Maric - The Fighter

[TheLeftFist8]

What we saw at the start of the season was huge improvement in Maric which than tailed off due most likely to fatigue.

After 5 or 6 pre-seasons, we don't expect him to be able to cope with more than 12 or so games before blaming fatigue?

For the past three years Maric has had some very encouraging runs of form and some solid patches of 'barely good enough'.

Perhaps it's injury, perhaps it's inexperience...but i doubt we'd be finding the same excuse for most other 24yo players on the list.

One thing is for sure...the inclusion of Jacobs will have a profound effect on Maric' career. It will either inspire him to new heights or it will see him floundering. Hopefully it's the former!

 

[cammo84]

I don't beleive that Maric is a one-dimensional player. Can take a grab (took some beauties on the last line of defence this year), and he's a pretty decent set shot. I wouldn't be opposed to resting him up forward at times. If he can take some grabs and slot 1 or 2 then he'll be more than handy down there.

 

[Wood_Duck]

I reckon Iv still has significant upside. I agree he is a bit undersized to lead the ruck for the entire season, but I'll bet my left one he plays most games next year.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

prior to the introduction of the new sub rule the tactic of selecting 2 genuine ruckman in most team structure was certainly dying a slow death with most of the top sides going in with 1x genuine ruckman and a backup that played the majority of game time either forward or back.

now with the introduction of the sub rule, IMO the days of selecting 2 x genuine ruckmen are gawn!!!!, subsequently I have listed examples of ruck combinations that we can expect to see next year

Collingwood - Jolly / Brown
Geelong - Ottens / Hawkins
Freo - Sandi / Bradley
WB - Minson / Roughead
Essendon - Hille / Ryder
Hawthorn - Hale / Roughead
St Kilda - McEvoy / Stanley
Sydney - Mumford / Jesse Smith
Brisbane - Leuenberger / Clark
Port - Brogan / Westoff
Carlton - Marnock / Kruzer
Adelaide - Jacobs / SMACK , who knows Tippett may even be used in this role in order to enable us to select another runner

 

[crowsarethebest]

I don't beleive that Maric is a one-dimensional player. Can take a grab (took some beauties on the last line of defence this year), and he's a pretty decent set shot. I wouldn't be opposed to resting him up forward at times. If he can take some grabs and slot 1 or 2 then he'll be more than handy down there.

He's shown in the SANFL and back in his junior days that he can kick a bag every now and then if he's played forward. However with his lack of mobility etc., if he doesn't mark it he's basically a massive liability.

He's not totally one-dimentional but he's not exactly the flexible 'Leigh brown' type 2nd ruck and neither is Jacobs. The new sub rule has basically brought back the undersized ruck and guys like McKernan/Sellar/James Craig to some extent (if he can develop his game in other positions)- they hold real value now.

Leigh Brown has basically brought back the flexible tall/ruck utility, even if the sub rule wasn't changed I reckon alot of clubs would've looked at Collingwood's ruck division set up and would've copied them in having 1 genuine ruck and one tall utility (Leigh Brown) to help out.

It'll be interesting next year especially if Moran comes back into the fold. Moran could play as a no.1 genuine ruck but also be used as a 2nd ruck (tall utility type) as well which is why he's such a valuable commodity. I don't think Maric or Jacobs will be able to play with each other... I just can't see it. It'll have to be Either Maric or Jacobs then a Smack/Sellar/Craig- don't forget we also have Tip as another option. Carry 2 genuine rucks + Tip isn't going to work next year, especially with the new sub rule.

 

[AFC979810]

I did an analysis in one of the Jacobs/Walker trade threads, comparing the two (Maric & Jacobs) in the head-to-head contests.

Jacobs played 13 games this year, against 12 different clubs (he played 2 games against Sydney). Maric also played games against those 12 clubs.

Of the 12 head-to-head comparisons, I scored Maric with 4 wins, Jacobs 3 with 5 draws. There is very little separating the two of them.

Jacobs averaged significantly more hitouts than Maric this year - and Carlton fans are quick to point out that he has a very high percentage of hitouts going to advantage (to be fair, Maric is no slouch in this department either). To a certain extent this was driven by the fact that he was Carlton's 2nd ruckman for most of the season - up against the likes of Kepler Bradley and Tom Hawkins. Having a genuine ruck up against a part timer will usually result in the ruck having inflated figures as a result.

In contrast, Maric spent most of the year as our #1 ruckman, aside from a 2-3 week period when Griffin took the mantle. Maric' stats suffered (in comparison to Jacobs') because he was up against the big boys, rather than the lower quality backups. Maric' stats also suffered, particularly in the latter half of the season, because he was sharing ruck duties with 2 other ruckmen (Griffin/Tippett then Sellar/Tippett), while Jacobs shared with only 1 other ruckman. Even if that resulted in a 40/40/20 split, the difference between 40% ruck time & 50% ruck time is the difference between 16-18 hitouts and 20-23 hitouts per game.

I expect the battle for Adelaide's ruck supremacy to be an epic contest between these two players. Even allowing for the changes to the interchange rules, I expect these two to play all 22 games in 2011 with Adelaide's ruck division re-gaining much of the respect it has lost in recent years as a result.

Great analysis mate.... Don't forget though that Jacobs was also tapping the ball to Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, etc....

I really don't think that having Sauce and Maric in the same 22 with the new sub system will be able to work - particularly when we have enough talls in the forward with Tippett, Walker (and you could consider Hendo)...

Will be very interesting to see how it ends up, but I think everyone agrees we upgraded our ruck stocks by losing Griff and getting Sauce.

 

[King Elvis]

The new interchange rules are stupid as hell.

 

[Vader]

The new interchange rules are stupid as hell.

Not really.. they're an attempt to return the interchange to its original purpose - which was a source of replacement players in case one (or more) players got injured and were unable to return to the field.

Whether or not the change will succeed in this endeavour is entirely another matter - but that is the intent.

 

[Wood_Duck]

The new interchange rules are stupid as hell.

Hard to know. Will be interested to see how the clubs handle it. Maybe we will see the emergence of a specialist last quarter player?

 

[King Elvis]

Not really.. they're an attempt to return the interchange to its original purpose - which was a source of replacement players in case one (or more) players got injured and were unable to return to the field.

Whether or not the change will succeed in this endeavour is entirely another matter - but that is the intent.

They're still stupid as hell.

Cap the interchange, if they must, or just reduce the bench to 3 players.

Having a sub is a massive mistake, IMO.

 

[cmndstab]

who knows Tippett may even be used in this role in order to enable us to select another runner

Surely we wouldn't be stupid enough to make this mistake for the third year in a row?

 

[Mismatched]

prior to the introduction of the new sub rule the tactic of selecting 2 genuine ruckman in most team structure was certainly dying a slow death with most of the top sides going in with 1x genuine ruckman and a backup that played the majority of game time either forward or back.

now with the introduction of the sub rule, IMO the days of selecting 2 x genuine ruckmen are gawn!!!!, subsequently I have listed examples of ruck combinations that we can expect to see next year

Collingwood - Jolly / Brown
Geelong - Ottens / Hawkins
Freo - Sandi / Bradley
WB - Minson / Roughead
Essendon - Hille / Ryder
Hawthorn - Hale / Roughead
St Kilda - McEvoy / Stanley
Sydney - Mumford / Jesse Smith
Brisbane - Leuenberger / Clark
Port - Brogan / Westoff
Carlton - Marnock / Kruzer
Adelaide - Jacobs / SMACK , who knows Tippett may even be used in this role in order to enable us to select another runner

No, if you compare Tippett to the rest of the 2nd rucks there, you'll notice that their either the 2nd or 3rd best tall forward, not the first. If you start sacrificing your best key forward to the ruck, suddenly your just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Tippett's far to dangerous and important to our structure to have him spending 30% of his game in the ruck, not to mention the extra fatigue it'll place on him. Walker at this stage would be a better option, but he's not tall enough to ruck, hence why I believe we'll see the emergence of McKernan as our 3rd tall forward/2nd ruck, with Henderson moving into a more attacking winger style role, providing a link between defence and attack.

 

[Wesley Pipes]

What the deal with this talk about only needing 1 ruckman now that interchanges are capped?

When I was playing we always had a saying that people get tired... but they never get smaller.

Ruckman will always have worth and I think when tactics change to suit the rule changes it will go back to a more 90's orientated style..Ruckman will be very valuable and I even remember a side going into the gf in 97 with 3 lumbering ruckman.

 

[Mismatched]

What the deal with this talk about only needing 1 ruckman now that interchanges are capped?

When I was playing we always had a saying that people get tired... but they never get smaller.

Ruckman will always have worth and I think when tactics change to suit the rule changes it will go back to a more 90's orientated style..Ruckman will be very valuable and I even remember a side going into the gf in 97 with 3 lumbering ruckman.

1 specialist ruckman, then a 2nd ruck who is versatile enough to play a KPP in his own right, as opposed to just another lumbering oaf. See Collingwood with L. Brown, Geelong with Hawkins, St. Kilda with Blake/Kosi in the GF, Essendon with Ryder, Freo with Bradley/Johnson, Brisbane with Mitch Clarke, Power with Westhoff etc. Very few clubs now go in with 2 dinosaur ruckman, with all the rotations there's no longer room on the bench for ruckman to split their game time 50:50 and then if they play forward, they have to be able to apply defensive pressure and actually be of use when the ball hits the ground.

There'll still be a 2nd ruck, but the position and the players who fill it will change. 1st ruck will be required to play 70-80% game time, which they should be able to do anyway. Now instead of have a bloke sit on the bench for 70-80% of the game, or have your 2nd ruck eat into the gametime of your 1st ruck, you'll maximise the time your best ruckman spends on the ground and just have a part-time give him a breather every now and then.

 

[Schulzycrow]

What the deal with this talk about only needing 1 ruckman now that interchanges are capped?

When I was playing we always had a saying that people get tired... but they never get smaller.

Ruckman will always have worth and I think when tactics change to suit the rule changes it will go back to a more 90's orientated style..Ruckman will be very valuable and I even remember a side going into the gf in 97 with 3 lumbering ruckman.

Very true don't get shorter, but get slower, but play is faster, av mids are taller and faster, fitter. Rucks are more mobile, floods, presses, zones. Height is valuable, but so now is flexability. I know Pittman played CHB for Blight and that is what is going to be needed.

 

[Mismatched]

Very true don't get shorter, but get slower, but play is faster, av mids are taller and faster, fitter. Rucks are more mobile, floods, presses, zones. Height is valuable, but so now is flexability. I know Pittman played CHB for Blight and that is what is going to be needed.

Yeah, with the rotations how they are these days, players aren't getting as tired, so the advantage taller players used to get as the game wore on is vastly diminished and with this they are getting exposed by their lack of pace for deeper into matches.