Walker the tagger

[mrkyuss]

Is anyone getting sicking of Pagan using Walker as a tagger. Whilst I realise people will see he needs to do this to further learn the game etc etc, I feel his skills are being wasted. why doesnt Pagan let him run free on a wing........ we have many duds, see wiggins spawn and co who can be used for these tagging roles. What does everyone thing. I just feel if Pagan does this for another year his confidence will be shot after averaging no more than 8 possessions for the year.

 

[Kooley]

unfortunately he is probably our only real option the real dangerous fast forwards. who else would we play on someone like Daniel motlop? David Teague. i don't thinks so.

 

[stokesy]

Run him free I say too.

 

[OZBomb]

unfortunately he is probably our only real option the real dangerous fast forwards. who else would we play on someone like Daniel motlop? David Teague. i don't thinks so.

Cory McGrath

 

[HBF]

Is anyone getting sicking of Pagan using Walker as a tagger. Whilst I realise people will see he needs to do this to further learn the game etc etc, I feel his skills are being wasted. why doesnt Pagan let him run free on a wing........ we have many duds, see wiggins spawn and co who can be used for these tagging roles. What does everyone thing. I just feel if Pagan does this for another year his confidence will be shot after averaging no more than 8 possessions for the year.

IMO, Walker needs another season under his belt learning more about the game. If this means he is used a tagger or playing in defense, then IMO, this will only benefit him, and his game.

I would like to see him become a wingman in the future, where he can use his skill and pace well.

 

[defier]

Why draft a player with pick no.2 and turn him into a tagger?

 

[HBF]

Why draft a player with pick no.2 and turn him into a tagger?

Because as good as an under age footballer Walker was, he still needed to be taught alot about the game. He's not not natural footballer that say Cooney or Sylvia were in the same draft. You only have to look at his debut game to see how much talent he has.

More of an athlete than a footballer who needs to learn more about the game. I have no doubt that within a few years, he will be one of the better players at the footy club.

 

[mrkyuss]

Because as good as an under age footballer Walker was, he still needed to be taught alot about the game. He's not not natural footballer that say Cooney or Sylvia were in the same draft. You only have to look at his debut game to see how much talent he has.

More of an athlete than a footballer who needs to learn more about the game. I have no doubt that within a few years, he will be one of the better players at the footy club.

Im sick of this mentality that people have saying he has to learn the game by tagging. Fair enough running aroung with your akermanis' and co will teach him alot. But only on the defensive end....... the fact is we got the kid because he is fast, and as you said an athlete. ultimately in five years time I expect him to be a wingmen/midfielder. Great, he might have all the defensive knowledge in the world, but might not know HOW to get the ball. Obviously the players hes tagging are of quality, but in reality he would have great opposition playing in the middle or on a wing. If he continues with this style of play, he might find himself suddenly thrown into the middle or on a wing, and not really be able to find the ball for himself, because he is used to somone else doing it for him.

 

[Muji]

double post

 

[Funkalicous]

We can't be certain that Walker would find more of the ball if he wasn't tagging. Afterall, that is his problem. At least Walker plays on a dangerous player. One who has no problems finding the sherrin. The way I see it, 1AW is just hitch-hiking. Besides, no one else can do a decent tagging job.

 

[bibi01]

Im sick of this mentality that people have saying he has to learn the game by tagging. Fair enough running aroung with your akermanis' and co will teach him alot. But only on the defensive end....... the fact is we got the kid because he is fast, and as you said an athlete. ultimately in five years time I expect him to be a wingmen/midfielder. Great, he might have all the defensive knowledge in the world, but might not know HOW to get the ball. Obviously the players hes tagging are of quality, but in reality he would have great opposition playing in the middle or on a wing. If he continues with this style of play, he might find himself suddenly thrown into the middle or on a wing, and not really be able to find the ball for himself, because he is used to somone else doing it for him.

see brett ratten, he basically started out as a back pocket tagger and went on to be a gun midfielder

tagging teaches a player where to run, when to run and keeps them involved in the game

when walker play's on a wing or HFF he tends to drift out of the game for long periods too often, tagging keeps him involved all game, even if the ball is at the other end, he still has the job of standing next to his man.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

Why draft a player with pick no.2 and turn him into a tagger?

Exactly right! You don't draft a kid at number 2 and turn him into a tagger, we have players like Banister, Wiggins, & even Sporn to do this job.


But Carlton have had a history of drafting players in the top 10 and then changing the position or the way in which they play. Don't forget that Luke Livingston was drafted to the club as a Key Forward prospect.

 

[Funkalicous]

Exactly right! You don't draft a kid at number 2 and turn him into a tagger, we have players like Banister, Wiggins, & even Sporn to do this job.


But Carlton have had a history of drafting players in the top 10 and then changing the position or the way in which they play. Don't forget that Luke Livingston was drafted to the club as a Key Forward prospect.

There's a popular misconception that Livingston has been played out of position since being drafted.
.... It's false
He was given a fair go as a forward for around 1/2 a season. What did he kick? 1 goal, 30 behinds?

Luke Livingston is quite possibly the worst kick of the footy I've ever seen. His permanent move to the backline is justified.

 

[defier]

There's a popular misconception that Livingston has been played out of position since being drafted.
.... It's false
He was given a fair go as a forward for around 1/2 a season. What did he kick? 1 goal, 30 behinds?

Luke Livingston is quite possibly the worst kick of the footy I've ever seen. He's permanent move to the backline is justified.

I think you've under-rated prenda's kicking

 

[stokesy]

When Walker gets the ball, he seems to panic a bit and in result to that he buggers it up.

I believe, because his playing a tagging role and is not overly worried about the ball just the man he is on, is that when the ball does go into his arms his not sure what to do with it.

Stuff this tagging bs, let him run free. Let him take hangers. Let him kick goals. Let him bounce the ball. Let him do something.

I see him as a Brett Burton type player.

 

[bibi01]

Exactly right! You don't draft a kid at number 2 and turn him into a tagger, we have players like Banister, Wiggins, & even Sporn to do this job.


But Carlton have had a history of drafting players in the top 10 and then changing the position or the way in which they play. Don't forget that Luke Livingston was drafted to the club as a Key Forward prospect.

silvagni came to carlton as a fwd, look how we ruined his career
ling was a FF at Geelong Falcons u/18, now an elite afl midfielder

where you play at u/18 means little as to where you can/will play at AFL level

 

[blues4flag]

I'd like to see Walker be allowed to run freely for at least a few games - give him a go at it and lets see how he does. If he doesn't perform well, fine, give him tagging jobs until he's ready to play his own game.

 

[mojo31]

The majority of half decent talls play forward in the juniors. Number 1 tall plays CHF and number 2 tall plays FF and the rest play down back. Not all the time but thats how it goes.
So when you come to the draft and you are looking for a defender do you take Number 1 or 2 tall who have been playing forward or do you take number 3 and 4 tall who have been playing back?

For mine I want the best tall who has the physical characteristics to play as a defender. If he is a man child and dominates because he is so much bigger than the kids in the TAC then be very careful. If he does it with timing, body positioning, athleticism, anticipation and smarts and not because he is a monster at 17 then that is the player I am looking for. He must be able to kick, handle pressure and read the play.

Livingston for mine cannot kick, handle pressure well enough and does not have the endurance to play anywhere other than back pocket/full back. He is also not overly tall and lacks anticipation and football smarts.

Paul Bower on the other hand can kick, is 193cms at 17 years of age (when drafted). He is mobile and has decent speed and agility and has a big frame to fill out. Good endurance and basically can be developed anyway the club sees fit because he is not lacking in anything in particular.

Hartlett is in a similar story. Can play either end and is 195cms when drafted (196 now) and a good size and a booming kick. Just a question on his body with injuries but basically all the tools to be developed as a forward or back depending on how he goes and what the club wants and needs.

Andrew was an attacking half back flanker in the TAC. When I mean attacking I am talking about absolutely shredding other teams and doing some of the most freaky things on a football field. He was skillful and kicked the ball well. His kicking was not superb but it was well abover average for a 17 year old. He also played tall and his instincts were to fly for the ball and his recovery was great and his hands below his knees were 1 touch. Basically a midfield/wing in waiting who was playing on the half back line but in reality was playing more like a sweeping midfielder.

Run, run, dodge, run, sidestep, run then kick. Repeat.

He was 189cms at draft camp and a bottom aged kid who had superb speed over 5m and a huge leap but also had top endurance. So he was quick but can run all day and is tall. So basically an athletic freak who had huge scope to improve. Fast forward and he is entering his 3rd year. A bit taller and 10kgs heavier. Still quick and his kicking is finally coming together but is still not as good as hoped yet. Played as a tagger/wing to teach him the defensive side to his game. Now will be playing half back flank and the role he had before getting drafted. That is fine but he will be covering for some fairly unaccountable defenders and his attacking role will be curtailed and he will be the one to peel of his man and meet the ball carrier or to cover the loose forward. His run and ball carrying will be stifled by the need to cover for others.
So thats why I would prefer he is kept way from there. Lets play McGrath there and Carrazzo and bring in Russell later on and release Carrazzo to the midfield. Let McGrath play on Ablett, Motlop types with Carrazzo as the next option and Russell as an option later on in the year. Then Walker is released onto the wing. He can drop back to the defensive50 and help out in the game and then come streaming out and carry the ball. That would suit his game better rather than being isolated in the goal square.

Then as the team improves and we have more ball carrying options we can move Andrew back to the half back line if he is not winning enough of the ball himself. Maybe in a couple of years when our structure is right and we have key defenders and a decent backline. Under that scenario he would play as a rebounding attacking defender who was able to attack because of our tall defenders being able to beat there opponents regularly. I mean Bower at CHB and Russell on the hbf on the most dangerous small/medium forward and a Hansen/Thorp/Hartlett/Edwards at full back and Thornton taking the 3rd tall.
That might be 3 or 4 years away and in the meantime I would like to see 19 year old Andrew play his natural game of run and attack. In our current setup he wont be able to do that on the half back line so lets have McGrath/Carrazzo and Russell as our 3 options for that role. Cory gets first crack and Carrazzo midfield and if needed on another small he can move back and JR can be looked at for the role full time as soon as possible.

Just a few thoughts.

 

[mojo31]

Physically mature player who dominates "dwarves" but on anybody decent looks below standard. Flat track bully who kicks bags when he has a weak opponent= Jay Neagle.

Limited player who cant kick and may struggle with it = Wade Mills. However he is taller than Livo and has good endurance and so he has a much better chance as a defender.

Physically mature defender who is going to struggle qwith his recovery and agility and get turned inside out a lot = Austin Lucy

Having seen a bit more of Lucy now and his games prior to getting drafted and speaking to a few others my previous good rating of him was unwarranted prior to the draft. He is going to struggle.

 

[audas]

Physically mature player who dominates "dwarves" but on anybody decent looks below standard. Flat track bully who kicks bags when he has a weak opponent= Jay Neagle.

Limited player who cant kick and may struggle with it = Wade Mills. However he is taller than Livo and has good endurance and so he has a much better chance as a defender.

Physically mature defender who is going to struggle qwith his recovery and agility and get turned inside out a lot = Austin Lucy

Having seen a bit more of Lucy now and his games prior to getting drafted and speaking to a few others my previous good rating of him was unwarranted prior to the draft. He is going to struggle.

I dont understand this post mojo.

 

[audas]

The majority of half decent talls play forward in the juniors. Number 1 tall plays CHF and number 2 tall plays FF and the rest play down back. Not all the time but thats how it goes.
So when you come to the draft and you are looking for a defender do you take Number 1 or 2 tall who have been playing forward or do you take number 3 and 4 tall who have been playing back?

For mine I want the best tall who has the physical characteristics to play as a defender. If he is a man child and dominates because he is so much bigger than the kids in the TAC then be very careful. If he does it with timing, body positioning, athleticism, anticipation and smarts and not because he is a monster at 17 then that is the player I am looking for. He must be able to kick, handle pressure and read the play.

Livingston for mine cannot kick, handle pressure well enough and does not have the endurance to play anywhere other than back pocket/full back. He is also not overly tall and lacks anticipation and football smarts.

Paul Bower on the other hand can kick, is 193cms at 17 years of age (when drafted). He is mobile and has decent speed and agility and has a big frame to fill out. Good endurance and basically can be developed anyway the club sees fit because he is not lacking in anything in particular.

Hartlett is in a similar story. Can play either end and is 195cms when drafted (196 now) and a good size and a booming kick. Just a question on his body with injuries but basically all the tools to be developed as a forward or back depending on how he goes and what the club wants and needs.

Andrew was an attacking half back flanker in the TAC. When I mean attacking I am talking about absolutely shredding other teams and doing some of the most freaky things on a football field. He was skillful and kicked the ball well. His kicking was not superb but it was well abover average for a 17 year old. He also played tall and his instincts were to fly for the ball and his recovery was great and his hands below his knees were 1 touch. Basically a midfield/wing in waiting who was playing on the half back line but in reality was playing more like a sweeping midfielder.

Run, run, dodge, run, sidestep, run then kick. Repeat.

He was 189cms at draft camp and a bottom aged kid who had superb speed over 5m and a huge leap but also had top endurance. So he was quick but can run all day and is tall. So basically an athletic freak who had huge scope to improve. Fast forward and he is entering his 3rd year. A bit taller and 10kgs heavier. Still quick and his kicking is finally coming together but is still not as good as hoped yet. Played as a tagger/wing to teach him the defensive side to his game. Now will be playing half back flank and the role he had before getting drafted. That is fine but he will be covering for some fairly unaccountable defenders and his attacking role will be curtailed and he will be the one to peel of his man and meet the ball carrier or to cover the loose forward. His run and ball carrying will be stifled by the need to cover for others.
So thats why I would prefer he is kept way from there. Lets play McGrath there and Carrazzo and bring in Russell later on and release Carrazzo to the midfield. Let McGrath play on Ablett, Motlop types with Carrazzo as the next option and Russell as an option later on in the year. Then Walker is released onto the wing. He can drop back to the defensive50 and help out in the game and then come streaming out and carry the ball. That would suit his game better rather than being isolated in the goal square.

Then as the team improves and we have more ball carrying options we can move Andrew back to the half back line if he is not winning enough of the ball himself. Maybe in a couple of years when our structure is right and we have key defenders and a decent backline. Under that scenario he would play as a rebounding attacking defender who was able to attack because of our tall defenders being able to beat there opponents regularly. I mean Bower at CHB and Russell on the hbf on the most dangerous small/medium forward and a Hansen/Thorp/Hartlett/Edwards at full back and Thornton taking the 3rd tall.
That might be 3 or 4 years away and in the meantime I would like to see 19 year old Andrew play his natural game of run and attack. In our current setup he wont be able to do that on the half back line so lets have McGrath/Carrazzo and Russell as our 3 options for that role. Cory gets first crack and Carrazzo midfield and if needed on another small he can move back and JR can be looked at for the role full time as soon as possible.

Just a few thoughts.

Looking at this set up, I have heard that setanta could easily drop back and fill in down back. There is also no mention of Lance here. Is there a possibility that with kennedy heading up into the forward line Fisher may find himself drifting down back as well ?

 

[blues4flag]

Physically mature player who dominates "dwarves" but on anybody decent looks below standard. Flat track bully who kicks bags when he has a weak opponent= Jay Neagle.

Limited player who cant kick and may struggle with it = Wade Mills. However he is taller than Livo and has good endurance and so he has a much better chance as a defender.

Physically mature defender who is going to struggle qwith his recovery and agility and get turned inside out a lot = Austin Lucy

Having seen a bit more of Lucy now and his games prior to getting drafted and speaking to a few others my previous good rating of him was unwarranted prior to the draft. He is going to struggle.

Wrong board?

 

[mojo31]

I dont understand this post mojo.

Sorry Audas it does not make a lot of sense.

The thread took a bit of a diversion into drafting policy so I made a comment on that. How drafting a defender at junior level and then expecting them to become a class defender at AFL level compared to taking a forward at junior level and converting them into a defender in the AFL.

The often quoted "Livo was a forward at junior level and is now a full back and it was a mistake to do that".

My point is that a tall with talent plays forward in the junior level 90% of the time. The best 2 talls play forward and the 3rd and 4th best talls play back. Sometimes this can vary but for the majotity of cases the really talented talls play forward. Then after they are drafted they can be converted. The reason they play forward is they might be a better kick, better mark, more athletic and read the play better. More instinctive and dont need to react to an opponent. Players like that can be converted into a defender. Players like Livo had things lacking even though they were highly rated at the time which make it hard for him now. Things like instincts, reading the play, height, kicking and agility. Some of it is due to poor management and some of it is due to injuries but half of it is due to his defiencies which pre draft were there and are still there.

Looking at the last draft if I was asked who would be the best 2 key defenders from the draft I would have no hesitation in saying Dowler and Kennedy. That is assuming Hawthorn and Carlton wanted to develop them that way. No its unlikely they will because they are most likely going to be better forwards and more value to the tem there. But anyone who thinks Lucy, Bower, Mills would be better at CHB than Kennedy and Dowler I would not agree with.
Give Dowler and Kennedy 50 games at CHB in the AFL and 4 pre seasons and I would have them in front of Bower and anyone else. Dowler has to work on the physical side of the game and in 4 years and 50 games he should have that sorted and Kennedy would have to work on his athleticism and speed.

These 2 kids do not have anything physical lacking in them and are 195cms and have big frames to fill out. Kick well and move well and have good endurance. They are instinctive forwards but could be converted into defenders if a club wanted. I see Roughead in the same situation.

From the next draft then there is Thorp and Hansen. Gumblelton also has all the tools to play there and Riewoldt has already shown he can.

So the best defender is likely to be the best tall who also has the best charactersitics to play as a defender if needed. That is for the 200 draft,, the last draft and the upcoming one. Not 100% but thats how I look at it. Sometimes a player is lost when switched but the odds of that are less than picking a junior who plays back the whole time and when he is drafted down the order he does not make it. There is a reason the forwards are picked first. They are better forwards and are still more likely to become better defenders as well.

Therefore

Kennedy, Dowler > Bower, Mills and Lucy as defenders if a club wanted to develop them that way.

Stephen Gilham from Port was pick 16 in 2002 and was skinny and undersized. Did not grow and fill out and was found at AFL level. Did not have the tools to make it as a key defender.

 

[mojo31]

Wrong board?

A number of posts have been made on Luke Livingston on this thread. So my posts are answering that. Why he was picked and why he is truggling now and future drafting policies and why a gun junior forward is more likely to become a good backman at AFL level over a player who plays back in his junior days.
Livo was a forward as a junior but if we draft a player who:

cant kick
read the play
react quickly and anticipate
is short for KPP
has no endurance

then we get what we deserve to be honest.

If he was a forward in the TAC but had better composure and anticipation then the other things could be overlooked at full back.

 

[mojo31]

Looking at this set up, I have heard that setanta could easily drop back and fill in down back. There is also no mention of Lance here. Is there a possibility that with kennedy heading up into the forward line Fisher may find himself drifting down back as well ?

Setanta is lost when playing back. Has no idea what he is doing as a defender. Lance is a stop gap measure. He is not a key defender and is not the long term solution to CHB in the future.

I would like to see Walker play wing and then drop back in the defensive 50 and help out and run the ball out. That way he is not going to be dragged back to the goal square but still gets to sweep back there and be the outlet for rebound. Then as we get our structure right over the next few years we can look at pushing AW back as a half back flanker who is very attacking. Under those cirumstances he would not be covering for unaccountable player and we would have 3 quality talls as defenders.
I would only push him back if he was not winning enough of the ball on the wing in the next few years. I see him as a wing who will develop the inside part of his game. He has fantastic hands in close and does not fumble and his handballing under pressure is a feature in congestion.

2006 : 75% wing, 25% onball of gametime.
2008 : 25% wing, 75% onball

is how I would manage him.