Opinion Who should be our 2nd key defender - Gardner, Cordy, Young or Wood

[The Inbetweener]

There seems to be enough debate on here and I’d love to know who others would pick if they were all available.

I realise Wood isn’t a key defender but wanted to include a smaller option.

I see it as;
Gardner
Speed - yes
One on ones - no
Disposal - yes
Intercept skill - no

Young
Speed - 50/50
One on ones - no
Disposal - no
Intercept skill - yes

Cordy
Speed - no
One on ones - no
Disposal - no
Intercept skill - no

Wood
Speed - 50/50
One on ones - 50/50
Disposal - no
Intercept skill - yes

 

[The Inbetweener]

Also I’ve left Naughton out as it seems unlikely to happen and there is already another thread on it.

 

[maddog37]

Gards. On exposed form. Also still improving.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Gards. On exposed form. Also still improving.

Can’t believe I’m going to agree but Gardner is the best option. That’s not a good thing though.

 

[Dogsman16]

Right now I'd go small until Gardner is ready to come back.

He's got the best combination of Reach, Speed, Disposal out of all the KPD's. Cordy is just too slow and not strong enough.

Young at his best is probably the best of the lot but his consistency is woeful.

 

[Tallsies]

They’re all trash

 

[Dogsman16]

There was a pretty impressive moment from Gardiner was actually when he was beaten by Cox in Rd 1 in the last quarter.

Missed mark by Bont/Duryea in the centre of our ground left all our defenders horribly exposed. De Goey has an easy kick to Cox which he marks. But Gardiner managed to close space and almost get a fingertip on it against a 211cm tall opponent who marks it at the very highest.

None of our other defenders would have got within 2ft of spoiling that. 7.34



As long as he plays back shoulder his reach and closing speed should mean that he won't get exposed in a strength battle. In comparison Cordy has no avenue of either bodying his opponent nor closing speed to come over the top, due to his lack of athleticism.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

I will take option 5 thanks Bailey Williams.

 

[weltschmerz]

Gardner is tall, athletic, and always puts in 100%. He's like a constant C grade. Cordy is smaller and slow. Young's best is the best out of them, but he's the least consistent.

I say throw Sweet in the backline and see if he can flatten forwards. Wood takes his place when he's in the ruck.

 

[bobs head soup]

I think Friday night showed us that either Gardner or Young need to partner Keath. With many teams having 2 quality genuine big kpfs, it's too easy for the one nearest Keath to play decoy and the other has a field day on an undersized opponent.

If we were playing finals tomorrow and all were available I'd take Gardner, but still think Young has the most potential.

 

[TommyD13]

Have just started leaning towards the Wood option, although it doesn’t have to be Wood and could be considered any of those mid-size options. Benefits of a smaller backline is firstly, on the offensive side of the game the run out of the backline will be too much for slow forward lines to handle. Secondly, if our midfield can continue to bring the heat, lots of grubbers and rushed kicks will go inside the oppositions 50. With a smaller backline these can be cleared much easier and we can use run and drive to get the ball back up the field.

Where this theory falls apart is obviously when the opposition gets clean ball into a key forward who is only being contained by a single medium defender. These balls can be minimised with pressure further up the field. Everything is a trade-off. So are we willing to cop those clean balls every now and then and look absolutely stupid in order to gain the benefits of the smaller backline outlined above. I’ve only recently come around to this idea but now that I have I am certainly intrigued by its viability.

To experiment with that, I think this week Khamis needs to come in for Cordy. But longer term Williams would replace Cordy in that back seven to make it: Keath, Wood, Williams, Crozier, Dale, Duryea, Daniel.

I like the aerial intercepting ability, the pace, the rebound and the kicking skills. I don’t like the ability 1 v 1 on the bigger forwards, but I like our midfield pressure enough to minimise these 1 v 1 opportunities, and am willing to make the trade-off.

 

[bobs head soup]

Have just started leaning towards the Wood option, although it doesn’t have to be Wood and could be considered any of those mid-size options. Benefits of a smaller backline is firstly, on the offensive side of the game the run out of the backline will be too much for slow forward lines to handle. Secondly, if our midfield can continue to bring the heat, lots of grubbers and rushed kicks will go inside the oppositions 50. With a smaller backline these can be cleared much easier and we can use run and drive to get the ball back up the field.

Where this theory falls apart is obviously when the opposition gets clean ball into a key forward who is only being contained by a single medium defender. These balls can be minimised with pressure further up the field. Everything is a trade-off. So are we willing to cop those clean balls every now and then and look absolutely stupid in order to gain the benefits of the smaller backline outlined above. I’ve only recently come around to this idea but now that I have I am certainly intrigued by its viability.

To experiment with that, I think this week Khamis needs to come in for Cordy. But longer term Williams would replace Cordy in that back seven to make it: Keath, Wood, Williams, Crozier, Dale, Duryea, Daniel.

I like the aerial intercepting ability, the pace, the rebound and the kicking skills. I don’t like the ability 1 v 1 on the bigger forwards, but I like our midfield pressure enough to minimise these 1 v 1 opportunities, and am willing to make the trade-off.

My argument against the idea of a 6th defender to provide run and offensive rebound is that 5 should be enough.

If you have Williams, Crozier, Daniel, Dale and Duryea in a backline group, the incremental benefit you get from a 6th running/attacking option is far outweighed by the cost of not being able to aerially cover a 2nd 195cm+ forward in my opinion.

How often do we really see a Cordy or Wood streaming out of defence, putting the opposition to the sword?

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Easton Wood is clearly the most competent CHB amongst the named options.

Easton Wood is clearly not a CHB.

 

[Struggle]

Some random state league KPD in the mid season draft

 

[TommyD13]

My argument against the idea of a 6th defender to provide run and offensive rebound is that 5 should be enough.

If you have Williams, Crozier, Daniel, Dale and Duryea in a backline group, the incremental benefit you get from a 6th running/attacking option is far outweighed by the cost of not being able to aerially cover a 2nd 195cm+ forward in my opinion.

How often do we really see a Cordy or Wood streaming out of defence, putting the opposition to the sword?

How often do you really see a Cordy negating a 195+ cm forward? Very rarely, so we may as well cop a loss in that department but then add in other areas.

 

[Dazb86]

Oddly enough. Gardner

 

[CarnTheScray]

I think Friday night showed us that either Gardner or Young need to partner Keath. With many teams having 2 quality genuine big kpfs, it's too easy for the one nearest Keath to play decoy and the other has a field day on an undersized opponent.

If we were playing finals tomorrow and all were available I'd take Gardner, but still think Young has the most potential.

Thing that worries me about Young is he seems like another Schache. Has talent but goes into noddy land at times and hates physical contact in 1-on-1s.

 

[Erect]

I think Young has the most potential as a second tall intercept type, but I think Gardner is most likely to get the most out of himself. Gardner for me.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Seriously don’t know how Cordy has become this bad. Was very promising a few years back.

I know he’s never been lightning but he was quick and agile enough and pretty reliable one on one.

Never exactly looks jacked and has found himself dropped early in the past two seasons so my guess is his preseasons have not been flash.

Of the above Gardner probably is actually the best option.

 

[ScragCity]

Joel Hambling

#bringjoelhome

 

[Virgin Dog]

Gardner, Wood, then daylight. Cordy has gone so far backwards he's barely among our best VFL players these days, let alone at AFL standard. Then for Young, to copy over what I wrote in another thread:

For anyone leaning towards wanting Young back in the side, I highly recommend you go onto the Kayo stream of the VFL game. Go to the 2:50:36 mark, and keep an eye on Young. An AFL standard defender would NEVER be caught standing around scared of the ball drop in the defensive 50.

https://kayosports.com.au/event/sport!afl/event-n-bullants-v-footscray!111212

I genuinely would rather we go in short and have Wood take the 2nd KPD than to have Young back in after that effort.

 

[doggie dog]

I voted for Woody, but i reality if Marra gets a gig up forward timmy will be surplus.

Turn timmy into a KPD/ back up ruck to Stef and Jordy when he's ready.
Timmy is way better than everyone on that voting list.
Speed:yep
One on one:yep
Disposals:yep
Intercept Skill:yep

 

[maddog37]

Marra for chb.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Joel Hambling

#bringjoelhome

Was told by someone ITK that we asked the question of ‘Hambers’ two years back when his pal Kersten got sacked. Ended up bringing in Keath later that year. It’s a shame he went. Could have been great for us over the years.

 

[Golden_6]

Easily Gardner, he was showing signs of playing a lot more confidently. His athletic traits, size and competitive put him ahead of Cordy & Young quite comfortably. He wasn’t being asked to do much, but rather play a specific role which he looked to be more comfortable in doing.