Team Mgmt. 2017 Team selections, injuries and availability

[Lore]

So you're probably aware of the spreadsheets I keep posting everywhere. Well this will be something of a home for it I guess.

Spoiler: 2016 version

 

[Lore]

TRENDS SO FAR:

Forwards:
4 smalls (sub-180cm): Colyer, Fantasia, Tipungwuti, Green (when he was injured, Howlett/Hocking)
1 medium (180-195): Langford/Francis
2 talls (195+): Daniher, Hooker

Rucks:
1 ruck: Leuenberger is preferred here. Whenever he has been available he has played. TBC 2nd, McKernan 3rd.

Midfield:
6 mids: Z. Merrett, Parish, Zaharakis, Heppell, Goddard, Watson (Myers in for Watson, rested)
Split these guys how you like. First three are around the 180cm mark, second three are ~190cm. Could look at inside/outside but there's also a matter of rotations, the small forwards rotate through here as well (and these guys rotate forward).

Defenders:
4 smalls: Kelly, Baguley, McGrath, Gleeson (McKenna/McNiece)
3 talls: Hurley, Brown (Hartley), Ambrose (Dea)
We were playing 4 small/3 tall defenders, but since Ambrose and Brown have been injured we've gone to 5 smalls/2 talls. Dea seems to play on the third tall anyway, though, so really it's a matter of semantics rather than structure I guess.

So 7 forwards, 7 defenders, 6 mids and a ruckman. One short of a 22. It's Stanton, who trained as a defender over the pre-season but seems to float around between there and the midfield, covering gaps in rotations I suppose. I suspect that there's a midfield rotation between Stanton and some of the small defenders as well.

 

[eth-dog]

I think that we're playing three of the "small forwards" as a part of the midfield rotation as well (Raz, Walla and Colyer) so that may skew the numbers a bit.

 

[ghostdog]

Daniher's metres gained for limited time on ball. I don't like the idea of risking his body rucking more, but he's got such a clean set of hands, great awareness and is a great field kick... if Stewart were to develop well as a forward it would be very tempting to let Daniher run more.

 

[ghostdog]

...reckon he'd be better than Luey.

 

[Lore]

I think that we're playing three of the "small forwards" as a part of the midfield rotation as well (Raz, Walla and Colyer) so that may skew the numbers a bit.

Yeah I think so too. It's fun when Walla is in there hahaha. The crowd goes nuts. I might've forgotten to mention it in the forwards section of the OP.

 

[Ambrosia]

My issues with selection:

Josh Green - I don't understand the role he's supposed to fill in our side and would much rather play Langford or any other mid sized forward with ability to role through the midfield.

3rd KPF/Second Ruck - Why not give one or both of Mckernan or Stewart a chance to play? I'm sick of seeing Daniher work his opponent over and look like tearing the game apart and then lose momentum by rucking.

So pretty much drop Green and bring in Stewart/Mckernan and I'll be happy as all my other grievances are fairly minor.

 

[tperks]

Definitely think laverde will take greens role when he's back up and running. Can see him kicking more goals, applying more pressure and be able to move through the midfield

My issues with selection:

Josh Green - I don't understand the role he's supposed to fill in our side and would much rather play Langford or any other mid sized forward with ability to role through the midfield.

3rd KPF/Second Ruck - Why not give one or both of Mckernan or Stewart a chance to play? I'm sick of seeing Daniher work his opponent over and look like tearing the game apart and then lose momentum by rucking.

So pretty much drop Green and bring in Stewart/Mckernan and I'll be happy as all my other grievances are fairly minor.

 

[Lore]

Post-game, time for some analysis!


This was the rest of the OP:


MAIN POINTS OF CONTENTION (pick your favourite and build a case!):

• Age. Some of these guys are getting older. What do they provide to the team? What does our depth look like? Is there a young guy playing well in the VFL, playing the same role better than the older guy? Can the younger guy provide the same leadership on game day?
• Forward structure. How many talls does it take to build a forward line?
• Rucks. What's more important, winning the hit outs, winning the clearances or providing a marking target up forward?
• Two rucks? Can we have a two ruck set up? Who comes out of the forward line for TBC?
• Midfield, midfield, midfield. Who, what, where, why, huh?
• The tall defenders: Brown vs. Hartley. What does each bring to the team? What do we expect of our defenders? 1%ers, rebounds? Both?
• Defensive structure generally. What do we do without Ambrose and Brown? Dea as a third tall is interesting, though not necessarily effective.

And some for specific players:

• Josh Green, 176cm small forward. Contentious acquisition, it would seem. What does he provide to the team? Can he be replaced with a guy 20cm taller (Stewart)?
• James Stewart, 196cm tall forward/ruck. Who does he come in for? Who replaces him? What does he bring to the team? What does that do to our structure?
• Craig Bird, 179cm midfield/small forward. Who does he come in for? Who replaces him? What does he bring to the team?
• Cale Hooker, 198cm tall forward/tall defender. Can we send him back? Have a look at our tall forward depth and structure.
• Kyle Langford, 191cm forward/midfielder. Should he play? Where should he play? Is he the third tall forward in place of Francis, or does he take a place in the midfield? Who comes out of the midfield for him?

 

[efcboy]

Another topic for debate:
Do we put McGrath on the wing/midfield or is he needed too much in our defence already?

Pros:
Utilise his pace and skills in midfield - could be a match winner?

Cons:
Exposes our poorer small/medium defenders
Might be asking too much to put him upfield?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

A few selection issues:

Leuenberger - offers no marking or ground level support and his tap game doesn't result in clearances. Futile selection as his involvement influences little positively. I'd be going TBC or even Doggies style with McKernan or Stewart.

Zaharakis and Stanton- offering little run and marking ability, nothing at the contest, barely hit the scoreboard, not genuinely versitile. Exact type of players that should be playing VFL unless they are banging down the door with form. Mutch and Langford in.

Not sure who misses from the small defenders but our balance is wrong, playing 5-6 is too much. Cut it to 4, especially considering few offer great lockdown or elite rebound.

The inside midfield sucks as well but thats more a list build issue than selection.

 

[Shane Hird]

Laverde. Need him back.

 

[Lore]

And while the team emerged from the match with a clean bill of health, Worsfold flagged further changes to face Geelong next Saturday night, before a well-earned eight-day break ahead of round nine.

"(Making changes) is something we have to consider," Worsfold said.

"We had three or four guys rested this week so we’ve got that to look at, (we need to) assess form of players and how they’re tracking physically.

"There’s guys that are on our radar for workload that we’ll have a look at this week, which we will do over the next 48 hours."

Worsfold also commended the efforts of returning midfielder David Myers (13 possessions) in his first since round 20, 2015 and confirmed former captain Jobe Watson would likely return next week.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-07/schedule-takes-toll-on-physically-stressed-dons

McGrath, Watson and McNiece were rested, so assume they're back in the side for next week. Do we think there'll be more players rested again, or will there be some omissions?

Another topic for debate:
Do we put McGrath on the wing/midfield or is he needed too much in our defence already?

Pros:
Utilise his pace and skills in midfield - could be a match winner?

Cons:
Exposes our poorer small/medium defenders
Might be asking too much to put him upfield?

Oooh good thought. I wondered this too. It's a possibility, given we've run 7 players through small defender positions in the last few weeks and our structure only has room for five of them. If we put him up the ground a bit you probably do drop some quality though, as you say. I'm not sure if they'd be as effective as shutting down an Eddie Betts without McGrath. Maybe rotations? Not sure who he'd rotate with though.

Leuenberger - offers no marking or ground level support and his tap game doesn't result in clearances. Futile selection as his involvement influences little positively. I'd be going TBC or even Doggies style with McKernan or Stewart.

Leuey was much better last year, I'd expect him to improve as the time goes on. I'd put some of it down to having a mish mash of players in the midfield as well, some have only roved off him for 4 games in their whole careers.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Leuey was much better last year, I'd expect him to improve as the time goes on. I'd put some of it down to having a mish mash of players in the midfield as well, some have only roved off him for 4 games in their whole careers.

He was better last year, but his tap work is only part of the problem. Mainly I just don't rate pure tap ruckmen bar Sandilands at his peak, when your midfield is good enough they'll position themselves well enough to defend and attack and compete relentlessly. I want my ruckman to either attack the contest physically, like Mumford, mark the ball both forward and in defence, like Gawn or link up like an extra midfield ala Goldstein/Martin. Even the best version of Leuenberger has never done any of those things.

Not a bad player by any stretch but just doesn't have enough weapons in his arsenal to justify his consistent selection.

 

[YEMOC NAYR]

Zaka must have something over Woosh for him to still be getting a game.

Senior players should not be getting armchair rides. Put in or go back to the 2s.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

He was better last year, but his tap work is only part of the problem. Mainly I just don't rate pure tap ruckmen bar Sandilands at his peak, when your midfield is good enough they'll position themselves well enough to defend and attack and compete relentlessly. I want my ruckman to either attack the contest physically, like Mumford, mark the ball both forward and in defence, like Gawn or link up like an extra midfield ala Goldstein/Martin. Even the best version of Leuenberger has never done any of those things.

Not a bad player by any stretch but just doesn't have enough weapons in his arsenal to justify his consistent selection.

Bellchambers can be that ruckman.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Bellchambers can be that ruckman.

Absolutely, I miss the days when I'd complain about him not chasing enough despite him kicking 28 goals in 18 games (two less than Leuenberger has kicked in his entire 132 game career)
Elite ruck problems like first world problems.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Absolutely, I miss the days when I'd complain about him not chasing enough despite him kicking 28 goals in 18 games (two less than Leuenberger has kicked in his entire 132 game career)
Elite ruck problems like first world problems.

His 2013 was great I still think he can get back to that.

 

[Lore]

He was better last year, but his tap work is only part of the problem. Mainly I just don't rate pure tap ruckmen bar Sandilands at his peak, when your midfield is good enough they'll position themselves well enough to defend and attack and compete relentlessly. I want my ruckman to either attack the contest physically, like Mumford, mark the ball both forward and in defence, like Gawn or link up like an extra midfield ala Goldstein/Martin. Even the best version of Leuenberger has never done any of those things.

Not a bad player by any stretch but just doesn't have enough weapons in his arsenal to justify his consistent selection.

Ultimately, I think he's being selected for the sake of hitouts. If that's the way we're going to go then it needs to work in our favour, because we don't have the midfield to play the sort of structure that would work with McKernan giving up 5-15cm before you even bounce the ball. Bellchambers I see as more of a ruck/forward (and not a very mobile one at that), he can't ruck whole games by himself.

 

[quotemokc]

I voted "We're too sentimental, gotta be ruthless." But the club royally ruined some of these guys careers and we owe them a year of AFL game time at minimum for what we did to them. This year was always going to be a payback/transition year and nothing more. Worsfold essentially gets two mulligans which is fine by me.

As much as I love Watson, Stanton, Hocking etc they are just not good enough anymore, and will rightfully/unfortunately be shown the door come seasons end.

Worsfold will move them on and he owes them nothing, he didn't get them into this mess but he is giving them an honorary end to their careers which they ALL deserve.

Being a Falcons fan, we fired our coach at the end of 2014 and had a huge overhaul of players since and made the Superbowl (that we should have won) in his 2nd year.

This was done by cutting the players that didn't fit his ideal team makeup, obviously you cannot just cut players in the AFL like you can American sports but the Falcons team of 2016 had 18~ out of 53 players still on the team 2 years removed from the last regime.

Bottom line, a new coach needs time to get players that suit his gameplan and Worsfold has not yet been fully afforded that luxury.

 

[bombreys]

For mine, it's the (seemingly) obvious selections that have bugged me.

Based on current form, playing Zaharakis and Stanton over the kids is not benefiting anyone.

If someone like Kobe Mutch, for example, came in and played as poorly as Zakka/Stants have over the past couple of weeks, at least we're getting games and AFL experience into a 19 year old kid.

 

[Lore]

We went to Subiaco having rested two running players without having replaced either and with a leading forward target who can't run out a quarter.

Our "pace" or "run" comes from lazy players like Colyer and Zaharakis who give nothing defensively. We get some run from Tippa but it's not two way and fair enough because he is a forward. Fantasia is also a forward. Merrett and Parish can't do it all themselves and they're not particularly good runners in any event.

Personally I've seen enough.

Expectation is that we go into full rebuild mode playing kids at the earliest opportunity.

Our wins this year have come against garbage. As it stands we're in the mix for the bottom four and we're far too old for that.

I'm almost at the stage of being apprehensive about beating Geelong. If we do it with the wrong team it's just going to prolong the inevitable. I was nervous against Fremantle because I was worried that we might win with a side that really had no business winning at Subi.

Stanton, Watson, Kelly, Howlett and Hocking can please themselves until the most appropriate late season game to give them the farewell (e.g. round 23 butbonly if in Melbourne) that the club is so keen to give them. Maybe we can even give them special jumpers for the occasion (something with a collar).

Was replying to this in the expectations thread but I think it's better served over here.

Dropping Stanton and Kelly (and presumably Baguley) from the backline would leave us with Gleeson, McKenna, McGrath, McNiece (R) and one of Jerrett or Morgan. That's a fairly unaccountable set of players with no-one to really direct them into position except Hurley. The last two don't even do consistently well in the VFL, so it'd be the gift of all gifts to be playing either of them over the old guys.

Watson and Hocking, well presumably Myers comes in for Watson. Hocking wasn't playing anyway except for one game when Green and Howlett both had injuries. Bird is 28, so I doubt he comes in for a youth policy. So some combination of Goddard? (how far are we taking this youth policy?), Zerrett, Heppell, Parish, Zaharakis, Colyer, Langford, Mutch and Clarke. I know you don't like Colyer but he is far from the first player I'd be dropping. If he's not accountable enough then play him forward (apparently that gets you a free pass for two-way running).

Howlett is essentially a small forward, he's only played one game so far and that was to cover injury (and then got injured himself). I guess they could bring Begley in instead. The forward line is pretty settled compared to the rest of the ground.

Not sure what any of them will learn if the opposition are going from the centre circle to the goals in a matter of seconds though.

 

[astrowizzle]

Smack and bellchambers. Bellchambers is far more physical than luey as is smack. Bellxho is a better forward as is smack. Bellchsmbers offers more around the ground as does smack. We were a better team performance wise with smack.

 

[efcboy]

Smack and bellchambers. Bellchambers is far more physical than luey as is smack. Bellxho is a better forward as is smack. Bellchsmbers offers more around the ground as does smack. We were a better team performance wise with smack.

Bellchambers is the least physical of the trio. He's a look like ken play like barbie kind of big man. Bellchambers is useless at ground level whereas McKernan and Leuenberger are ok at this. Bellchambers doesn't tackle - Leuenberger and McKernan are big tacklers. Bellchambers is the better mark of the trio. Leuenberger has the best aerobic fitness of the trio. Leuenberger is the worst forward of the trio.

My opinion is:
Leuenberger can only play ruck and is a first ruck.
Bellchambers doesn't have the tank to play four quarters consistently as a number one ruck but is too immobile to be a 2nd ruck - so he's just a backup ruckman for mine.
McKernan also cannot cope with playing four quarters of ruck so isn't a number one ruckman, he is very mobile and capable in multiple roles so is a decent 2nd ruckman option.

If we play only one ruckman I'm going with leuy. If we play two it's leuy and smack.

 

[eth-dog]

Leuey 1st, Bellcho 2nd, McKernan 5th (Not really but people need to get it through their heads that Bellchambers shits on him as a ruckman)