then we'll be forced to move onto plan b whether we like it or not.

 

[Shadow Man]

Agreed on all accounts. Sandi > Competition

However is he holding back Clarke?

What we do know is that:

- Clarke was in career best form in 2013 when he was our no1 ruckman. Without Sandi we were still able to get into a top 4 position.

- Clarke is a spud forward - Sandi is also a spud forward.

- Sandilands being our no1 ruckman means Clarke spends 75% of a game as one of our forwards. This is not good.

- Our ability to score goals was compromised because our forward line was a shambles for the majority of the year.

- Opposition teams learned that all they had to was clog the backline because we have no forwards who can take a pack mark. (note how often we tried to clear the forward line so our smalls could be effective with the 'Chaos' ball)

- We have 2 genuine rucks rather than the more preferable 1 ruckman and one forward who can ruck for 15-20% of the game. Ideally IMO we would have Clarke as the main ruckman and Taberner to help out.

- Clarke will be 25 next year, he fits in the age bracket with the future of our midfield (Fyfe 23, Barlow 26, Hill 25, Mora 23, Neale 21) Sandi at 32 does not.

- I favour Clarke over Sandi because I think long term team prosperity is more important then flag hunting season by season. Remaining close to the top 4 on a consistent basis like Geelong does gives you more opportunities at winning a flag. Make the top 4 with a healthy team and you're a chance. With smart recruiting and player management we can avoid the pitfall of being 'in' the window of opportunity followed by the rebuilding stage. This means sometimes moving older players on before they are spent. Geelong moved Chappy and Pods on before they were done and still managed to make top 4 (just).

- Sandi is better than Clarke but he is also holding him back by not letting him take on the no1 ruck spot. A position we have seen Clarke excel at.

Look I'm not calling for Sandi's head or anything. I'll be happy if he's playing next year, I just know that him playing comes at a cost. We win a flag and it'll be worth it. We don't win a flag and then we'll be forced to move onto plan b whether we like it or not.

That's just crazy and I really don't think your summation holds water. You are suggesting to retire the All Australian ruckman in his prime because we might get more out of the back-up B grade stringer. In what world would this ever be considered??

Better idea, is that Zac pulls his finger out and starts making the most out the opportunities he has been given. Find a way to impact games in whatever role he is given or move on elsewhere and we do likewise with other options.

Sandi isn't holding back Zac, Zac is holding back Zac!

 

[Unique Name]

That's just crazy and I really don't think any of this holds any water. You are suggesting to retire the All Australian ruckman in his prime because we might get more out of the back-up B grade stringer. In what world would this ever be considered?

Better idea is that Zac pulls his finger out and starts making the most out the opportunities he has been given. Find a way to impact games in whatever role he is given or move on elsewhere and we do likewise with other options.

Sandi isn't holding back Zac, Zac is holding back Zac!

What part of my argument doesn't hold water.

I'm guessing you only read the first few lines and then jumped the gun with your reply.

- Firstly I said that I am happy for Sandi's to keep the no1 ruck spot for us. But it comes at a cost, which is that he is holding Clarke back.
- We were successful without Sandi for a big portion of the 2013 season. (Our most successful season ever)

- If you think something in Zac Clarke is going to click and all of a sudden he's going to be a gun forward I don't know what to tell you. Zac is a good ruckman and a poor forward, it is what it is. No point trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

- In what world would this ever be considered?
Geelong let Chappy go, a club legend and a good forward. Club's make these decisions, hoping that the short term loss is eclipsed by long term gain.

 

[Mr Peabody]

- We were successful without Sandi for a big portion of the 2013 season. (Our most successful season ever)

We were successful for a big portion of the 2013 finals because of Sandi's contribution.

Played well with a cracked jaw in the Geelong game at the Cattery and Sandi played a key part in getting us going in the GF. Meanwhile, Clarke got subbed off for hearing footsteps....

Huge difference between the two particularly when the coach asks them to step up during games and show leadership.

 

[Unique Name]

We were successful for a big portion of the 2013 finals because of Sandi's contribution.

Played well with a cracked jaw in the Geelong game at the Cattery and Sandi played a key part in getting us going in the GF. Meanwhile, Clarke got subbed off for hearing footsteps....

Huge difference between the two particularly when the coach asks them to step up during games and show leadership.

Firstly I never said Sandilands wasn't a key asset to the team. My point was that Zac Clarke was our no1 ruckman for the majority of the 2013 H&A season playing 17 games. He helped get us into a Top 4 spot.

And really, Sandilands at 31 years old (150+ games) had more leadership skills than a 24 year old (50 gamer) you don't say.

 

[Mr Peabody]

Firstly I never said Sandilands wasn't a key asset to the team. My point was that Zac Clarke was our no1 ruckman for the majority of the 2013 H&A season playing 17 games. He helped get us into a Top 4 spot.

And really, Sandilands at 31 years old (150+ games) had more leadership skills than a 24 year old (50 gamer) you don't say.

My point is that if Sandi had played the home & away season in 2013, it could have only helped. Who knows, Top 2 may have been possible?

On the matter of leadership, on field it's less about numbers of games and more about lifting when the team requires it. Sandi has loads of it. Clarke goes missing at key moments.

If the coaches agreed with you, Sandi would have played less this year. If the industry agrees with you, clubs and the media would be clamoring over Zac as their first ruck option right now. Rather, the talk is about Ryder, Gorringe & other ruck trade options.

 

[freofc1994]

For us to remain in the hunt for many years we need to keep on the same path. Blooding youngsters like Neale, Suttcliffe, Crozier, Sheridan, Tabener. The fact that Zac has played a lot of footy and when handed the No. 1 ruck duties will stand us in a good position.

Topping up with talent when available is vital, that may mean giving up some guys to trade but thats the business.

 

[Agenfrida]

Sandi, at the moment is the best there is. He is unlikely get any slower and will not get any shorter and could play at this standard for a couple more seasons.

Sandi could theoretically go on for another five years. He's never been an agile or pacy player, he's been a 7ft player who rarely loses taps and has a good tank to get up and down the ground. His endurance isn't likely to fade, it's not that, that normally causes players to retire. It's that loss of speed and agility. That and/or injuries. Whether or not he chooses or the club chooses to move him on in a year or two is another thing. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's still rucking in 2018/2019.

 

[Unique Name]

Firstly Ryder is being talked about because he has asked to leave the Bombers. Zac has not asked and the club have not officially said they are trying to trade him. Just some baseless article on SEN.

Secondly Ryder is better than Zac, I'm not denying that. If we could swap I'd definitely go for it. But you are comparing a 170 gamer against a 70 game player, hardly fair.

You point about the 2013 season is speculative nonsense. The facts are Sandi was injured for a large part of the 2013 season. Zac as a 23 year old stood up and became our no1 Ruckman and did a great job and he didn't go missing. Again proving my point that he is a good Ruckman.

This season he has had some shocking games playing as a forward who also rucks. I'll say it again to clarify. Clarke is a spud up forward with only the odd game to be proud of playing. When he was fulfilling his ruck duties though he did well. Inconsistancy is something that occurs with a lot of young players. But for some reason Clarke's being singled out. What about Ballas' performances in finals to date?

Your point about the coaches not agreeing with me just shows you're replying without actually reading what I wrote.

To clarify, Sandi is a better option as our no1 Ruckman because he's the best in the comp. But he is 32 next season and closing in on retirement. Zac is a good ruckman and will be our no1 Ruckman when Sandi does retire. But having Clarke play 75% of a game as a forward is a liability to the team because he is a spud forward. That is not going to change.

So Zac is being played out of position as a forward who rucks because we have a better option for now in sandi. Replying to Freds initial post I said if I was being brutal in list management I would cut De Boer and Suban because I no longer see them as anything other than depth, McPharlin could be cut to make way for Silvagni and Sandi could be dropped to give Zac the no1 ruck spot.

I know it sounds crazy but the 2013 h&a season is proof that we are still a top 4 side without sandi. The downside is we lose Sandi's ruck domination a year earlier than we would have otherwise. The benefit is that Zac gets a full season as our no1 ruck which would only lead to him getting even better and it frees up a spot in the forward line for a forward who rucks. I think Taberner could be this person and from training reports RTB thinks this too as Taberner is doing ruck work at training.