Discussion Thoughts on full back

[saintsrfreak]

Jackson Trengove is out of contract at the end of next year, offer him a shit ton of money

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Jackson Trengove is out of contract at the end of next year, offer him a shit ton of money

Is it really necessary. Couldn't we just offer that he go to a club that isn't Port?

I really liked the idea of Trengove at the time he was drafted (2008 ).
Touted as a top 10 pick except for his injury that would sideline him, I thought he was ideal for where the Saints were at the time, with a bit of time up our sleeves to replace Max. While his injury had been severe it didn't seem that it would leave him permanantly disabled.

( At the time I saw Dawson as an emergency for the role ).

 

[Q TRAIN]

Think there is a bit too much emphasis sometimes on looking for a huge defender to take on the "gorillas" .
Maxy wasnt overly big but he was one of the best ever IMO. Beat the gorillas like Richo and the mid size fwds like Nathan Brown. Same with Matty Scarlett , wasnt a massive man and that helped with his mobility ( and toe pokes ). If Tom Simpkin keeps improving at the rate he is, Who Knows just how good the kid might end up.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Think there is a bit too much emphasis sometimes on looking for a huge defender to take on the "gorillas" .
Maxy wasnt overly big but he was one of the best ever IMO. Beat the gorillas like Richo and the mid size fwds like Nathan Brown. Same with Matty Scarlett , wasnt a massive man and that helped with his mobility ( and toe pokes ). If Tom Simpkin keeps improving at the rate he is, Who Knows just how good the kid might end up.

Those are extremely exceptional players though, players with their amount of skill don't come around often, so it's easier to look for guys that make up their lower level of skill with their body size.

 

[Q TRAIN]

Those are extremely exceptional players though, players with their amount of skill don't come around often, so it's easier to look for guys that make up their lower level of skill with their body size.

Yes , thats a good point . I guess my point is i still think Simpkin could end up being a pretty dam good player himself. He's shown some great signs so far.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Yes , thats a good point . I guess my point is i still think Simpkin could end up being a pretty dam good player himself. He's shown some great signs so far.

I agree, it will take quite some time if his performances against monster forwards this year were any signal though. I've said before that we can't expect Max to turn any defender into a gun, but he looks like the perfect mentor for Simpkin. If he can teach him how to maneuver himself against the monsters then Simpkin could well be a quality KPD for us.

 

[Defacto]

Those are extremely exceptional players though, players with their amount of skill don't come around often, so it's easier to look for guys that make up their lower level of skill with their body size.

whos to say that modern day fwd, in the next 3-5 years, will be a big bustling/tall player like a buddy/brown/darling.

for all we know the max style defender could come back in vogue

 

[saintsrfreak]

whos to say that modern day fwd, in the next 3-5 years, will be a big bustling/tall player like a buddy/brown/darling.

for all we know the max style defender could come back in vogue

I wouldn't bet on it, big bodied forwards have been prominent since the game's conception, I can't see that changing in a few years.

 

[Defacto]

I wouldn't bet on it, big bodied forwards have been prominent since the game's conception, I can't see that changing in a few years.

i agree big fwds have been prominent but their attributes have changed over time. the dunstall/abletts/lockets required a different full back to the next generation of fwds that showed greater athletic ability and less muscle.

 

[sammm]

Jack tore him a new one in the game against Richmond last year. Said he was close to shedding a tear after it.

yeah, i remember that gaem, i think others said that he was quite upset about his own game.

 

[sammm]

Jackson Trengove is out of contract at the end of next year, offer him a shit ton of money

so does the saints offer a FB next year 800k or more and if so how will that look to Dal Santo? or even Goddard? when Watters and Co talked aobut loyalty and taking less money etc.

 

[saintsrfreak]

so does the saints offer a FB next year 800k or more and if so how will that look to Dal Santo? or even Goddard? when Watters and Co talked aobut loyalty and taking less money etc.

When I say shit ton, I mean $400-500k, not sure if that would do it, but worth a shot.

 

[Defacto]

so does the saints offer a FB next year 800k or more and if so how will that look to Dal Santo? or even Goddard? when Watters and Co talked aobut loyalty and taking less money etc.

i think the max any player will get moving fwd is 600k per year. max 3 years. i think were going back to the grant thomas approach

 

[The Enemy Within]

Fisher to F/B and Simpkin to CHB

 

[stkildathunda]

Big key defender is so overrated. Fact is even the best defenders get bags of goals kicked on them by Franklin, Riewoldt, Cloke, Cox etc etc.

 

[tbarker]

I posted this on the thread about this on the D&T board, so I'll just paste it here as well, as I think much of it is relevent:

Firstly, I'm pretty sure Watters didn't say that we will be specifically going after Mitch Brown next year. They don't quote him saying that at all, that is likely just the conclusion that the HS have drawn themselves, to create an eye-catching headline and opening paragraph.

They ask him about our attempt to get Brown and he just stated that yes, we wanted him and that at the time he didn't want to be there if he could come here and be assured of playing senior footy.

Watters then goes on to say that we will be in a very strong position to go very hard at free agency/trade period next year and that we will be looking to target someone to play in one or both of the key defensive positions. He doesn't say that we'll be going after Brown specifically.

Logically, he is the most likely one we will be going after, but 12 months is a long time in footy, so I just think this is the club putting it out there that we are going to have a lot of cash to splash around (it's looking like well over $1million at this stage) at the end of next year and that we will be targeting those areas very strongly, so this is like sending out a message to anyone in the league that plays FB or CHB that is coming out of contract in 12 months time (including Brown) that if they are after more money, or opportunities, they may be wise to hold off on re-signing during the year, so that they can see what are willing to offer them in 12 months time.

There is also the chance that someone on our current list will step up to fill that hole next year (there is talk that one or two who usually play key forward will be tried back next year, so they may be successful) and that we won't need to go after someone like Brown after all, but this also puts it out there that we are likely to have a huge amount of salary cap space free, to be able to go after anyone else that plays in other positions, that may be out of contract. Next year's Goddard, Caddy, or Mitch Clark, for instance.

I don't think this comment: "There is no doubt in 12 months' time we will be looking to add to our key defensive posts." sends a great message to our current list though, especially those who play key position down back, or who are going to be tried down back next year.

He's basically suggesting that he doesn't believe that they can be successful there and that he's already looking to replace them, 12 months out, before they've even had a chance to show if they have what it takes to play there next year. Hopefully he's at least had a word to them privately to say that he hopes that they will be able to step up to the plate and play the role, though, so that we won't need to get anyone else in, otherwise I don't think comments like that send a great message to them, or shows a lot of faith in them. At all.

I agreed with this post on the other post and I will agree with you again. Absolutely spot on - this was the media creating a story out of nothing and using a conclusion as a headline. Of course we go after Brown if he is available. Not sure what else Watters can say.

 

[tbarker]

whos to say that modern day fwd, in the next 3-5 years, will be a big bustling/tall player like a buddy/brown/darling.

for all we know the max style defender could come back in vogue

Very true. I think it is more about reach than anything else. It doesn't matter how strong or skilled you are - a big bloke with long arms is hard to spoil. I think that is why we need height in the backline. Cox and Tippett both smashed us on reach alone. For mind - Lee is the natural fit. A good kick and we have plenty of forward options for now so he is not needed down there. Chips can rotate onto anyone that is physically monstering Lee. Another thing to remember is that it is leg and core strength that assist in marking contests. That was the change with Dawson - he went nuts on strengthening both (a smart move by Lyon). That is why Kosi gets pushed off the ball - he has no strength in either area.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Big key defender is so overrated. Fact is even the best defenders get bags of goals kicked on them by Franklin, Riewoldt, Cloke, Cox etc etc.

Exactly.
And the right defender for Franklin is a different guy to the right defender for Cloke etc etc.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Very true. I think it is more about reach than anything else. It doesn't matter how strong or skilled you are - a big bloke with long arms is hard to spoil. I think that is why we need height in the backline. Cox and Tippett both smashed us on reach alone. For mind - Lee is the natural fit. A good kick and we have plenty of forward options for now so he is not needed down there. Chips can rotate onto anyone that is physically monstering Lee. Another thing to remember is that it is leg and core strength that assist in marking contests. That was the change with Dawson - he went nuts on strengthening both (a smart move by Lyon). That is why Kosi gets pushed off the ball - he has no strength in either area.

Not too sure about this. Roo is pretty much the only tall forward locked in, if Lee is better in the forward line than either Wilkes or Stanley then that's where he should play.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Not too sure about this. Roo is pretty much the only tall forward locked in, if Lee is better in the forward line than either Wilkes or Stanley then that's where he should play.

I don't agree with the logic.
If for example, Lee is brilliant in the backline, and Wilkes is nearly as good as Lee in the forward line, it would be worth doing it if there is no-one else competent in the backline. ( just for example, not saying that it will pan out like that ).

A couple of years back we were looking for a forward when Roo was injured, and Fisher was probably the best option, but we lost too much in defense.

While it seems pretty sure that Wilkes and Lee will be competing for a spot, I'm not sure that the third tall ( Stanley ) isn't a particular strategy based on Stanley's speed.

 

[mysainters]

so does the saints offer a FB next year 800k or more and if so how will that look to Dal Santo? or even Goddard? when Watters and Co talked aobut loyalty and taking less money etc.

Exactly, which is why I struggle to comprehend this model of nobody earning above and beyond.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

so does the saints offer a FB next year 800k or more and if so how will that look to Dal Santo? or even Goddard? when Watters and Co talked aobut loyalty and taking less money etc.

First you need to have someone in mind that would be worth that much.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I can completely understand the club looking at someone who is 195cm+ for the backline (as long as they consider them to be good enough, obviously. Not picking anyone up in any of the drafts for that role suggests that we won't take someone just because they are over that height- they have to be good as well).

The simple fact is that, like most areas of the ground, due to the trend in the whole population (at least of those who generally play footy) forward lines are getting taller, not shorter and the days of being able to get away with a backline where you have no-one over about 192cm are probably pretty much over, as we saw with us this year and how much we struggled. (Those who recruit for clubs apparently don't consider you to be "key position height" unless you're at least 194cm or so, now, apparently.) Just like how the days of being able to have someone like Jeff White, at 195cm, in the ruck, are probably over, due to the gradual increases in height of those playing the role these days compared to even then.

Sam Newman played 300 games in the ruck, yet is listed at only 190cm. There are now "mids" who are taller than that! If he came along now he would be considered too short for not only the ruck, but almost certainly for a key position as well. Darrel Daldock played at CHF and was 177cm! Now he would be collecting the crumbs at the front of the pack like Milney. Over the years, teams have gotten taller and taller and taller and that is not about to change any time soon, I don't imagine, unless the trend in the height of the Australian population changes all of a sudden.

The new interchange rules (and the potential of further tightening of the interchange rotations) means that teams pretty much no longer have their second ruck option resting on the bench anymore and are instead looking for someone like a Tipett, Mike Pike, Mitch Clark, Nic Nat/Dean Cox, Rhys Stanley, Tyrone Vickery, Shaun Hampson, Ayce Cordy, etc, who can play most of the game forward, but then pinch-hit in the ruck when needed. They are all over 200cm tall and are all likely to be playing forward most of every week and before long every team in the comp is likely to have someone that sort of height in their forward line, if they don't already and many of them are not just tall, but also huge, strong units.

Going forward: Kurt Tippett (202cm), Joe Daniher (201cm), Mitch Clark (200cm), Tom Hawkins (197cm) Nathan Vardy (198cm), Witts (209cm), Brodie Grundy (202cm), Shaun Hampson (201cm), Kruezer (200cm), Rhys Stanley (202cm), Paddy Ryder (197cm), Drew Petrie and Lachie Hansen (both 197cm), Ayce Cordy (203cm), Ty Vickery (200cm), Todd Elton (197cm), Jono Patton (197cm- may have grown more since then), Mike Pyke (201cm), Tom Lynch (Gold Coast version (199cm), Charlie Dixon (Gold Coast, 202cm), John Butcher (197cm), Mason Shaw (198cm- may grow more), Nic Nat/Dean Cox (201cm/203cm), Scott Gumbleton (197cm).

That is 24 already in the league who regularly/generally play forward who we will have to combat in our backline on pretty much a weekly basis from as early as next year onwards, who are between 197 and 209cm tall and next year Boyd is tipped to go top 3 in the draft and he is already listed as 198cm and 100kg and is monstering backlines and kicking bags of goals in the U18's (including in the champs, despite being ineligible to be drafted this year) despite being a year younger than them. By the time he enters the comp he could be over 200cm, just like Daniher this year. That is the trend. The "power forwards" who are being drafted now are as tall as 198-201cm, compared to the 195cm of a Johnno Brown of 12 years ago.

197cm is the 193cm of 10-12 years ago, I would suggest, so if you're hoping to combat them, and those taller than that, with someone who is 191 or 192cm tall, they would need to be absolutely exceptional to be able to handle them every single week of the year. It would be like having someone who is 195cm in the ruck for you every week. It's possible that they could succeed, but they would have to be outrageously good to be able to pull it off consistently these days.

This doesn't mean that you won't need one or two or three who are around that 191cm mark back there, but unless they are exceptionally good, you'll also need someone capable who is at least 195cm there, to take the "monsters" that pretty much every team is likely to have at least one of forward, from next year onwards. Before long every team will most likely be hoping to have someone who is at least 197cm tall in their backlines, especially if the interchange rotations get capped more, or they reduce the numbers on the bench, pushing more height into the forward lines.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Fine post ARR. The idea of Stanley switching to the backline is growing on me more and more, for that reason.

 

[Defacto]

I can completely understand the club looking at someone who is 195cm+ for the backline (as long as they consider them to be good enough, obviously. Not picking anyone up in any of the drafts for that role suggests that we won't take someone just because they are over that height- they have to be good as well).

The simple fact is that, like most areas of the ground, due to the trend in the whole population (at least of those who generally play footy) forward lines are getting taller, not shorter and the days of being able to get away with a backline where you have no-one over about 192cm are probably pretty much over, as we saw with us this year and how much we struggled. (Those who recruit for clubs apparently don't consider you to be "key position height" unless you're at least 194cm or so, now, apparently.) Just like how the days of being able to have someone like Jeff White, at 195cm, in the ruck, are probably over, due to the gradual increases in height of those playing the role these days compared to even then.

Sam Newman played 300 games in the ruck, yet is listed at only 190cm. There are now "mids" who are taller than that! If he came along now he would be considered too short for not only the ruck, but almost certainly for a key position as well. Darrel Daldock played at CHF and was 177cm! Now he would be collecting the crumbs at the front of the pack like Milney. Over the years, teams have gotten taller and taller and taller and that is not about to change any time soon, I don't imagine, unless the trend in the height of the Australian population changes all of a sudden.

The new interchange rules (and the potential of further tightening of the interchange rotations) means that teams pretty much no longer have their second ruck option resting on the bench anymore and are instead looking for someone like a Tipett, Mike Pike, Mitch Clark, Nic Nat/Dean Cox, Rhys Stanley, Tyrone Vickery, Shaun Hampson, Ayce Cordy, etc, who can play most of the game forward, but then pinch-hit in the ruck when needed. They are all over 200cm tall and are all likely to be playing forward most of every week and before long every team in the comp is likely to have someone that sort of height in their forward line, if they don't already and many of them are not just tall, but also huge, strong units.

Going forward: Kurt Tippett (202cm), Joe Daniher (201cm), Mitch Clark (200cm), Tom Hawkins (197cm) Nathan Vardy (198cm), Witts (209cm), Brodie Grundy (202cm), Shaun Hampson (201cm), Kruezer (200cm), Rhys Stanley (202cm), Paddy Ryder (197cm), Drew Petrie and Lachie Hansen (both 197cm), Ayce Cordy (203cm), Ty Vickery (200cm), Todd Elton (197cm), Jono Patton (197cm- may have grown more since then), Mike Pyke (201cm), Tom Lynch (Gold Coast version (199cm), Charlie Dixon (Gold Coast, 202cm), John Butcher (197cm), Mason Shaw (198cm- may grow more), Nic Nat/Dean Cox (201cm/203cm), Scott Gumbleton (197cm).

That is 24 already in the league who regularly/generally play forward who we will have to combat in our backline on pretty much a weekly basis from as early as next year onwards, who are between 197 and 209cm tall and next year Boyd is tipped to go top 3 in the draft and he is already listed as 198cm and 100kg and is monstering backlines and kicking bags of goals in the U18's (including in the champs, despite being ineligible to be drafted this year) despite being a year younger than them. By the time he enters the comp he could be over 200cm, just like Daniher this year. That is the trend. The "power forwards" who are being drafted now are as tall as 198-201cm, compared to the 195cm of a Johnno Brown of 12 years ago.

197cm is the 193cm of 10-12 years ago, I would suggest, so if you're hoping to combat them, and those taller than that, with someone who is 191 or 192cm tall, they would need to be absolutely exceptional to be able to handle them every single week of the year. It would be like having someone who is 195cm in the ruck for you every week. It's possible that they could succeed, but they would have to be outrageously good to be able to pull it off consistently these days.

This doesn't mean that you won't need one or two or three who are around that 191cm mark back there, but unless they are exceptionally good, you'll also need someone capable who is at least 195cm there, to take the "monsters" that pretty much every team is likely to have at least one of forward, from next year onwards. Before long every team will most likely be hoping to have someone who is at least 197cm tall in their backlines, especially if the interchange rotations get capped more, or they reduce the numbers on the bench, pushing more height into the forward lines.

i agree. although i dont see the defender in the mold of a mitch brown, frawley, scarlett etc i see them more in the mold of a dustin fletcher. someone tall who is agile. rather than someone tall who is brutish and powerful. i dont see us needing a monster but more someone who can outplay the tall fwds. if were opting for agile forwards, what does this say about where we think the weakness will be in future defenders?