MVP Tommy Boyd - The Grand Final Enigma

[BEaston]

Grundy, Natanui, Gawn, Goldstein, Minson.

My guess is you'll say they weren't lead ruckman, to which I don't know the answer but they still managed more hitouts than Boyd and Boyd is only lead until Roughead is in.

I'm not sure using 4 of the best rucks in the comp as examples is helpful to the point you're making?

Statistically, he's about on par with Goldy and Gawn at the same age anyway (both have gone on to be the best ruck in the comp at certain times). NicNat and Grundy both outperformed him at the same age, but they were both freakish beasts that impacted straight away (extremely, extremely rare for ruckman). He has Minson covered pretty easily.

 

[BEaston]

He's barely an AFL standard first ruck IMO, it's more because our options are so thin. True a lot wouldn't have debuted or played very little footy but I'd say that's more because they wouldn't have had the opportunity because of experienced ruckman in their way.

I struggle to see what his real strengths in the ruck are in all honesty. He doesn't take marks around the ground, he doesn't use his size to make his presence felt on smaller players, while improving every week he doesn't cover a huge amount of ground, he has literally zero forward craft (ironic considering this should be a strength of his ruck game), he's not a brilliant tap ruckman and he quite often gets pushed around in the around the ground contests. His follow up work when the ball hits the deck is usually good and his ball use when he has time and space is very good, although his hands in traffic are quite slow and poor imo.

Yes I definitely see signs he could
be a decent ruckman but does literally any part of his game sceam future gun ruckman? Absolutely not IMO.

In short, I'd be rapt if we got him for pick 35 on a standard developing ruckman contract.

Edit: I take my last comment back, I'm rapt we got him no matter what we paid because of his role in our flag, of course I'll always be rapt with that. I'll rephrase by saying his current output is what you could expect of a ruckman taken at pick 35 on a standard contract.

He doesn't scream future gun ruckman because you can literally count on one hand the number of ruckmen you could say that about at age 21 over the past 20 years. I think expectations need to be tempered a bit.

He's developing very nicely.

 

[Mofra]

Grundy, Natanui, Gawn, Goldstein, Minson.

My guess is you'll say they weren't lead ruckman, to which I don't know the answer but they still managed more hitouts than Boyd and Boyd is only lead until Roughead is in.

All debuted in an era of two ruckman though, although Grundy debuted just as a clear definition of first / second ruckman was being established.

I honestly only want Boyd to be rucking 10-20% of the game in time, but having a 2m forward who can chop out in the ruck is invaluable. How many decent ruck/forwards in the competition are there?
Lobb (who hadn't debuted at Boyd's age now), Daniher, Jenkins, Tippett (who saalary wise is on par with or paid more than Boyd) - heck Ty Vickery was chased by the Hawks on $500k pa. Ryder perhaps, Trengove is odd as a back/ruck who is good at both.

Boyd is still a work in progress - 2m ruck/forwards are - but structurally he is already one of the better ruck/forwards in the competition where I can't see too many joining their ranks. Peter Wright perhaps, although he's never had the responsibility of being the no 1 ruck or no 1 forwards so it's very hard to compare.

 

[Mutt]

Grundy, Natanui, Gawn, Goldstein, Minson.

My guess is you'll say they weren't lead ruckman, to which I don't know the answer but they still managed more hitouts than Boyd and Boyd is only lead until Roughead is in.

How many of them killed it in a Prelim Final and then backed it up with a best on performance in the Grand Final? The answer....none! I couldn't care how many hitouts the others got at age 21. The important question is, were they instrumental in their team achieving ultimate success when they were 21?

 

[BRWB]

How many of them killed it in a Prelim Final and then backed it up with a best on performance in the Grand Final? The answer....none! I couldn't care how many hitouts the others got at age 21. The important question is, were they instrumental in their team achieving ultimate success when they were 21?

No doubt Boyd will forever be a premiership legend.

We hear that the other premiership legend Boyd may be encouraged to retire...where does Tom Boyd's output need to be to be a valued team member? I assume he doesn't have a free pass till retirement so where does his performance need to be?

As a ruck, is it just competing? What defines competing?

As a fwd is it taking a contested mark or mark on the lead and kicking at least 2 per game?

What metrics do we use to assess him? I assume no one is saying he is a premiership legend, end of discussion..

 

[Clay]

No doubt Boyd will forever be a premiership legend.

We hear that the other premiership legend Boyd may be encouraged to retire...where does Tom Boyd's output need to be to be a valued team member? I assume he doesn't have a free pass till retirement so where does his performance need to be?

As a ruck, is it just competing? What defines competing?

As a fwd is it taking a contested mark or mark on the lead and kicking at least 2 per game?

What metrics do we use to assess him? I assume no one is saying he is a premiership legend, end of discussion..

Good sensible questions in a difficult discussion

 

[DelRe]

I'm not sure using 4 of the best rucks in the comp as examples is helpful to the point you're making?.

They were just names of rucks that were playing similar numbers of games and getting plenty of hitouts at 21 to suggest they were spending reasonable time in the ruck even if they weren't the lead ruck so in that sense provide a reference point for what you might expect of a young ruck likely to be at the top end of that category in the long run.

Unfortunately we don't have many coming through at the same time at the same age to do a direct comparison with today's players so agree you run the risk of comparing with slightly different types playing slightly different roles but prob the best comparison we have and what you might expect of Boyd.

Potentially skewed against Boyd though because those came in as rucks whereas he has moved into it.

 

[BEaston]

With the way Rough's contested marking came on last year, is it that preposterous to suggest Boyd could become the main ruck with Roughy the fwd/2nd ruck? Fix Roughy's set shot kicking a bit more and he could be a beast up there.

Random fact: Roughead has never registered more than 30 hitouts in a game. Boyd did so last weekend for the first time.

 

[BEaston]

They were just names of rucks that were playing similar numbers of games and getting plenty of hitouts at 21 to suggest they were spending reasonable time in the ruck even if they weren't the lead ruck so in that sense provide a reference point for what you might expect of a young ruck likely to be at the top end of that category in the long run.

Unfortunately we don't have many coming through at the same time at the same age to do a direct comparison with today's players so agree you run the risk of comparing with slightly different types playing slightly different roles but prob the best comparison we have and what you might expect of Boyd.

Potentially skewed against Boyd though because those came in as rucks whereas he has moved into it.

Right.

Well it's good signs that he compares well at the same age then.

 

[Mofra]

We hear that the other premiership legend Boyd may be encouraged to retire...where does Tom Boyd's output need to be to be a valued team member? I assume he doesn't have a free pass till retirement so where does his performance need to be?

As a ruck, is it just competing? What defines competing?

As a fwd is it taking a contested mark or mark on the lead and kicking at least 2 per game?

What metrics do we use to assess him? I assume no one is saying he is a premiership legend, end of discussion..

Here's a metric - is anyone else on the list capable of doing what he's doing, but better?

For Matty Boyd, he has competition*. For Tommy, right now he has a Roughy getting back to full fitness and a woefully out of sorts Tom Campbell - and as a pure tall forward giving ruck chop-outs it's Redpath and Cloke - Cloke is terrible in the ruck and Redpath is just ok as a chop-out when fully fit (not sure how he'd go now).

Bevo has shown in the past he'll drop anyone regardless of reputation.

 

[DelRe]

Right.

Well it's good signs that he compares well at the same age then.

On pure stats he doesn't compare that well, probably mid to lower end of that group but appreciate there's more to it than that. It's not a bad sign if you want him to be a very good ruck (I'll say it again I think he'll be a very good player) but not necessarily of itself supportive of him becoming a long term stand out dominant one although as you point out he just got 30 hitouts so hopefully he's on a steeper trajectory - and like others I ultimately want him to be more forward as well anyway (esp if English comes on).

Contested marking is still only 2 in 8 games which may answer your other post. Agree too though Roughead's year last year was a bit of a spike there so hopefully it can click for Boyd like that as well.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Grundy, Natanui, Gawn, Goldstein, Minson.

My guess is you'll say they weren't lead ruckman, to which I don't know the answer but they still managed more hitouts than Boyd and Boyd is only lead until Roughead is in.

Comparing him to five rucks that have delivered elite football is more helpful to my point than your own, I'd suggest.

I would also argue that most of these rucks pride themselves on their tap work, but not all ruckmen are created equally. Boyd doesn't rack up huge hitout numbers (yet), and while I don't have the hitouts to advantage statistics I'd suggest that he's merely average. However his strengths come in different forms.

Further to that, I'd imagine you're using average stats, which are really hard to use in this context as it's impossible to determine what proportion of them were gained as a ruck compared to as a forward. Without that crucial information the stats are very hard to interpret and as a result I'm more inclined to back my own view - which tells me that he's trending similarly to the top-line players you've used as examples. Of course, I'm aware that that is not a strong argument, but I just don't think the stats are useable without more information.

By "lead ruckman," I meant not that he was our first ruckman, just that he's an AFL standard lead ruckman if used that way.

He's barely an AFL standard first ruck IMO, it's more because our options are so thin. True a lot wouldn't have debuted or played very little footy but I'd say that's more because they wouldn't have had the opportunity because of experienced ruckman in their way.

I struggle to see what his real strengths in the ruck are in all honesty. He doesn't take marks around the ground, he doesn't use his size to make his presence felt on smaller players, while improving every week he doesn't cover a huge amount of ground, he has literally zero forward craft (ironic considering this should be a strength of his ruck game), he's not a brilliant tap ruckman and he quite often gets pushed around in the around the ground contests. His follow up work when the ball hits the deck is usually good and his ball use when he has time and space is very good, although his hands in traffic are quite slow and poor imo.

Yes I definitely see signs he could
be a decent ruckman but does literally any part of his game sceam future gun ruckman? Absolutely not IMO.

In short, I'd be rapt if we got him for pick 35 on a standard developing ruckman contract.

Edit: I take my last comment back, I'm rapt we got him no matter what we paid because of his role in our flag, of course I'll always be rapt with that. I'll rephrase by saying his current output is what you could expect of a ruckman taken at pick 35 on a standard contract.

To borrow a term from fronkalicious, this paint-by-numbers approach just doesn't accurately represent the situation - particularly for a player such a short distance into his development curve. If you add all of your claims up, I would suggest that Boyd's impact on games as a ruckman far outweighs what you've given him credit for above. At the end of the day it's that impact that's the important factor here, and the bigger picture as I believe it to be is as I've stated: at an age where only the cream of the crop ruckmen are able to hold their own at AFL level, he is doing so.

I won't address all of your points but there are a number of them that I disagree with. Not so much that they're not correct - he does need development in a number of those areas - but simply that none of them are particularly damning or surprising. Many ruckmen struggle with the exact same things, and I don't think any of them throw him off course compared to many dominant ruckmen at the same age.

Don't get me wrong, there are areas of Boyd's development that I'm disappointed in, and many phases of the game that we need to see improvement in - but I think the impact he's having in a difficult role so early into his career sees him trending very much in the right direction, and as much more than simply average.

 

[DelRe]

Comparing him to five rucks that have delivered elite football is more helpful to my point than your own, I'd suggest.

Well you did ask for rucks that were playing / could play a lead role at the same age and it seems there's potentially been a few rather than it being rare. His stats aren't stand out in that group either by average or total but there may be reasons for that. It probably supports my point that he could turn out to be a very good player like that group but potentially not the dominant one of this era. Just different shades of grey.

One troubling aspect is very few ruckman seem to last long at a high level which is partly why I don't like the idea of him being there long term.

 

[Mutt]

No doubt Boyd will forever be a premiership legend.

We hear that the other premiership legend Boyd may be encouraged to retire...where does Tom Boyd's output need to be to be a valued team member? I assume he doesn't have a free pass till retirement so where does his performance need to be?

As a ruck, is it just competing? What defines competing?

As a fwd is it taking a contested mark or mark on the lead and kicking at least 2 per game?

What metrics do we use to assess him? I assume no one is saying he is a premiership legend, end of discussion..

I was responding to a post that criticised Boyd because his ruck stats as a 21 year old are not as good as some others. As a 21 year old he has achieved much, much more in the way of team success and making a vital contribution to that team success than the other ruckman have at 21 years of age. Do you disagree with me?

 

[BEaston]

On pure stats he doesn't compare that well, probably mid to lower end of that group but appreciate there's more to it than that. It's not a bad sign if you want him to be a very good ruck (I'll say it again I think he'll be a very good player) but not necessarily of itself supportive of him becoming a long term stand out dominant one although as you point out he just got 30 hitouts so hopefully he's on a steeper trajectory - and like others I ultimately want him to be more forward as well anyway (esp if English comes on).

Contested marking is still only 2 in 8 games which may answer your other post. Agree too though Roughead's year last year was a bit of a spike there so hopefully it can click for Boyd like that as well.

- He was exceeded by Grundy and NicNat, both of whom were freaks being able to compete basically from day dot (very. very few ruckmen would be on par with them at the same age).
- He is on par with Gawn and Goldy (who have both been regarded as the no 1 ruckman in the comp at different times)
- He exceeded Minson's output

(Edit: so I guess I'm agreeing with you but) considering there's 4 All Australians in those 5 players (and I'd be surprised if Grundy never gets a gong) and he's basically tracking along side them, it's a pretty good sign.

 

[X_box_X]

Two seasons ago, Max Gawn was considered an honest battler. It was a match against Geelong at Skilled Stadium in 2015 that a star was born. He dominated that match, as he lead Melbourne to victory. Until that match, his best performance was a match against Sydney.

Two seasons later, Tom Boyd will follow in Gawn's footsteps, as he has his career best game against Geelong at Skilled Stadium, well and truly surpassing the effort he put in against Sydney on GF day, which to this day is considered his best performance.

 

[cecil]

I strongly disagree with Redpath being ahead of him. He was a liability defensively last week. Yeah he kicked 3, but 2 were over the top goals.

Before people say Boyd hasn't kicked 3 in a while, he hasn't played primarily as a forward since 2015. When he was 19 and had played 10 games. Redpath is in his prime, albeit with a dodgy knee, and doesn't really offer a heap more forward.

 

[Zgope1]

I think he's going to be a good 45% ruck 55% forward. For these reasons:

He's capable of good tapwork

He's skilful on the deck by hand and foot

When fit he can protect the air at least and control the air at best

He can find the ball ok inside fifty and max out at finding 4-5 shots at goal a game, right now he's getting a dismal 0-2 albeit not in that role


These types of player fit well in Bevo's game style (which requires a reasonably skilled ruck)

His mark dropping is clearly a problem but it's literally the only long term problem I have with him.

Even if he keeps dropping them and he probably will in my mind he'll be useful and less unco than most other rucks


The ruck division of our future encourages me for its skill and versatility

 

[Dogsman16]

I strongly disagree with Redpath being ahead of him. He was a liability defensively last week. Yeah he kicked 3, but 2 were over the top goals.

Before people say Boyd hasn't kicked 3 in a while, he hasn't played primarily as a forward since 2015. When he was 19 and had played 10 games. Redpath is in his prime, albeit with a dodgy knee, and doesn't really offer a heap more forward.

Redpath has kicked 42 goals in his past 23 matches. Significantly more than Boyd and yes Redpath for a while was the second ruckman. Redpath has taken 7 or more marks in 7 out of his 26 matches. Boyd has done it once in his 48 senior games. Redpath would double if not triple the amount of contested marks per game than Boyd does over his career, he drops less easy grabs than Boyd and is a better set shot goal than Boyd. And lets not pretend that Boyd provide cyrilesqe type defensive pressure in comparison, imo hes just as much of a defensive liabilty.

Redpath is streets ahead of Boyd in every aspect of forward play, whether it be marking on the lead, in a contested sense, positioning and goal kicking. Boyd isnt even in the same conversation as Redpath as a forward.

 

[DelRe]

I was responding to a post that criticised Boyd because his ruck stats as a 21 year old are not as good as some others. As a 21 year old he has achieved much, much more in the way of team success and making a vital contribution to that team success than the other ruckman have at 21 years of age. Do you disagree with me?

Think that was my post but in fairness it was responding to a question asking about who was doing what Boyd is doing at 21 - it wasn't a damning criticism of Boyd by any stretch to suggest there have been a few. Don't think anyone disagrees Boyd made a valuable contribution in a GF which is a credit to him, but this points reached a bit of a stalemate I think. Ultimately only one team can win the flag each year so some very good players miss out (e.g. Scott Wynd, Jim Stynes, Salmon at Hawks historically and again, Natanui, Goldstein currently) and on the flip side Clarke Keating earned the nickname mushroom for a reason. It's probably just a difference in the weighting you're giving the individual performance which is understandably higher for a GF than an ordinary game but still needs to balanced against the remainder of his games.

 

[cecil]

Redpath has kicked 42 goals in his past 23 matches. Significantly more than Boyd and yes Redpath for a while was the second ruckman. Redpath has taken 7 or more marks in 7 out of his 26 matches. Boyd has done it once in his 48 senior games. Redpath would double if not triple the amount of contested marks per game than Boyd does over his career, he drops less easy grabs than Boyd and is a better set shot goal than Boyd. And lets not pretend that Boyd provide cyrilesqe type defensive pressure in comparison, imo hes just as much of a defensive liabilty.

Redpath is streets ahead of Boyd in every aspect of forward play, whether it be marking on the lead, in a contested sense, positioning and goal kicking. Boyd isnt even in the same conversation as Redpath as a forward.

You're definitely overstating the amount of ruck Redpath has played. He has literally only had more than 5 HO's in a game twice. I'd definitely disagree with the comment on defensive pressure too, but theres no real way of measuring that. I just think once the ball hits the deck Redpath is totally out of the contest, and I can see it costing his spot when Cloke and Roughy are back. I just think Toyd is so much more fluid to our style of play. Once Roughy is back I honestly don't see Redpath being in the best 22.

 

[Dogsman16]

You're definitely overstating the amount of ruck Redpath has played. He has literally only had more than 5 HO's in a game twice. I'd definitely disagree with the comment on defensive pressure too, but theres no real way of measuring that. I just think once the ball hits the deck Redpath is totally out of the contest, and I can see it costing his spot when Cloke and Roughy are back. I just think Toyd is so much more fluid to our style of play. Once Roughy is back I honestly don't see Redpath being in the best 22.

Obviously i wasnt suggesting Redpath was a good ruck at all. Merely suggesting that he was forced to play some games as 2nd ruck under Beveridge. Also think their is a direct correlation between Redpath in this side and Stringer playing well. I disagree strongly to the notion that Redpath isnt fluid to our style of play in fact i think we look better with him in it and have done so under Beveridge. He fits better than Cloke cause in my opinion we dont really need a ChF as boyd and Roughy are suited to playin as the ruck and tall target up the ground not to mention we have midfielders who are marking targets like Jong and Bont. Redpath is the best inside 50 target we have at the club as he can take contested marks and marks on the lead.

Hes a natural fit in the side imo.

 

[Mutt]

Think that was my post but in fairness it was responding to a question asking about who was doing what Boyd is doing at 21 - it wasn't a damning criticism of Boyd by any stretch to suggest there have been a few. Don't think anyone disagrees Boyd made a valuable contribution in a GF which is a credit to him, but this points reached a bit of a stalemate I think. Ultimately only one team can win the flag each year so some very good players miss out (e.g. Scott Wynd, Jim Stynes, Salmon at Hawks historically and again, Natanui, Goldstein currently) and on the flip side Clarke Keating earned the nickname mushroom for a reason. It's probably just a difference in the weighting you're giving the individual performance which is understandably higher for a GF than an ordinary game but still needs to balanced against the remainder of his games.

Sure - and your points are all valid.

My attitude to this has always been to ask... "has Tom played the role that the team asks of him, rather than seeking individual recognition?; has Tom continued to improve?; has Tom played well in the big games?"

Surely the answer to all of the above is yes. Given that he is definitely a team player, who is better now than he was two years ago, and that he played an instrumental role in us winning both the Prelim Final and especially the Grand Final, I'm not sure what some on here want from Tom. He has been an outstanding success.

Is he Wayne Carey like? No, of course not.
Am I glad we traded pick 6 and Griffen for Boyd... ken oath I am!!!

 

[DelRe]

Sure - and your points are all valid.

My attitude to this has always been to ask... "has Tom played the role that the team asks of him, rather than seeking individual recognition?; has Tom continued to improve?; has Tom played well in the big games?"

Surely the answer to all of the above is yes. Given that he is definitely a team player, who is better now than he was two years ago, and that he played an instrumental role in us winning both the Prelim Final and especially the Grand Final, I'm not sure what some on here want from Tom. He has been an outstanding success.

Is he Wayne Carey like? No, of course not.
Am I glad we traded pick 6 and Griffen for Boyd... ken oath I am!!!

I think we're in furious agreement

 

[Mutt]

I think we're in furious agreement

We are.