Strategy The case for a third tall forward

[Portia]

Trengove played little more than a season of SNAFL sans injury and was hardly burning it up when he was promoted.

Was Hinkley coach then?

I don't think Butch lacks motivation, effort or skill. He just needs a confidence boost that would come with being told he's got a spot 'till Carlile returns.

Yeah no. Guaranteed spots, particularly when undeserved, are the absolute pinnacle of gold pass.

 

[Janus]

Wingard should have been crumbing and snapping goals and not trying to take mark of the century when we bombed it in.

Just on this - I think Wingard was seduced by the idea that we would break the record in terms of crowd noise. He wanted to get the crowd up and going - too bad he's not mature enough to realize that the crowd doesn't need the spectacular to do that...we just need the substance.

 

[Pedro59]

Crows coaching panel boss and everyone else now)
Umm Ports great at rebounding and linking through the guts going from centre to wing to centre and we just can't stop that stuff
Advisor:yeh no matter what we do they always beat us in the race back to our defensive goal square and then it's a bloody nightmare with a Chad here and a gray and Fries popping up everywhere
Sando:
Why don't we just let them have the midfield and leave half our team down there waiting for em to give it to us on a plate
Advisor : heck that's a great idea and if they are silly enough to keep it high ... Well goodbye to gray,fries and Chaddy baby
Sando: but what if they Chucked the ball butcher in the mix?
Advisor : doesn't matter can't kick or pack mark
Sando: gee not sure about just conceding the guts and just getting heaps of the boys to wait at the end for them... What if they simply compose themselves and get a Harlett ,White or Broadbent waiting on the edge of the 50 and bang it over our heads in to the goal
Advisor: naw they are going too fast to think of that

Kenny H:
Kick it to Shultz as fast as ya can
Port supporters:
Just kick it in long FFS!

 

[Pedro59]

Crows coaching panel boss and everyone else now)
Umm Ports great at rebounding and linking through the guts going from centre to wing to centre and we just can't stop that stuff
Advisor:yeh no matter what we do they always beat us in the race back to our defensive goal square and then it's a bloody nightmare with a Chad here and a gray and Fries popping up everywhere
Sando:
Why don't we just let them have the midfield and leave half our team down there waiting for em to give it to us on a plate
Advisor : heck that's a great idea and if they are silly enough to keep it high ... Well goodbye to gray,fries and Chaddy baby
Sando: but what if they Chucked the ball butcher in the mix?
Advisor : doesn't matter can't kick or pack mark
Sando: gee not sure about just conceding the guts and just getting heaps of the boys to wait at the end for them... What if they simply compose themselves and get a Harlett ,White or Broadbent waiting on the edge of the 50 and bang it over our heads in to the goal
Advisor: naw they are going too fast to think of that

Kenny H:
Kick it to Shultz as fast as ya can
Port supporters:
Just kick it in long FFS!

More Port supporters :
Er do we have a plan B for when the clog up our goal:

 

[Pedro59]

Just on this - I think Wingard was seduced by the idea that we would break the record in terms of crowd noise. He wanted to get the crowd up and going - too bad he's not mature enough to realize that the crowd doesn't need the spectacular to do that...we just need the substance.

Really?

 

[AdamMarrett]

It doesn't matter how many talls we play our forward structure,forward brilliance and our run from behind the ball all comes from our inside stoppage and defensive work around the stoppages.All our best play comes from that.The last 2 weeks we have lacked that and been smashed inside handsomely and the rest of our game has suffered.All our best work no matter how many talls we play comes from there.Even if we had Schultz,Westhoff and Shaw/Butcher we still would've lost the last 2 the way we have been smashed around the stoppages and contested ball.This to me is a dead argument cos if we don't fix the inside game it won't matter how many talls we have up forward.

 

[itisnt2hard]

It doesn't matter how many talls we play our forward structure,forward brilliance and our run from behind the ball all comes from our inside stoppage and defensive work around the stoppages.All our best play comes from that.The last 2 weeks we have lacked that and been smashed inside handsomely and the rest of our game has suffered.All our best work no matter how many talls we play comes from there.Even if we had Schultz,Westhoff and Shaw/Butcher we still would've lost the last 2 the way we have been smashed around the stoppages and contested ball.This to me is a dead argument cos if we don't fix the inside game it won't matter how many talls we have up forward.

Gold. So many thumbs up. Couldnt find a thumbs up thumb nail so here is a smile.

 

[rignanv]

Drop Mitchell and bring in a clearance player to fix the balance

 

[Power Raid]

If we need a backup on the rookie list it should be a backup for Lobbe (ruck, possibly Baulderstone) and an experienced backup for Impey (Krakouer)

I hope krak gets another chance and does something with that third chance

 

[Power Raid]

I don't know why Kern won't give Stewart a chance up fwd.

He is versatile to go fwd and back but he doesn't go fwd at all now.

Agree

A paul type or better still as sJohnson type would be a great addition to our line up.

Someone who can go forward, back or in the middle and can kick goals.

But clearly he is out of favour

 

[Ford Fairlane]

More Port supporters :
Er do we have a plan B for when the clog up our goal:

We missed at least 5 set shots on goal and Broady just had to kick a footy over the top to Matt White who would have blitzed into an open forward 50 for a goal. We lost by 2 points. Plan A was fine, we just stuffed up its execution.

 

[AdamMarrett]

Agree

A paul type or better still as sJohnson type would be a great addition to our line up.

Someone who can go forward, back or in the middle and can kick goals.

But clearly he is out of favour

Paul Stewart has been injured.On the website it states he is back this week in the SANFL.

 

[Pedro59]

We missed at least 5 set shots on goal and Broady just had to kick a footy over the top to Matt White who would have blitzed into an open forward 50 for a goal. We lost by 2 points. Plan A was fine, we just stuffed up its execution.

Wasn't real happy with the plan A part that led to bombing in long to very congested and double teamed forwards
Not sure how that part could be executed better

 

[Liverpower]

We missed at least 5 set shots on goal and Broady just had to kick a footy over the top to Matt White who would have blitzed into an open forward 50 for a goal. We lost by 2 points. Plan A was fine, we just stuffed up its execution.

This. It was obviously a very disappointing loss, but it does not follow that our game plan no longer works. We win that game comfortably if just 4 of those behinds were converted. Heck, that still would have left us with 11.14 on the day, so still not exactly great kicking. We had more clearances and more contested possessions than they did so we were not "smashed" around the stoppages. And as bad as our disposal was at crucial times, our overall efficiency was higher than theirs on the night. We execute, we win. We don't, we lose. Sometimes it is as simple as that.

 

[Power Raid]

Wasn't real happy with the plan A part that led to bombing in long to very congested and double teamed forwards
Not sure how that part could be executed better

kick it even higher?

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Wasn't real happy with the plan A part that led to bombing in long to very congested and double teamed forwards
Not sure how that part could be executed better

The Plan A part is not to kick it long to inequitable contests. That is what Essendon forced us to do by executing their plan very well.

How to beat that? Quicker cleaner ball movement to get the ball out through good spread. It's difficult when you are a young side learning to cope with being the hunted against teams that execute their part of the Plan very well. But it is something we have to learn to work through as Ken made clear in his post match press conference. We're on a journey. We are very much not a finished product yet.

The Sydney v West Coast game the next day was just as brutal a slog. It's happening across the competition and the teams that are disciplined at shut down football make scoring a nightmare for any team they play.

Choco was right when he said that it would be great to be able to play the way you wanted but there is an opposition out there doing their best to stop that. We are being subject to real high intensity midfield pressure and extra numbers down back. We're not handling that as well as we could but the sky's not falling either.

The flipside is that Essendon were hardly potent up forward. They scored 62 points but backed themselves in to score more than us. They managed that by two points and after we missed 5 set shots over the last quarter and a half and butchered several clear goal scoring opportunities with overuse or poor skills at the critical moment. We have to execute those basic skills better. As we get more experienced and more confident in ourselves (and improve our list) we will get better at what we do.

 

[Jello_B]

If Hinkley is taking the view that he is developing his list, then its important to maintain standards.

If effort is a non-negotiable, then its non-negotiable and thats that.

The biggest flaw of Williams was when he had different rules for different people. You get that when you start making exceptions and being inconsistent.

It should be a motivator for Butch that the team clearly needs him and he isn't performing well enough to get a game.

I am struggling to write this but I actually understand from your post why Mitchell is selected now. Not saying I agree with why but I can stop waiting for the second coming as this was more sensible than Mitchell's selection.
Don't know wether to thank you or ignore you moving forward

 

[Pedro59]

The Plan A part is not to kick it long to inequitable contests. That is what Essendon forced us to do by executing their plan very well.

How to beat that? Quicker cleaner ball movement to get the ball out through good spread. It's difficult when you are a young side learning to cope with being the hunted against teams that execute their part of the Plan very well. But it is something we have to learn to work through as Ken made clear in his post match press conference. We're on a journey. We are very much not a finished product yet.

The Sydney v West Coast game the next day was just as brutal a slog. Choco was right when he said that it would be great to be able to play the way you wanted but there is an opposition out there doing their best to stop that. We are being subject to real high intensity midfield pressure and extra numbers down back. We're not handling that as well as we could but the sky's not falling either.

The flipside is that Essendon were hardly potent up forward. They scored 62 points but backed themselves in to score more than us. They managed that by two points and after we missed 5 set shots over the last quarter and a half and butchered several clear goal scoring opportunities with overuse or poor skills at the critical moment. We have to execute those basic skills better. As we get more experienced and more confident in ourselves (and improve our list) we will get better at what we do.

Fair enough Ford I agree pretty much in what you are saying
We've done pretty well the last couple of years
I'm definitely not the doomsdayist type and the behind score speaks for itself

 

[raptalia]

The Plan A part is not to kick it long to inequitable contests. That is what Essendon forced us to do by executing their plan very well.

How to beat that? Quicker cleaner ball movement to get the ball out through good spread. It's difficult when you are a young side learning to cope with being the hunted against teams that execute their part of the Plan very well. But it is something we have to learn to work through as Ken made clear in his post match press conference. We're on a journey. We are very much not a finished product yet.

The Sydney v West Coast game the next day was just as brutal a slog. Choco was right when he said that it would be great to be able to play the way you wanted but there is an opposition out there doing their best to stop that. We are being subject to real high intensity midfield pressure and extra numbers down back. We're not handling that as well as we could but the sky's not falling either.

The flipside is that Essendon were hardly potent up forward. They scored 62 points but backed themselves in to score more than us. They managed that by two points and after we missed 5 set shots over the last quarter and a half and butchered several clear goal scoring opportunities with overuse or poor skills at the critical moment. We have to execute those basic skills better. As we get more experienced and more confident in ourselves (and improve our list) we will get better at what we do.

As far as Saturday's game goes Ford has pretty much summed it up. We stuffed up by not modifying our game plan to suit the conditions. I am not sure that a third tall forward would have helped much on Saturday night. What would have helped was that Monfries and Wingard actually got on the end of some better directed kicking and converted, I lost count of the number of times the ball was kicked high or long into our forward line which forced our smaller forwards to compete in the air with taller opponents.

That said we need another tall KPP on the list maybe Clurey or Shaw are the answers and will step up next year. We also need another sound backup ruckman because Redden's persistent injuries are a concern and Renouf is past it. I guess that suggests that somewhere in this year's trades and drafts we have to go tall.

 

[Peck]

If you were at the ground and saw Wingard flying for everything and Monfries being the lead up forward so many times and the ball kicked hard and high were he needed to be full stretch to touch the ball you might change your opinion. On a wet night like last Saturday Wingard should have been crumbing and snapping goals and not trying to take mark of the century when we bombed it in. We had 7 rushed points and Essendon 3. The main reason was we just kicked the ball too deep instead of landing it 10-15m out or bombed it without thinking and the taller Eseendon defenders just jumped over our little blokes and smashed it through for a behind. A 3rd tall may have meant the ball went forward not back in those contested pack situations and a smart small forward might have crumbed a goal by playing front and centre.

Yeah I was going to make the point that we didn't lack a tall when we had 0 players up forward, rather when we had every player up forward as you stated here. Having Butcher to fly at those packs would have helped enormously, but the question is whether he would have done enough elsewhere.

Honestly I'm not really on either side of playing a 3rd tall in general, its just when that third tall is going to be Butcher that I'm more hesitant. If it was someone I had some faith in I would be fine with it, but to me it seems an unnecessary risk to play Butcher in the side.

We missed at least 5 set shots on goal and Broady just had to kick a footy over the top to Matt White who would have blitzed into an open forward 50 for a goal. We lost by 2 points. Plan A was fine, we just stuffed up its execution.

Hmm. I agree somewhat, but I do think that Essendon moved the ball a lot easier than we did, which suggests our players movement wasn't good enough, which I would guess is down to the gameplan (not related to a third tall IMO). Certainly the wet weather caused some of our players massive problems, the shots at goal by Wines and Hartlett for example.

 

[Macca19]

I wrote the following in the Q&A's for Geoff Parker thread last November before the draft.......
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/q-a-with-geoff-parker.1041481/page-4#post-31000026
Our depth chart for true KPF's not a Westhoff utility or Redden part timer, should look something like

18-19-20 year olds 1 or 2
21-22-23 year old 1
24-25-26 year old 2
27-28-29 year old 1 or 2
30+ year old....... 1 if they are a champion of the club

That would give us 6 to 8 true KPF's. If there are a couple who are solid players but not a great KPF's then you can either turn them into KPD's or trade them and they hold their value.

Way too much. Its good to have depth but holding 8 KPFs on the list would be craziness. Im not even sure Adelaide at the peak of Rendells tall infatuation had 8 KPFs on their list, nor Hawthorn when they were picking KPFs with first rounders year in year out.

If we had 4, 5 or 6 true KPF's that were 21 years old now, then I would be happy with Mason Shaw as the only 18-20 year old KPF on our 2014 list, and not worry about a KPF this year because supposedly there are plenty next year.

You're forgetting Mitch Harvey as another 18-20 year old on our list.

Interestingly enough Parker was interviewed during the first televised U18 match a couple of weeks back and he said we'd probably be looking at bringing in another KPF this year.

 

[Garibaldi Red]

Yes the ken hotline...

For the 1st hour ken will say words that ryhme with "ken"

Ring 13 KERN and you will be greeted with the sounds of the Ken Oath Ockerstra singing "Let's hear it for Ken..."

 

[Hinkley Effect]

If Hinkley is taking the view that he is developing his list, then its important to maintain standards.

If effort is a non-negotiable, then its non-negotiable and thats that.

The biggest flaw of Williams was when he had different rules for different people. You get that when you start making exceptions and being inconsistent.

It should be a motivator for Butch that the team clearly needs him and he isn't performing well enough to get a game.

That is the problem I am having though - I don't think he is using the same rules with everybody...

We continually see Mitchell getting full games when his output doesn't warrant it.

Does Logan getting dropped after a great game remain consistent with that type of thinking?

Mitchell and Gray getting games before Young and Newton which weren't warranted on form...

I think as much as we want to argue otherwise, Hinkley has favourites just like every other coach in existence. It is human nature

 

[klem22]

"The case for a third tall forward"
One thing is very evident in all this is the failure for Butcher to produce the goods.
The need is there for another tall, so the team demands it. Which to me is proving the ever increasing gap that is coming between Butcher and him filling the spot. Port need guys stepping up to fill the need and i think the coaching staff would be seriously questioning Butchers real potential to bridge this gap.

Or i hope they are questioning his potential

 

[klem22]

That is the problem I am having though - I don't think he is using the same rules with everybody...

We continually see Mitchell getting full games when his output doesn't warrant it.

Does Logan getting dropped after a great game remain consistent with that type of thinking?

Mitchell and Gray getting games before Young and Newton which weren't warranted on form...

I think as much as we want to argue otherwise, Hinkley has favourites just like every other coach in existence. It is human nature

Fair comment imo.
As much as i love Ken and the job he has done so far he needs to continue to step up to the plate. There is not much room for failures in AFL and the coach will be the first to come under scrutiny when things go wrong. One of the most serious flaws for a coach to have is fall in love with his players. His job is to get the best out of them not provide security for them. After all it is his head on the line.