Tarkyn Lockyer

[Quicky]

I'm not sure if on the internet as I'm pretty sure it was in a post match interview (televised on free to air tv). I'm pretty sure it was during the h+a season (2009). Would have been after a win and probably on one of his better games considering he was interviewed. It was just a comment where he said that he would like to go back to playing on taller opponents (he was suggesting KPP, but also possibly medium size which I took note of at the time).

Without a doubt we have a surplus of medium size backs which was what lead me onto the Lockyer idea at the time.

With a 2 man full forwardline how do you see JA fitting? I heard the club had an interest in increasing his versatility and pushing him up the ground a bit further, but would be interesting to hear your ideas on that one. Having just Rusling + Medhurst certainly could work.

In the 7 man rotation would have said it's too early to include Buckley, but Johnson/ Reid (I think could play on a back flank or as a sweeper quite easily with his great ability to read to ball and with his great disposal)/ Goldsack would be the players I would be looking it as alternatives to Buckley.

Macaffer while the plan for him is to become the Lockyer type utility, I really like him up forward. Whether it be deep or on a forward flank. His accuracy on goal is first rate and compareable with JA at his best.

I see our forward line like this if we played a seven man defense:

------Didak-----Cloke-----Lockyer-----
--------Medhurst----Anthony----------

Thomas or Macaffer to move into the pocket if we went with the more conventional line up.

Really though i'm not that inspired by our forward line. We are really banking on Medhurst and Cloke returning to form and Anthony maintaining his. I'd like to see Didak make a permanent return to the HFF for the same reasons you want Medhurst played there. I think he could really improve our forward line.

Rusling i'm a bit lost on regarding where I see him fitting into the structure. I think Rus or Anthony are not the best suited to a pocket like a lot of people are suggesting. He also seems to need a fair bit of space to function in requiring us to set up a structure specifically to suit him - which i'm not sure is a good thing. That said I really think he may offer us something different if he can get going. Like I said i'm not sure how to fit Rus in. If one of him or Anthony adapts as a third marking forward that may solve it - though thats wishful thinking - and may just adversely affect Medders position anyway.

Think its a headache i'll leave up to Bucks

 

[Markfs]

I think the point that posters make about Tark's lack of speed is good. I would like to move him in Heath's position but he doesnt have that closing speed that Heath does. It's going to be tough for him up forward and he's going to have to be even more like Geelong's Chapman.....a forward that makes the big tackles and kicks the crunch goals.

Rusling is going to have to do a lot more than look pretty to get a game up forward.

As for dumping Toovey, someone will to make up for his defensive work....

 

[knightwheelrqr]

I see our forward line like this if we played a seven man defense:

------Didak-----Cloke-----Lockyer-----
--------Medhurst----Anthony----------

Thomas or Macaffer to move into the pocket if we went with the more conventional line up.

Really though i'm not that inspired by our forward line. We are really banking on Medhurst and Cloke returning to form and Anthony maintaining his. I'd like to see Didak make a permanent return to the HFF for the same reasons you want Medhurst played there. I think he could really improve our forward line.

Rusling i'm a bit lost on regarding where I see him fitting into the structure. I think Rus or Anthony are not the best suited to a pocket like a lot of people are suggesting. He also seems to need a fair bit of space to function in requiring us to set up a structure specifically to suit him - which i'm not sure is a good thing. That said I really think he may offer us something different if he can get going. Like I said i'm not sure how to fit Rus in. If one of him or Anthony adapts as a third marking forward that may solve it - though thats wishful thinking - and may just adversely affect Medders position anyway.

Think its a headache i'll leave up to Bucks

Thomas often looks out of place in a forward pocket. While having the natural flare, marking ability, speed and goal sense for a forward pocket he just doesn't seem to get enough of the ball or seem as dangerous as he does further up the ground. Not saying he will become a perminant mid, but should spend some time inside. And when forward more so as a forward flanker probably would be a better fit for him.

Agree on Didak, he should spend most of his time forward because he is just simply so dangerous and with Medhurst and others it really adds significant firepower back into our forwardline which we definately need. I would go as far as to add Leon as (not perminant) but as a rotational guy between the positions.

The forwardline I think will be a rotational type thing where we can mix in a few different elements and cause a few mismatches through a large forwardline rotations. So you would add guys like Thomas, Davis, Fraser and others into the forward mix and it could be pretty dangerous.

On Rusling, he seems in great condition and on the way he is travelling at the moment looks like a starting 18 guy (which could be huge for our forwardline dynamic). He could play a Tarrant type role out of the forwardline where he goes on tremendously long leads then JA + Medhurst have the forwardline to themselves which could work really nicely.

I'm starting to think we might have enough forwardline options to be able to play a 6 man forwardline (due to rediculous numbers who we can rotate).

So a 6 man backline of:

B: Alan Toovey Simon Prestigiacomo Harry O'Brien
HB: Heath Shaw Nathan Brown Nick Maxwell

looks likely at this stage.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Doesn't have the size, pace or strength nor is he good enough one on one to be used with any confidence as a defender. On the other hand the guy you are suggesting we drop is much better in all these aspects.

As others have mentioned Tarks still has a fair bit to offer, hard runner, good over head for his size, neat user of the ball, decent finisher. Will continue to play that floating link foward role and do it well IMO.

I disagree with the comments on strength and his ability in contested marking situations. He's better than Toovey, quite comfortably, in all these aspects. However, I'd expect my twelve year old sister to beat Tarkyn in a foot race these days, so I don't think there's any value at all playing him in the backline, the only position on the ground where this flaw will really punish the side.

Tarkyn's strengths lie in his tackling, hard running and his marking. These aren't naturally strong points of his either, but instead have become strengths through his ethic to improve himself however he can. Really, he's a bloke whose natural talents have dwindled to the point where he has to give himself as much upside as possible in order to have an AFL career - especially considering he never really had these natural talents in the first place. He's suited to a defensive half forward, or a deep forward pocket role. He'll be competing with Medhurst and Macaffer for spots, and in reality, I'd loathe to see Medhurst winning one. My preferred side would definitely be Macaffer and Lockyer playing these roles.

 

[Pie eyed]

I think it is far too early to be having the bulk of these discussions.
The older players on the brink of being over-taken and the young turks looking to break into the 22 will all get their chance to put their individual cases in the practice matches and NAB Cup.

All talk of "X" must make way for "Y" is moot if "X" show great form and "Y" does not. Speculation on who's got what trade value are uber premature given a game has not been played.
Ball, Jolly, Thomas and co are all yet to pull on a Pies jumper in anger and we have yet to win a game in 2010.

I'll reserve my judgement on who should do what until after a ball has been bounce at the very earliest.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I think it is far too early to be having the bulk of these discussions.
The older players on the brink of being over-taken and the young turks looking to break into the 22 will all get their chance to put their individual cases in the practice matches and NAB Cup.

All talk of "X" must make way for "Y" is moot if "X" show great form and "Y" does not. Speculation on who's got what trade value are uber premature given a game has not been played.
Ball, Jolly, Thomas and co are all yet to pull on a Pies jumper in anger and we have yet to win a game in 2010.

I'll reserve my judgement on who should do what until after a ball has been bounce at the very earliest.

Copy paste job.

 

[Pie eyed]

The same applies to all those threads so why wear out my finger.

Perhaps these threads could all be merged into a "Who might move over for which youngster" Thread.

Please don't start one though.

 

[knightwheelrqr]

I think it is far too early to be having the bulk of these discussions.
The older players on the brink of being over-taken and the young turks looking to break into the 22 will all get their chance to put their individual cases in the practice matches and NAB Cup.

All talk of "X" must make way for "Y" is moot if "X" show great form and "Y" does not. Speculation on who's got what trade value are uber premature given a game has not been played.
Ball, Jolly, Thomas and co are all yet to pull on a Pies jumper in anger and we have yet to win a game in 2010.

I'll reserve my judgement on who should do what until after a ball has been bounce at the very earliest.

It's more so based on where Lockyer best fits in the structure of our best 22 as opposed to "will he lose his spot in the side" (discussion about whether he should play down back or up forward primarily)

 

[Pie eyed]

It's more so based on where Lockyer best fits in the structure of our best 22 as opposed to "will he lose his spot in the side" (discussion about whether he should play down back or up forward primarily)

Fair enough, I'm busy working so may have missed the gist...

Basically, though the post still applies.
We won't know any more than last year what anyone's roles will be until we get them on the paddock and see how all the pieces fit.

 

[mongrel_punt]

Statistically he was in our top 5 for nearly every stat last season and kicked the 3rd most goals for us.

I know he's not lightning, but he was a very important contributer in 2009 and I don't think he will drop off quite as dramiatically as some here are seeming to suggest.

He's handy in many positions which gives him good flexibilty and he's a beautiful user of the ball which seems to be an underrated attribute.

Still in our top 22 for '10 imo.

 

[Old Spice]

Statistically he was in our top 5 for nearly every stat last season and kicked the 3rd most goals for us.

I know he's not lightning, but he was a very important contributer in 2009 and I don't think he will drop off quite as dramiatically as some here are seeming to suggest.

He's handy in many positions which gives him good flexibilty and he's a beautiful user of the ball which seems to be an underrated attribute.

Still in our top 22 for '10 imo.

I'll 2nd that. Very reliable , I never panic when he has the ball in his mittens.

 

[shawthing09]

I disagree with the comments on strength and his ability in contested marking situations. He's better than Toovey, quite comfortably, in all these aspects. However, I'd expect my twelve year old sister to beat Tarkyn in a foot race these days, so I don't think there's any value at all playing him in the backline, the only position on the ground where this flaw will really punish the side.

Tarkyn's strengths lie in his tackling, hard running and his marking. These aren't naturally strong points of his either, but instead have become strengths through his ethic to improve himself however he can. Really, he's a bloke whose natural talents have dwindled to the point where he has to give himself as much upside as possible in order to have an AFL career - especially considering he never really had these natural talents in the first place. He's suited to a defensive half forward, or a deep forward pocket role. He'll be competing with Medhurst and Macaffer for spots, and in reality, I'd loathe to see Medhurst winning one. My preferred side would definitely be Macaffer and Lockyer playing these roles.

For his size Tarks competes well but Toovey has a comfortable reach advantage and would be heavier and stronger then Tarks too. People really underrate Toovey's defensive capabilities. Defensively Toovey is shades ahead of Tarks in all the KPI's.

 

[Optimax]

For his size Tarks competes well but Toovey has a comfortable reach advantage and would be heavier and stronger then Tarks too. People really underrate Toovey's defensive capabilities. Defensively Toovey is shades ahead of Tarks in all the KPI's.

Tooves is also quite awesome overhead for a smaller player.

His overhead ability (he goes spoil more then mark) is one of his strengths

 

[Tarkyn_24]

For his size Tarks competes well but Toovey has a comfortable reach advantage and would be heavier and stronger then Tarks too. People really underrate Toovey's defensive capabilities. Defensively Toovey is shades ahead of Tarks in all the KPI's.

I love Toovey... and in every likelihood he and Macaffer'll be my favourite players once Tarks goes... so I don't think I'm one that would underrate Toovey's capabilities. I still think Tarkyn's sensational for his size, case in point Lockyer against Mal Michael in 2007.

 

[Invigoration]

The one absolute fact we can conclude from this thread is how much Toovey continues to be underrated.
The OP starts out by saying we need another small defender because Shaw is our only one... Umm what? Can any of you blokes who dislike Toovey cite any game/opponent that clearly beat him? I can't remember him being convincingly beaten all year, in fact he was the main reason for our turn around in regards to small forwards. We use to struggle with small forwards, that is undeniable, but it seems some people forget we only struggled with them when our options were limited to Johnson and Lockyer in those roles.
We tried Lockyer multiple times as a shut down defender and it didn't work at all, it has only been in the last year or two that we have improved significantly with H and Toovey taking the mantle.

Toovey is from memory, in the top 2/3 tacklers, top 2/3 1%ers and top 2/3 spoilers. Too many people either watch these games from their TV where this sort of work isn't really exemplified or they go to games and only focus on the offensive/flashy things.
Toovey is a defender and in that regard he is brilliant, he continually beats his opponent and does his job (something that the people in the know don't fail to notice - I do mean the coaches btw, not Opti, MDC, ST and I ), but this seemingly isn't enough when people only focus on the 1 or 2 disposal errors he made with the ball (even though these are significantly down from when he first started playing).

Our back six is easily our strongest six on the ground, only the Saints let through less points than us. We don't need to take our 3rd highest goal kicker who has slowed considerably in recent years and chuck him in the back pocket to patch up some nonexistent hole down there. It is about time people forgot how Toovey played 3 years ago and started trying to watch how he actually plays now.

 

[Optimax]

Invig just posted the equivlant of a reserve torp goal off his non preferred.

That post perfectly sums up the entire thread and any toove related discussion

 

[Pie eyed]

May I bow and kiss you non preferred boot Invig?

Eloquently put.


Rage for Toooves!!!!!!!

 

[knightwheelrqr]

Tooves is also quite awesome overhead for a smaller player.

His overhead ability (he goes spoil more then mark) is one of his strengths

He is actually a medium (as he stands at 190cm), or according to CFC 189cm.

So you would hope he would have the advantage in that regard over "small forwards".

 

[knightwheelrqr]

The one absolute fact we can conclude from this thread is how much Toovey continues to be underrated.
The OP starts out by saying we need another small defender because Shaw is our only one... Umm what? Can any of you blokes who dislike Toovey cite any game/opponent that clearly beat him? I can't remember him being convincingly beaten all year, in fact he was the main reason for our turn around in regards to small forwards. We use to struggle with small forwards, that is undeniable, but it seems some people forget we only struggled with them when our options were limited to Johnson and Lockyer in those roles.
We tried Lockyer multiple times as a shut down defender and it didn't work at all, it has only been in the last year or two that we have improved significantly with H and Toovey taking the mantle.

Toovey is from memory, in the top 2/3 tacklers, top 2/3 1%ers and top 2/3 spoilers. Too many people either watch these games from their TV where this sort of work isn't really exemplified or they go to games and only focus on the offensive/flashy things.
Toovey is a defender and in that regard he is brilliant, he continually beats his opponent and does his job (something that the people in the know don't fail to notice - I do mean the coaches btw, not Opti, MDC, ST and I ), but this seemingly isn't enough when people only focus on the 1 or 2 disposal errors he made with the ball (even though these are significantly down from when he first started playing).

Our back six is easily our strongest six on the ground, only the Saints let through less points than us. We don't need to take our 3rd highest goal kicker who has slowed considerably in recent years and chuck him in the back pocket to patch up some nonexistent hole down there. It is about time people forgot how Toovey played 3 years ago and started trying to watch how he actually plays now.

Toovey is not "small" he is 189/191cm which is considered a "medium sized defender". He just plays small. Likewise Harry O'Brien 188cm, although O'Brien has the size and ability to also play on more medium sized players.

My purpose of writing is more so to see how specific lineup structures work out.

I was using my perceived "best 22" and working out a lineup structure accross different lines including rotations.

I would not perceive Toovey to be "best 22" in terms of quality but clearly he plays his role down back as well as any on our list which naturally is why he was selected throughout 2009.

I was also looking to see if it is possible to fit O'Brien onto a more medium sized forward as opposed to a small.

So one of the ideas I was testing out for that purpose was Lockyer who clearly as stated and concluded within this thread is not suited to that role.

The offseason and preseason are the times to be playing around with different ideas. (Such as this) - Whether good or bad. Never leave a stone unturned, because you might just find out she's a gem.

The home and away season is where you want to perfect your teams structures and lineups.

And the finals naturally is where you test out whether yours is surperior to that of the oppositions.