Analysis The Matt Taberner effect

[scon]

Planet Scon is located 5.8748 light-years away, despite numerous studies there has been no sign of intelligent life.

But I'm not the one who posted that we were 50 pts up at half time!!
Go figure about signs of intelligent life Mudd.
Like I said before do you still maintain we were that far ahead as you seemed to be using that nonsense as a basis for your intelligent game analysis.

 

[DudleyDocker]

After watching Peel on Saturday my view of Taberner remains the same. He is tall, has a big tank (apparently) and that's about it.

People read stats and say he had 8 marks, 17 possessions and two goals. Well Danyle Pearce went off at three quarter time with 8 marks and 17 possessions - let's play him as a key forward.

I am not a Tabs hater, but he did nothing to press a claim for an AFL spot. Zac Dawson was clearly better on the day and Strnadica was streets ahead of him.

In all honesty I would play Strnadica next week ahead of Taberner. He is a much better mark, a good kick, both field and goal, and a superior backup ruckman. He is more agile than Tabs and really cracked in yesterday.

I think we all acknowledge we need a tall forward, but gifting games to Tabs is not the answer. If Sandi is back next week I'd play Darcy at full forward, if not leave it as is or bring in Strnadica. I want to see Tabs fight for his spit, yesterday he did not do that and Strnadica did.

 

[Freomaniac]

You are probably right given how much Lyon seems to dislike Taberner.

But in truth Taberner has shown a whole lot more in his time at the club than Apeness ever has. Both as a forward and and as a ruck.

Apeness averages something like 5 possessions and 0.5 hitouts per game. I continually fail to see how he ever became the great white hope. Truth be told he's never shown a single thing at AFL level.

Apeness has shown something At AFL level at te end of last year, played 5 games and kicked 3 goals, all from set shots.

 

[IAMJUNGLEMUFFIN]

Correct. What's your point?

He takes contested marks, brings the ball to ground, we score more when he is in the team, he provides forward structure, and he can provide a back-up rucking option. That's why he is a key forward.

See, that's bullshit. He's useless in the air, he only brings to ball to ground because he drops marks he should take, he provides 0 presence up forward, and isn't a ruckmans arseh*le.

The only thing he's got going for him is his height, which is sad, because he doesn't use it anyway.

Will be delisted at first opportunity.

 

[Unique Name]

Saints, play Carlisle (200cm) Brown (195cm) Gilbert (194cm) and Robertson (194cm) in their backline. If we don't play a genuine tall forward we will see McCarthy play 120mins against a Carlisle who has 6-7cm and 20kgs on him. He will get absolutely monstered. Kersten would struggle to beat a 6yr old auskicker so it doesn't really matter who he gets as an opponent.

With the way we deliver inside 50 we need a tall player that can at least split the aerial contests.

 

[samFFC]

Well you were complaining about Kersten and McCarthy playing all this season so far (ie 13 games). So how is that any different?

I'm not calling for them to be delisted.

 

[ydraw]

See, that's bullshit. He's useless in the air, he only brings to ball to ground because he drops marks he should take, he provides 0 presence up forward, and isn't a ruckmans arseh*le.

He was our leading contested mark last year and in the top 20 in the league. Reports of him being useless in the air are greatly exaggerated. He does have a habit of dropping uncontested marks that he should take, but his contested marking is up there with key forwards from most other teams.

 

[wayToGo_]

I'm not calling for them to be delisted.

I'm not calling for Taberner to be delisted. But gifting him games just because he is tall isn't going to help the team nor him either.

He played well at Peel early in the year. Earned a call up. Played well in one game and then was poor from then on and got dropped. He hasn't done anything at Peel to deserve a recall yet. He's neither as good or as bad as most are making out in this thread.

 

[ydraw]

I'm not calling for Taberner to be delisted. But gifting him games just because he is tall isn't going to help the team nor him either.

He played well at Peel early in the year. Earned a call up. Played well in one game and then was poor from then on and got dropped.

In his second game he had 12 hitouts, 6 marks (3 contested) and 2 goals. Is that a poor game for a 2nd ruckman in your opinion?

After that we had 3 wet games in a row and yeah, he was poor. But so were our other 2 "key" forwards. And they've been poor since too.

Taberner's only played 5 games this year and he's still 5th in the team for total contested marks.

 

[wayToGo_]

Saints, play Carlisle (200cm) Brown (195cm) Gilbert (194cm) and Robertson (194cm) in their backline. If we don't play a genuine tall forward we will see McCarthy play 120mins against a Carlisle who has 6-7cm and 20kgs on him. He will get absolutely monstered. Kersten would struggle to beat a 6yr old auskicker so it doesn't really matter who he gets as an opponent.

With the way we deliver inside 50 we need a tall player that can at least split the aerial contests.

The problem is all of our tall forwards (including Tabs) are probably going to get monstered regardless.

Some are blaming inside 50 entries, others blaming the forwards. I personally think it is both and therefore the coaches deserve more heat about it. And it's not just the talls, our whole forward line is dysfunctional. We had 3 tackles inside 50 to Geelong's 26! We had 4 marks inside 50 to Geelong's 12. And we only had 18 shots on goal from 47 entries (ie 38%) to Geelong's 47%. Turn that around and all that hard work down field from our youngest team all season would have resulted in an easy win.

I don't think adding more talls or taller players is the solution. I'd get back to simple selection integrity. Get dropped if you aren't performing and earn your recall through the WAFL irrespective of size. Kersten has to be dropped. I'd probably drop McCarthy as well. The cupboard is bare but Tabs hasn't earned a recall through his Peel performances yet.

If Sandi is fit I'd play Darcy as a forward/2nd ruck and just keep Cox in. Then bring in another running forward (hopefully Langdon is fit). Would love Balic as well but assume he needs a game at Peel first. And then use the extra run against those tall defenders and apply some forward pressure for once and ban bombing it inside 50. In the meantime Tabs, McCarthy and Kersten could learn some forward craft together for Peel just like our young defenders have.

 

[wayToGo_]

In his second game he had 12 hitouts, 6 marks (3 contested) and 2 goals. Is that a poor game for a 2nd ruckman in your opinion?

Yeah fair call. One good game, one ok game and 3 poor games. If he'd kept up how he performed against Richmond he'd still be in the team.

 

[ydraw]

If he'd kept up how he performed against Richmond he'd still be in the team.

Don't you think your expectations are a little unrealistic?

If he'd had kept up how he performed against Richmond he'd have more contested marks than Josh Kennedy and be on track to win the Coleman while playing in the ruck.

His game against Richmond was more than just ok.

Currrently Taberner sits in the top 10 in the league for contested marks per game with 2.2 per game.

 

[wayToGo_]

Don't you think your expectations are a little unrealistic?

If he'd had kept up how he performed against Richmond he'd have more contested marks than Josh Kennedy and be on track to win the Coleman while playing in the ruck.

His game against Richmond was more than just ok.

Stop being so obsessed with a single statistic. It's got nothing to do with how many contested marks he takes. It's to do with his overall performance. He worked hard and presented all game in his game against Essendon. He still worked hard most of the Richmond game. But the next three games his work rate was rubbish and wet weather shouldn't be an excuse for that. It's all mental with Tabs, always has been. He stuffs something up, then doubts himself, stops working hard and performs poorly. If he could maintain the confidence and work rate he had against Essendon, or even against Richmond, he'd still be in the team. Very certain no key forwards are marked pass/fail just on the basis of how many contested marks they have each game.

 

[ydraw]

Stop being so obsessed with a single statistic. It's got nothing to do with how many contested marks he takes. It's to do with his overall performance. He worked hard and presented all game in his game against Essendon. He still worked hard most of the Richmond game. But the next three games his work rate was rubbish and wet weather shouldn't be an excuse for that. It's all mental with Tabs, always has been. He stuffs something up, then doubts himself, stops working hard and performs poorly. If he could maintain the confidence and work rate he had against Essendon, or even against Richmond, he'd still be in the team. Very certain no key forwards are marked pass/fail just on the basis of how many contested marks they have each game.

I find it funny you say it isn't about a single statistic, but it is all about a single metric that you made up - "work rate". Something which (handily for you) can't be measured, so we are just supposed to accept your opinion that he "wasn't working hard enough".

You allow literally nothing for the conditions or the fact that we got spanked in the midfield in 2 of those games - it must just be because he stopped trying amiright? I suppose all our other forwards decided to stop trying at the same time then, because they were equally bad in all those games.

And yes, contested marks is the most important metric for a key forward. That and goals. And on both metrics, Taberner is our best key forward.

 

[Unique Name]

The problem is all of our tall forwards (including Tabs) are probably going to get monstered regardless.

Big difference though is that Carlisle will be able to mark the ball a foot above McCarthy's arms. A tall forward will at least be able to get his hands to the contest and do something.

We've all watched McCarthy and Kersten be continually outmarked and outmuscled for the last few games. Continually failing to even impact the contest and create a spill.

You mentioned our lack of tackles in the forward 50. You're not allowed to tackle a bloke who marks the ball. Kersten and McCarthy's opponents marked almost everything that came there way. Check out the marks and intercept possessions from Geelong's backline. Depressing.

While I think Tabs is our best option I don't really care which talls we play we just need to play 2 genuine talls (195cm+) in the forward line, then McCarthy is free to play the 3rd tall role.

Walters - KPF - Deluca
McCarthy - KPF/Ruck - Ballas

Pick two of Darcy - Strnadica - Tabs - Griffin to fill the spots.

Two KPFs, a 3rd med/tall and 3 smalls is the standard fwd setup because it has stood the test of time as the most reliable and effective setup.

Talls split the contests, smalls crumb and pressure the loose ball. Without the talls splitting the contest we can't pressure because the opposition keep marking the ball.

 

[samFFC]

See, that's bullshit. He's useless in the air, he only brings to ball to ground because he drops marks he should take, he provides 0 presence up forward, and isn't a ruckmans arseh*le.

The only thing he's got going for him is his height, which is sad, because he doesn't use it anyway.

Will be delisted at first opportunity.

Have you watched him take contested marks, or provide back-up ruck duties?

I'm not calling for Taberner to be delisted. But gifting him games just because he is tall isn't going to help the team nor him either.

He played well at Peel early in the year. Earned a call up. Played well in one game and then was poor from then on and got dropped. He hasn't done anything at Peel to deserve a recall yet. He's neither as good or as bad as most are making out in this thread.

You were comparing my criticism of McCarthy and Kersten. I'm saying they've had a full half season plus to show their wares (which is entirely appropriate for new recruits) but Tabs has never been given the same opportunity.

Re: Peel. I don't follow as closely as some, but my understanding is that:
1. He has kicked at least one goal in every game this season, and has kicked 5 and 4 in two wins. 19 in 8 games overall.
2. Peel is often a low scoring team - they've scored less than all teams bar EF.
3. He is 12th overall in the goalkicking this year, but all ahead of him have played 12 or 13 games (vs 8), other than Leroy Jetta.

And if you are in and out of a side, that wouldn't help either I imagine.

 

[wayToGo_]

And yes, contested marks is the most important metric for a key forward. That and goals. And on both metrics, Taberner is our best key forward.

Sorry but this is absolute BS. Jeremy Cameron, who currently leads the Coleman tally only averages 0.8 contested marks per game. Should GWS drop him because he's not hitting a decent contested mark total?

Sure Josh Kennedy leads the contested marks table with 2.7 per game but more importantly he also leads the marks inside 50 with 3.7 per game, and the goals per game (3.4). He's also miles ahead of Tabs in score involvements and pressure acts.

I'd take a forward that can take plenty of marks inside 50 well ahead of a contested marking beast. If they can do both, like Kennedy, then they will be a superstar.

I'm just trying to provide some balance here. He came off our rookie list, we shouldn't expect him to be amazing. But this idea that we would of definitely won with him in the team is rubbish because you aren't looking at the big picture. What if having him in the team meant we didn't lock it forward a few times and cost us the one or two goals he output? What if his clangers cost us another couple of goals? Maybe we would have lost by more with him in the team, we don't know because there are far too many variables and it's not as simple as adding a player means adding x output without impacting everything else along the way.

 

[ydraw]

Sorry but this is absolute BS. Jeremy Cameron, who currently leads the Coleman tally only averages 0.8 contested marks per game. Should GWS drop him because he's not hitting a decent contested mark total?

Sure Josh Kennedy leads the contested marks table with 2.7 per game but more importantly he also leads the marks inside 50 with 3.7 per game, and the goals per game (3.4). He's also miles ahead of Tabs in score involvements and pressure acts.

Contested marks is quite literally a measure of how competitive someone is in marking contests. Given that we need someone to bring the ball to ground in our forward line (rather than being constantly outmarked by the opposition defender), it's the most important metric you can look at.

You mention Jeremy Cameron but you still don't seem to get it. Cameron is not GWS' #1 key forward. He's their equivalent of Cam McCarthy. Cameron plays small for his size and is as good off the ground as many guys a foot shorter than him. GWS' main key forward is Jonathon Patton - who averages 2.1 contested marks per game. Patton is the contested marking option who brings other players into the game by making defenders have to man him up and spoil rather than simply outmarking him, which is what is happening in our forward line in Taberner's absence.

What we are doing is the equivalent of dropping Patton for Toby Greene, because Greene gets more possessions and kicks more goals. But that would be stupid because Patton is so important to forward structure.

You have to have at least 1 key forward and we've been playing without one. Neither Kersten nor McCarthy are key forwards.

(BTW since you mentioned it, Taberner also #1 at Fremantle for marks inside 50.)

What if having him in the team meant we didn't lock it forward a few times and cost us the one or two goals he output? What if his clangers cost us another couple of goals?

Having clangers at least means you got near the ball, which is more than you can say for Kersten over the last month. BTW Taberner this year averages 3 tackles and 1.4 1%ers per game vs Kerstens 1.3 tackles and 0.9 1%ers. So if you want to talk about forward pressure I think there are bigger goats to scape.

 

[wayToGo_]

Contested marks is quite literally a measure of how competitive someone is in marking contests. Given that we need someone to bring the ball to ground in our forward line (rather than being constantly outmarked by the opposition defender), it's the most important metric you can look at.

You mention Jeremy Cameron but you still don't seem to get it. Cameron is not GWS' #1 key forward. He's their equivalent of Cam McCarthy. Cameron plays small for his size and is as good off the ground as many guys a foot shorter than him. GWS' main key forward is Jonathon Patton - who averages 2.1 contested marks per game. Patton is the contested marking option who brings other players into the game by making defenders have to man him up and spoil rather than simply outmarking him, which is what is happening in our forward line in Taberner's absence.

What we are doing is the equivalent of dropping Patton for Toby Greene, because Greene gets more possessions and kicks more goals. But that would be stupid because Patton is so important to forward structure.

You have to have at least 1 key forward and we've been playing without one. Neither Kersten nor McCarthy are key forwards.

(BTW since you mentioned it, Taberner also #1 at Fremantle for marks inside 50.)

I still don't agree about contested marking being more important than goals, marks inside 50, score involvements, pressure acts etc for a key forward but I do agree having someone that can bring the ball to ground in your forward line can help a lot. The contested marking stat isn't an indication of that though because where those marks happens is kind of important. I honestly don't know anyone that has watched Taberner play regularly (both at Peel and for Freo) that thinks he does that. Most people have him as a high half forward, some even think he is a tall winger. Nobody sees him as a contested beast near the goals to bring the ball to ground for the smalls. If he was then his score involvements and goal assists would be far higher than what they are but we don't need the stats, our eyes can tell us that. Almost all of his stats were from that one game against Essendon - it was a brilliant performance from him but it has padded his stats in the subsequent four games he played. I'm far from a Tabs hater but we have to be realistic in our assessment - he's bog average.

 

[ydraw]

I'm far from a Tabs hater but we have to be realistic in our assessment - he's bog average.

Average who can take contested marks is better than average who can't.

Do you think Kersten is some kind of world beater?

We need a key forward and it makes no sense for us to have 2 "third talls" and no key forward in our forward line, especially when one of them has been worse than Taberner in virtually every way this year.

If you would prefer to go with Strnadica or one of the 3 long term injured key forwards then I would understand that. But going with Kersten just makes no sense because we already know that he can't do what we need him to do.

The point of this thread after all isn't that Taberner is the next Wayne Carey. It's that for far too long we've gone in with a forward structure that lacks a key forward, and as a result we've been one of the lowest scoring teams in the league.

If Taberner is the only fit key forward then he should be picked. If he gets dropped again when Apeness or A. Pearce is fit then that's fine. But going in with no key forwards because our match committee thinks we can win without one is stupid, and has been stupid for many years.

 

[wayToGo_]

Do you think Kersten is some kind of world beater?

No I think he is bog average as well - can have a good game here and there but is incredibly inconsistent. I also think McCarthy has been bog average so far this season but at least we know he has a higher ceiling than what he has shown to date.

As I said earlier I'd have no problem with all three playing at Peel together next week. I think them developing more chemistry in a less pressured environment might help. But I'm also highly doubtful Tabs and Kersten are part of our long term solution so we need to invest heavily in quality tall forwards in the coming years.

 

[ydraw]

But I'm also highly doubtful Tabs and Kersten are part of our long term solution so we need to invest heavily in quality tall forwards in the coming years.

Even if we do manage to get a quality tall in the next draft he won't be ready to play next year. If we get one through free agency then we still need a backup. It makes no sense at all to leave the only fit key forward on our list in the reserves - either from an immediate strategic point of view or a long-term development point of view.

Every supporters been saying for years that we'll fix our key forward problem through the draft or trade table. We haven't. It's been 12 ****ing years. It's about time we started playing the ones that we do have. It really doesn't matter if they are shit or not. We have no choice but to play them and hope they get better at this point.

Who knows if Taberner would be any good if he had a full season at AFL level? Ross Lyon certainly doesn't, because he's never tried. It's time we actually tried.

 

[salim malik]

Taberner has had 5 years on the list and turns 25 next July and at 25 he should be taking control of games which is something he has rarely done even at Peel. He won't be delisted this year but next season will be his defining season.

 

[wayToGo_]

Even if we do manage to get a quality tall in the next draft he won't be ready to play next year. If we get one through free agency then we still need a backup. It makes no sense at all to leave the only fit key forward on our list in the reserves - either from an immediate strategic point of view or a long-term development point of view.

If he'd played a couple of good games at Peel over the past few weeks I'd agree with you. This is what is frustrating - there is a spot open and he's not pushing himself hard enough in the seconds (if someone else who watches Peel disagrees and thinks he's been great please let me know).

Why won't our newly drafted KPF be ready? We had all four of our first year players playing yesterday and all were pretty good imo (Darcy and Cox were great!).

I can't wait until next year because we'll have more competition for spots in the forward line. Ideally we draft a key forward with our early first and they debut early. McCarthy and Kersten fight for one spot as the 3rd tall (think we know who will win that one) and then the last spot is for someone who can be the 2nd ruck and bring the ball to ground for the smalls (ie Darcy, Tabs, Ape, Cox, Ueber, Strnadica etc)...

 

[ydraw]

If he'd played a couple of good games at Peel over the past few weeks I'd agree with you. This is what is frustrating - there is a spot open and he's not pushing himself hard enough in the seconds (if someone else who watches Peel disagrees and thinks he's been great please let me know).

Why won't our newly drafted KPF be ready? We had all four of our first year players playing yesterday and all were pretty good imo (Darcy and Cox were great!).

Logue has been awful this year, he isn't ready. Not everyone is ready to play AFL at the age they are first drafted.

I can't wait until next year because we'll have more competition for spots in the forward line. Ideally we draft a key forward with our early first and they debut early. McCarthy and Kersten fight for one spot as the 3rd tall (think we know who will win that one) and then the last spot is for someone who can be the 2nd ruck and bring the ball to ground for the smalls (ie Darcy, Tabs, Ape, Cox, Ueber, Strnadica etc)...

"Ideally" is what we've been saying every year for the last 10 years. What happens if we get to our draft pick this year and all the good key forwards are gone again? Do we just say "**** it" and spend another year at the bottom of the ladder to try again? Even if we do manage to draft a good key forward prospect, it will be 4 years before they reach their potential.

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush as they say.

Your list of guys who could be our 2nd ruck isn't as impressive as you might think. Every chance Apeness and Uber will be delisted. Cox isn't tall enough, and is more of a Key Defender than a ruck/forward anyway. Darcy will be our #1 ruck. It's Tabs or Strnadica who will most likely play that role going forward unless we draft someone else.

In terms of what we are aiming for - which presumably is a premiership tilt in 2-3 year's time with Fyfe and Hill as our senior players, Taberner is the right person at the right age. Strnadica and Cox will only be 20-21 then. Barring some kind of trading coup like getting Rory Lobb to come home, Taberner's the best bet at the moment to be one of our key forwards in that period. So we have to stick with him if we are serious.