Analysis The Bigger Picture

[BrunoV]

Have to say that I was surprised to turn on the radio last night to hear presenters asking for callers to discuss whether Essendon needs to rebuild. I thought that maybe I'd zoned out and that I had found myself in 2019.

I could not stress more that I don't think that we are looking at wholesale changes to a side. We're really looking at turning over 3 to 5 spots in the next 2 years in a "best" team to add more running power and skill to address the team's main weakness.

Think this a much better place to be discussing most of what is being discussed in the 2015 best 22 thread.

 

[rines]

Have to say that I was surprised to turn on the radio last night to hear presenters asking for callers to discuss whether Essendon needs to rebuild. I thought that maybe I'd zoned out and that I had found myself in 2019.

I could not stress more that I don't think that we are looking at wholesale changes to a side. We're really looking at turning over 3 to 5 spots in the next 2 years in a "best" team to add more running power and skill to address the team's main weakness.

Think this a much better place to be discussing most of what is being discussed in the 2015 best 22 thread.

Ya.. thought it was a practical joke.. till I realised they were serious.. and I was like WTF??

Finished 7th, missed out on a QF by 10 minutes of 'dumb' football.. after two years of hell off field, playing with a team with an average age of under 25.. with Carlisle and Ambrose (our two forwards for the whole year) not playing in and you think we need a total rebuild???

I understand we have some 'gaps'.. but chronic underestimation of the talent on our list sometimes.. chronic.

I think you are right.. I think it is closer to 3-4 spots that we need to 'upgrade' and we are close. Clearly a lead up forward player, but hopefully Ambrose can improve again next year in that role.. Daniher will just keep improving.

And we need to take out 2 'slower' guys (like Howlett, Stanton, Hocking etc) and replace them with a bit of pace.

If we need a total rebuild.. then I hate to think what they propose for St K, Richmond, WB, WCE, Collingwood etc etc...

 

[Whispering_Jack]

Ya.. thought it was a practical joke.. till I realised they were serious.. and I was like WTF??

Finished 7th, missed out on a QF by 10 minutes of 'dumb' football.. after two years of hell off field, playing with a team with an average age of under 25.. with Carlisle and Ambrose (our two forwards for the whole year) not playing in and you think we need a total rebuild???

I understand we have some 'gaps'.. but chronic underestimation of the talent on our list sometimes.. chronic.

I think you are right.. I think it is closer to 3-4 spots that we need to 'upgrade' and we are close. Clearly a lead up forward player, but hopefully Ambrose can improve again next year in that role.. Daniher will just keep improving.

And we need to take out 2 'slower' guys (like Howlett, Stanton, Hocking etc) and replace them with a bit of pace.

If we need a total rebuild.. then I hate to think what they propose for St K, Richmond, WB, WCE, Collingwood etc etc...

The Ox was quite bullish on where we are, which is only pleasing in that he hates us.

 

[bacon buster]

The Ox was quite bullish on where we are, which is only pleasing in that he hates us.

The Ox also said Carlisle wouldn't be at Essendon in 2015. Then he was told he was contracted for 2015. Then he said, "well he wont be there in 2016 then"

The Ox is slow but... nothing

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

The focus this pre season should be adding pace and getting Garlett is a good starting point.

 

[rines]

The focus this pre season should be adding pace and getting Garlett is a good starting point.

Agree agree agree.

Going to cost nothing and could be the 20 goals a year small forward we need.. replaces Chappy over time too.. (like in 1-2 years)..

 

[Bunk Moreland]

We don't need to rebuild

We have a great core - Watson, Goddard, Heppell, Hurley, Hooker, Carlisle, Daniher, Hibberd, Zaharakis, Dempsey, Hocking and Ryder.

We do however have some glaring holes. Unless these are addressed, this side won't win a flag.

A third tall, mobile forward. Happy with Ambrose's first year and happy to give him a run at this role. He's (form permitting) gotta play every week. Also - a resting ruckman like Bellchambers cannot fill this role full time.

1 or 2 smart small forwards - crumbing and lead up. Chapman and Winderlich are perfect for this but they're not going to be part of a flag. Both have one year left. Urgent priority, we need multiple avenues to goals. Kommer is not good enough. Howlett? He can kick goals. But we need to recruit / develop in this area.

A third back who can play tall or small. Fletch has one year left. It doesn't seem like Hardingham or Pears are going to be this player unfortunately. Too early to tell on Steinberg. Carlisle, Hurley and Hooker back would be brilliant, but Carlisle is required forward.

Midfield - it is quite simply not deep enough. Watson, Heppell and Zaka form a super group, but it thins out extremely quickly after that. I don't think Myers, Stanton and Melksham are a good enough support midfield for a premiership team. Merrett Z looks the goods. We need to pad it out.

There's 4 big holes that I think we have. If the flag push is coming with Jobe and BJ they've gotta be filled pretty quickly.

We have a very good core but we're a long way off the Hawthorns and Sydneys of this world.

We also went backwards this year - from 14 wins to 12 - so let's not pretend there's not major questions to be answered.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Would of been a different story if we friggin beat North like we supposed to.

 

[BrunoV]

Would of been a different story if we friggin beat North like we supposed to.

In terms of the bigger picture, no, not if it was just so that Geelong could flog us. Winning a final would have been a fitting reward for a group that has been to hell and back but it doesn't change what we are good at and what we are not good at.

We would have had to play at the level of the second quarter just to stay in touch with Geelong given what they put together on Friday night. Not impossible but there was a gulf between the performances of the top 5 and Essendon and North.

 

[hurlygurdy]

In terms of the bigger picture, no, not if it was just so that Geelong could flog us. It would have been a fitting reward for a group that has been to hell and back but it doesn't change what we are good at and what we are not good at.

We would have had to play at the level of the second quarter just to stay in touch with Geelong give what they put together on Friday night. Not impossible but there was a gulf between the performances of the top 5 and Essendon and North.

Really? I thought the quality was there in that game except for a poor 15 mins or so from each side at different times. I guess disposal was a little iffy...

 

[Benno30]

Be interested in your thoughts on how Membrey fits with the slowness issue I raised in the OP. His name came up in a discussion after the game last night and my immediate reaction was "nope, he's too slow and not dangerous enough to overcome that". Carlton would be a better fit, with more agile key forwards and quicker top shelf mids.



Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but if we can balance the books to make a free agent tilt without losing anyone important, it's a no risk move because if the first window isn't there, he'll be gone by the start of the second and we'll have the cap space to fill a different hole.

Riewoldt would be a fascinating option, but he's well and truly committed to St Kilda for life I believe.



My point was quite clearly elucidated in the OP I thought. Look at the player who surround the guys you've mentioned.



Kavanagh and NOB aren't quick.

personally from the limited bit I saw of membrey he looked very agile and not slow for a mid sized forward.

 

[hurlygurdy]

Ya.. thought it was a practical joke.. till I realised they were serious.. and I was like WTF??

Finished 7th, missed out on a QF by 10 minutes of 'dumb' football.. after two years of hell off field, playing with a team with an average age of under 25.. with Carlisle and Ambrose (our two forwards for the whole year) not playing in and you think we need a total rebuild???

I understand we have some 'gaps'.. but chronic underestimation of the talent on our list sometimes.. chronic.

I think you are right.. I think it is closer to 3-4 spots that we need to 'upgrade' and we are close. Clearly a lead up forward player, but hopefully Ambrose can improve again next year in that role.. Daniher will just keep improving.

And we need to take out 2 'slower' guys (like Howlett, Stanton, Hocking etc) and replace them with a bit of pace.

If we need a total rebuild.. then I hate to think what they propose for St K, Richmond, WB, WCE, Collingwood etc etc...

Obviously we all try to keep a lid on things, but lets be serious here... How good would the team look if Howlett, Hocking and Stanton were all forced out by upgrades? For arguments sake that could mean that Jackson finds consistency and takes out Stanton, Fantasia fills out and adds an x-factor to our forward line that does for Howlett, while Aylett takes his game to the next level and becomes one of the best shut down players in the comp racking up 12 tackles every game.
Does all that sound implausible? Some might say so, but we have about 8 or 9 players on the fringe who are all looking absolutely primed to take it to the next level. Even if they don't quite shake loose an established player, there should be at least 3 of them that become like for like replacements for quality players. That means that we should finally have the sort of depth that is required.
I think people have underestimated the effects of carrying an under performing player or two each week. The team will find much greater consistency if we are batting right down to 22 each week. At times this year we have had to carry Carlisle (shouldn't happen again), Melksham and Jackson among others. Next year (depending on injuries) i don't see players that are under performing being given the same sort of latitude. There will simply be too much pressure from the next tier. The result of that should be that our worst performances wont be as bad as they have been this year.

 

[Benno30]

Speed's overrated.

There's no faster way to move the ball than with players who can hit targets by foot 50 metres away.

How good are hawthorns foot skills and they still identified speed as an issue. Hence the recruitment of Hill Smith and Hartung......

 

[BrunoV]

Really? I thought the quality was there in that game except for a poor 15 mins or so from each side at different times. I guess disposal was a little iffy...

Well North was diabolical for the first half. We still missed targets. We then wilted and were belted before a frenetic final 15 minutes.

Sydney v Freo was 120 minutes of footy played at a higher intensity that what we reached. Hawthorn and Geelong lasted for about 100 minutes at that level. Port did not need to play more than the 80 it played.

 

[hurlygurdy]

How good are hawthorns foot skills and they still identified speed as an issue. Hence the recruitment of Hill Smith and Hartung......

Watching Colyer in action has somewhat converted me to the whole "speed" thing. If we had Colyer breaking away from the pack and feeding the ball off to another "Colyer" like player it could only be a good thing.
It's easy to get caught up in thinking that the right structure will allow a slower player separation from his opponent, and during the year in 95% of games that's true. However, come finals time against a top four team in full flight, you need every ounce of pace that you can find.

 

[Benno30]

Watching Colyer in action has somewhat converted me to the whole "speed" thing. If we had Colyer breaking away from the pack and feeding the ball off to another "Colyer" like player it could only be a good thing.
It's easy to get caught up in thinking that the right structure will allow a slower player separation from his opponent, and during the year in 95% of games that's true. However, come finals time against a top four team in full flight, you need every ounce of pace that you can find.

When the game is slow and you are struggling to find options to kick to giving a handball of to someone with genuine speed can really break the game open. Without the speedy attacking run you end up chipping around to much.

 

[Towno78]

I don't really care about the specifics of tonight's game. We need to start thinking about premierships, and why we're not winning them. All my comments below are not related to form. There's no point worrying about form until you have a team good enough for form to be relevant.

As far as I can see, we have three stars on our list: Watson, Goddard and Heppell. There's quite a number of other top line players, but they're the 10/10 players. They're the core of the team. Looking at that group, there's two things that jump out at me. 1. They're all slow. Not just "not quick", but slow. 2. Two of them are 29. In my opinion, all our thinking has to be based around those three players.

Let's deal with the pace issue first. Basically, if you're in the same team as that group, and you're slow, you need to be damaging and dangerous in another facet. Myers ticks that box with his clearance work, and also his flexibility (able to pinch hit tall). Stanton ticks that box with his outside running and ability to make the ground larger. Chapman is dangerous inside 50. I can't think of too many others. That probably means that it's time to look past Dell'Olio, time to force Howlett out of the best 22. Hocking is borderline, because he's one of the few who can protect a team-mate, but ideally he'd be looking to upgrade him. Can we afford to play Bellchambers in the same team as that bunch, especially alongside two other 2m forwards? I think there's a number of good to very good players on our list who are potentially incompatible with the core of the team.

Now let's talk age. Two out of those three stars are 29. That seems to suggest that any hope of a premiership with that core is pretty much now or never. Sure, there's the next wave of talent coming through, a more talented and diverse core, one based on more than three players, but to pin all our hopes on that is to essentially write off the Watson/Goddard era. Not for me. I think we need to look to fill gaps with players of a similar age to Watson and Goddard, so that we're making that charge in the immediate short term, but also not limiting ourselves when it comes to supplementing the (hopefully) Heppell/Daniher/Merrett core.

My belief is that Nick Malceski is the perfect example of a player we should be bringing in. He ticks all the boxes:
1. He's an elite player, at the top of his game (this is by far his best season). That satisfies the "ready to go now" angle.
2. He's fast, he's skilful and he's smart. That helps alleviate the pace issue that the Watson/Goddard/Heppell core creates, and provides more weapons for the team. There's no doubt that he'd significantly improve us.
3. He's 29 (nearly 30) so he's not going to create any long-term list issues. A 3 year contract would all but see him out. Between him, Goddard and Watson, we'd be talking about $2m p.a. worth of 29-30 year old. Along with Stanton who's roughly the same age, we're talking about a massive, massive chunk of the salary cap opening up just in time for the new wave of this team starting to blossom. Recruiting players of that age strikes the balance between contending for a flag in the very short term, and having the flexibility to re-sign and add to the next tier of the list when it's their turn to shine.

The obvious counter-argument is "why not kill two birds with one stone, and recruit a younger player of that ilk who will improve the team immediately, but be around with the next group?" but to me that seems like overcommitting to the Watson-era flag push. Recruiting for the short term (with the implied factor of not trading out draft picks) actually allows you to recruit more specifically for the next tier. If it turns out that we need a gun clearance mid in 2017, then we can go and get one with free agency. We're not locked in to the younger equivalent of Malceski who we picked up this year. In the past losing draft picks to get players meant you needed to look for the younger guys in order to get a reasonable return, but these days recruiting older guys gives you a very strong ability to control the exact make-up of your list for shorter periods of time.

In terms of "recruiting" from within, it's time to start considering which guys can complement the slower core. For mine that's Lauchie Dalgleish, Marty Gleeson and Alex Browne. All of those guys are quick, and all have shown they can play footy in their glimpses at senior level. These guys need to be fast tracked, roles need to be created for them, so that we can offset the pace issue that we currently have. Travis Colyer's addition to the team has created a new dimension which we lacked in the first half of the year when we were particularly stagnant. Now it's time to expand that a little and create a team which is considered fast despite it's slow core.

I'm not sure how well I've conveyed my point, but it's a different way of looking at the bigger picture.

Just read the OP for the first time. A lot of what I've been thinking (except for the Malceski part).

IMO we need a massive injection of speed to complement Watson/Goddard/Heppell, as opposed to our current support act that expose their only collective flaw. Colyer coming on this year is a fantastic start, and Zach has helped also and only going to be more influencial in the next 2-3 years. I desperately hope we get regular contributions from the group of Gleeson, Browne, Dalgleish, Edwards, J. Merrett, Ashby, Rayner ASAP (plus retain Winderlich). We need these players pushing Howlett, Hocking and Stanton out of the side in that order. But to your point, we need someone in the ready to go basket also, I'd personally prefer we looked in the 25-27 bracket however to serve both this premiership push and the next. (We will then also need the side as a collective to make up for the lost tackling presence of Howlett/Hocking such as Freo would do).

I also think we need 1 more ready to go KPP. Either KPF to complement Daniher, or KPD to allow Carlisle to do it. Don't care which and given the age of our spine we could easily accommodate anyone (with the appropriate skill set of course) between the ages of 22-31.

 

[rines]

We also went backwards this year - from 14 wins to 12 - so let's not pretend there's not major questions to be answered.

Agreed with most of your post (not the Carlisle forward but that has been well covered).

It is somewhat easier to think of this year as a 'gap' year. I have no doubt that the form we showed last year can be replicated and improved upon. JD will take another step forward next year and (if all goes to plan) we aren't looking like losing any of our 'core' group this year.. time will tell on Paddy.

No one disagrees that we are short of a couple of players, but this team has a lot more to give than what they showed this year.

 

[BrunoV]

Watching Colyer in action has somewhat converted me to the whole "speed" thing. If we had Colyer breaking away from the pack and feeding the ball off to another "Colyer" like player it could only be a good thing.
It's easy to get caught up in thinking that the right structure will allow a slower player separation from his opponent, and during the year in 95% of games that's true. However, come finals time against a top four team in full flight, you need every ounce of pace that you can find.

Running power/speed is also crucial for the ability to defend well without robbing yourself of the ability to attack. It's the main thing that separates us from the top 5 teams this year.

We'd be less interested in small forwards if our forward flankers and midfielders ran hard forward (rather than just taking up defensive positions) to provide attacking options and to lock the ball into the 50 when we get it there.

I wonder if this year was the first step in the transition and whether the defensive positioning was overemphasised on purpose. On a number of occasions at VFL matches this year I was surprised at the extent of the focus on getting forwards up into the play and behind the ball with there being almost no focus on working hard forward when we had the ball. In fact, running in front of the ball as a forward was discouraged on occasions.

 

[84859300]

Kommer is not good enough.

I wan't to see more of him, before I write him off.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Just read the OP for the first time. A lot of what I've been thinking (except for the Malceski part).

IMO we need a massive injection of speed to complement Watson/Goddard/Heppell, as opposed to our current support act that expose their only collective flaw. Colyer coming on this year is a fantastic start, and Zach has helped also and only going to be more influencial in the next 2-3 years. I desperately hope we get regular contributions from the group of Gleeson, Browne, Dalgleish, Edwards, J. Merrett, Ashby, Rayner ASAP (plus retain Winderlich). We need these players pushing Howlett, Hocking and Stanton out of the side in that order. But to your point, we need someone in the ready to go basket also, I'd personally prefer we looked in the 25-27 bracket however to serve both this premiership push and the next. (We will then also need the side as a collective to make up for the lost tackling presence of Howlett/Hocking such as Freo would do).

I also think we need 1 more ready to go KPP. Either KPF to complement Daniher, or KPD to allow Carlisle to do it. Don't care which and given the age of our spine we could easily accommodate anyone (with the appropriate skill set of course) between the ages of 22-31.

Agree with a hell of a lot of that.

I'm interested to know the reasons for your objection to Malceski though. Is it age, injury history or style of player? I can see the arguments for all of those positions, but also the upside behind them.

 

[hurlygurdy]

Agreed with most of your post (not the Carlisle forward but that has been well covered).

It is somewhat easier to think of this year as a 'gap' year. I have no doubt that the form we showed last year can be replicated and improved upon. JD will take another step forward next year and (if all goes to plan) we aren't looking like losing any of our 'core' group this year.. time will tell on Paddy.

No one disagrees that we are short of a couple of players, but this team has a lot more to give than what they showed this year.

As much as a supporter base can ever be resigned to a transitional year, i think most on this board knew it was the case. I'm actually not even sure we are a couple of players short of top four, i just think the team needs time to settle into its current format. It's a nice reality that we will gain a couple of players regardless, which to my mind is icing on the cake.
The greedy part of me wants Malceski though... It's not enough that we should be top four next year, we need to go all out.

 

[84859300]

Would of been a different story if we friggin beat North like we supposed to.

Sorry to reply to two points on the page so quickly....

My biggest issue in not beating North stemmed from Thompson's presser after the draw with Carlton. If you remember back to that, he mentioned the importance of defence and how he tried to teach the guys of it's value all year. He said that they had discussed the negatives of the game and that the players were aware of the deficiencies.

Now, having this happen two weeks in a row either says that the team didn't stick to the game plan, or the cattle on the park were not up to the task. I'll leave you all to make your own decisions on how you see it - but my take is that we're great going forward and when we have the pressure on opposition teams...we're unstoppable. When the ball turns and we're chasing, we get found out again and again. This comes about when we have one of the best back six going in the game...and that we have further depth to call on if needed to fill injuries.

So I am in agreement that I think the next port of call for upgrade is in the middle of the ground.

Again, my take is that Howlett, Stanton, Myers are the weaker links in there so far. Goddard and Chapman go in there, but it's as a need more than a want as we lose focus time after time. Watson is Elite. Hocking is a negative player. Hepp is learning the ropes. The rest of the spots are really up for grabs and if upgrades are needed....I'm all for it.

 

[Towno78]

Agree with a hell of a lot of that.

I'm interested to know the reasons for your objection to Malceski though. Is it age, injury history or style of player? I can see the arguments for all of those positions, but also the upside behind them.

More that I'm not sure he's the style of player we desperately need. Of course he would improve our side, but I don't see it being by that much to get us that much closer to a flag.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

More that I'm not sure he's the style of player we desperately need. Of course he would improve our side, but I don't see it being by that much to get us that much closer to a flag.

That's more than fair, especially if Dempsey is going nowhere.