Preview R14: Changes vs. Hawthorn Hawks

[Pugsley]

The negative responses on FB and insta are good to see, this club like many do take notice when the fans turn on them publicly

and do nothing about it.

 

[MarcusP2]

Billy Dowlings last game he had 21 disposal, 8 marks and a goal. That would be absolute peak Murphy based on the last 2 years. Except Dowling is 20 and has played 9 games.

 

[relapse]

We all knew that Nicks would eventually find a way to shoehorn both Murphy and Smith back into the lineup.

To be fair Smith has been playing well, however he's in his final year so playing him is not really achieving anything other than robbing development opportunities from guys who are the future.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

We all knew that Nicks would eventually find a way to shoehorn both Murphy and Smith back into the lineup.

To be fair Smith has been playing well, however he's in his final year so playing him is not really achieving anything other than robbing development opportunities from guys who are the future.

Smith at least has played well with his limited minutes

Murphy was bloody useless & yet Nicks brings him back yet again.

Clearly Nicks is clueless about talent, which is a major problem going forward... along with being a strategic numpty.

 

[cmndstab]

Honestly, what's their logic with murphy?

The logic is pretty straightforward. The club thinks they are firmly in the premiership window and so have completely de-emphasized developing youth (to the extent they ever emphasized it at all). They just want to pick what they think is the best side every week. They view Murphy as an experience senior player with a supposedly hardened body, who offers leadership. He's posting good numbers in the SANFL, he's "plug and play", ready to go. And hey, look at how well Smith went when we brought him back!!

In their mind, Murphy offers more, today, than Taylor, or Draper, or Edwards, or any of our other younger options. So he gets the nod. Simple as that.

There are two issues here. One is that the club seems to place essentially no value on developing our young talent, requiring them to be significantly outperforming a senior player before they even get a chance. You can at least make the argument that we're in the top four and need to prioritise the now over the future, so fair enough. But the other issue is that we seem to dramatically overrate the value Murphy actually offers, despite copious evidence to the contrary.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The logic is pretty straightforward. The club thinks they are firmly in the premiership window and so have completely de-emphasized developing youth (to the extent they ever emphasized it at all). They just want to pick what they think is the best side every week. They view Murphy as an experience senior player with a supposedly hardened body, who offers leadership. He's posting good numbers in the SANFL, he's "plug and play", ready to go. And hey, look at how well Smith went when we brought him back!!

In their mind, Murphy offers more, today, than Taylor, or Draper, or Edwards, or any of our other younger options. So he gets the nod. Simple as that.

Talent is more important than experience.

 

[cmndstab]

Talent is more important than experience.

I agree. But I think the club places significant value on experience and a "hardened body".

I've always thought that if two players are performing similarly well in the SANFL (say, Murphy and Edwards for example) then you should prioritise the younger player, since they have the most upside. But I think the club has the opposite view - if both players are performing similarly in the SANFL, then they should back in the more experienced player with the more developed body, since they will be more capable of translating those numbers to AFL level.

 

[Pugsley]

I agree. But I think the club places significant value on experience and a "hardened body".

I've always thought that if two players are performing similarly well in the SANFL (say, Murphy and Edwards for example) then you should prioritise the younger player, since they have the most upside. But I think the club has the opposite view - if both players are performing similarly in the SANFL, then they should back in the more experienced player with the more developed body, since they will be more capable of translating those numbers to AFL level.

But what does Murphy bring?

 

[WeeBlake]

In their mind, Murphy offers more, today, than Taylor, or Draper, or Edwards, or any of our other younger options. So he gets the nod. Simple as that.

There are two issues here. One is that the club seems to place essentially no value on developing our young talent, requiring them to be significantly outperforming a senior player before they even get a chance. You can at least make the argument that we're in the top four and need to prioritise the now over the future, so fair enough. But the other issue is that we seem to dramatically overrate the value Murphy actually offers, despite copious evidence to the contrary.

This is true but not the whole truth. There’s young players who are given lots of games early.

They are either on the preferred player list (and they get lots of games) or they aren’t (in which case they get few or none).

And Nicks sticks to his lists no matter what.

Doedee was above Worrell on the list.

Edwards is below everyone, pretty much, apparently.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I agree. But I think the club places significant value on experience and a "hardened body".

I've always thought that if two players are performing similarly well in the SANFL (say, Murphy and Edwards for example) then you should prioritise the younger player, since they have the most upside. But I think the club has the opposite view - if both players are performing similarly in the SANFL, then they should back in the more experienced player with the more developed body, since they will be more capable of translating those numbers to AFL level.

Isn't it interesting that Mitchell picked the in form younger option for tonight.

Only way of having the best team going forward is to fast track your best talent & use the average players as last resort.

Nick's selection policy is holding back our club not only in the future, but will cost us games in the short term... as we found out last time Murphy played.

Just another reminder he is not very bright.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

This is true but not the whole truth. There’s young players who are given lots of games early.

They are either on the preferred player list (and they get lots of games) or they aren’t (in which case they get few or none).

And Nicks sticks to his lists no matter what.

Doedee was above Worrell on the list.

Edwards is below everyone, pretty much, apparently.

Should be open to playing young players if they are in a good patch of form... not rate them based on preseason thinking.

We should be developing around 30 players for depth through the AFL like the best teams do & Murphy should not be part of the 30.

 

[cmndstab]

But what does Murphy bring?

In their mind? He offers forward-line pressure, versatility (can go into the midfield if needed), runs all day, puts his body on the line, leadership, etc. The club recognises that he hasn't quite got it all right, but then they see him doing exactly what they want in the SANFL and think "finally, he's taken the next step! He's in the best form of his career! He's earned a recall!"

In reality, he's an "almost" player at AFL level... he almost manages to kick goals, he almost manages to lay that tackle, or affect that spoil. But never quite actually gets there.

This is true but not the whole truth. There’s young players who are given lots of games early.

They are either on the preferred player list (and they get lots of games) or they aren’t (in which case they get few or none).

And Nicks sticks to his lists no matter what.

Doedee was above Worrell on the list.

Edwards is below everyone, pretty much, apparently.

I agree - the "list" is how much the club rates each player. One of the issues is that they are extremely slow to update their thinking on a player based on form. Another issue is that they seem to reset their thinking each year, forgetting the lessons learned in the back end of the season when their hands are forced and, wow, turns out these out-of-favour players are actually pretty good!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

But what does Murphy bring?

We know we are effectively playing 1 short, so he encourages his team mates to take up the slack... particularly in the last quarter when he will be MIA when the game is on the line

 

[George CantStandYa]

Has Ciao posted to tell us Murphy was the logical choice?

 

[crowker]

Murphy predictor

7 k, 2 h, 3 dropped marks, 0.5 tackles

He did top the clanger stat at the last game down there

 

[GreyCrow]

Impey was his opponent

 

[CrowinNT]

Murphy is an experience AFL player so he should be too good for the SANFL level but also has proven to be not good enough for the AFL. Who knows, he might fluke a few goals and be useful but we all know he will turn to shit again.

Oi you having a go at my goal of the week comp selection ?

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

The negative responses on FB and insta are good to see, this club like many do take notice when the fans turn on them publicly

Too many are still blaming umpiring which wasn't even in the top 10 reasons why we lost tonight.

As long as the umpires are still being blamed for close losses, we will never shake the loser mentality that has infested this joint for nearly 30 years.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Impey was his opponent

Arguably BOG.

Seen this before as the opposition know they don't need to worry about him.

 

[MsTopG]

How many games has Nicks lost us at selection since he took over from Pyke? I would say a minimum of 30.

 

[adelaidecrows]

How many games has Nicks lost us at selection since he took over from Pyke? I would say a minimum of 30.

add another 30 to 40 with an ever changing game plan that never worked. but in fairness he has managed to snare a whopping 46 games in 5.5 seasons from plan A working.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

How many games has Nicks lost us at selection since he took over from Pyke? I would say a minimum of 30.

I have lost count.

But it's worse than that as he is holding back the development of depth & younger players.