Will Sullivan Upgraded

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Let's be honest the idea of playing Naita on the wing is bloody stupid and wont happen!

Well, whether he actually lines up on the wing is not as significant as the idea of releasing him between the arcs, even when not rucking. He could line up on a HFF and the point would be the same. It's not where he's listed on the teamsheet that counts, but the role he plays.

Tell me something – what is so absurd about putting an emphasis on Naitanui getting to contests and trying to have an impact at ground level around clearances, even when not rucking? Why do you think that is such a crazy idea?

All the criticisms of Naitanui centre on his lack of awareness and footy nous. How better to develop that than deploying him as a roving midfielder? Is he going to improve that side of his game playing out of the goal-square?

Naitanui is 19. We need to shelve the idea that he's the finished product. With that in mind, we should be giving him as much time in general play as possible.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It's impressive when he's playing on a 6' 8 lunk.

Maybe not so when playing on or being accountable for a wily mid or flanker

Mate, look at his highlights reel. He's not just beating ruckmen at ground level.

 

[Long Sleeves]

Mate, look at his highlights reel. He's not just beating ruckmen at ground level.

His highlights reel?
Was he accountable for a flanker or mid in those?

 

[swannies]

Well, whether he actually lines up on the wing is not as significant as the idea of releasing him between the arcs, even when not rucking. He could line up on a HFF and the point would be the same. It's not where he's listed on the teamsheet that counts, but the role he plays.

Tell me something – what is so absurd about putting an emphasis on Naitanui getting to contests and trying to have an impact at ground level around clearances, even when not rucking? Why do you think that is such a crazy idea?

All the criticisms of Naitanui centre on his lack of awareness and footy nous. How better to develop that than deploying him as a roving midfielder? Is he going to improve that side of his game playing out of the goal-square?

Naitanui is 19. We need to shelve the idea that he's the finished product. With that in mind, we should be giving him as much time in general play as possible.

You have more gumption than me Gunnar but good to see you fighting the good fight. I've been arguing, not as well as you I might add, for well over a year that midfield, or thereabouts is his position of most impact. Good to see them all coming at you now!

Continue on!

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

His highlights reel?

You know what I mean – the passages of play throughout his short career that really made people think, "hang on – this kid could be something we haven't seen before."

Was he accountable for a flanker or mid in those?

No – but that's not the point. The point is that he still won the ball at ground level against 6'0 midfielders. The point is that Naitanui can have an impact at ground level, matched against anyone and not just lumbering ruckmen.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You have more gumption than me Gunnar but good to see you fighting the good fight. I've been arguing, not as well as you I might add, for well over a year that midfield, or thereabouts is his position of most impact. Good to see them all coming at you now!

Continue on!

Will be interesting to see if so much as one of them can land a blow more coherent than: "OMG NN = Tippet his a forward".

I have my doubts.

 

[SwiftforPM]

You have more gumption than me Gunnar but good to see you fighting the good fight. I've been arguing, not as well as you I might add, for well over a year that midfield, or thereabouts is his position of most impact. Good to see them all coming at you now!

Continue on!

When I think about some champion WA ruckman off the past with similar athletic attributes to Naita I don't recall any of them becoming champions by playing on the wing.
So why do you want to reinvent the wheel?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

When I think about some champion WA ruckman off the past with similar athletic attributes to Naita I don't recall any of them becoming champions by playing on the wing.

Who are you talking about?

So why do you want to reinvent the wheel?

I want to get the most out of a player who has unique attributes. And I think part of that involves improving Naitanui's awareness – we're not going to do that by playing him out of the goal-square.

We've seen what Naitanui can do at ground level. We've seen his ability to win his own footy, to tackle and to make second and third efforts. With that in mind, why is it so absurd to suggest that he spend a fair chunk of his time, when not rucking, between the arcs?

Give me a real answer – something more than just "well, that's not what other ruckmen have done".

Come on. Let's see what you've got.

 

[Long Sleeves]

You know what I mean – the passages of play throughout his short career that really made people think, "hang on – this kid could be something we haven't seen before."

No – but that's not the point. The point is that he still won the ball at ground level against 6'0 midfielders. The point is that Naitanui can have an impact at ground level, matched against anyone and not just lumbering ruckmen.

It is the point, because there's two parts to playing around the pack as a midfielder...only one of them is getting the ball...granted an important part...however, if I was Ablett, I'd be licking my girly lips at the thought of Nic as a mid

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Naitanui can play anywhere but id play him anywhere he can attack. I think he will suprise people up forward.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It is the point, because there's two parts to playing around the pack as a midfielder...only one of them is getting the ball...granted an important part...however, if I was Ablett, I'd be licking my girly lips at the thought of Nic as a mid

Well, Naitanui isn't going to be playing on Ablett. I'm not suggesting we make him a tagger.

But, at the end of the day, if Naitanui has to develop more accountability, then so be it. He's 19, and he should be given the opportunity to improve that part of his game. But it's not as though that's a major flaw in his game to begin with. He's already got an impressive defensive side – his tackling is exceptional, as are is second and third efforts. He's got a lot of the basics in place already.

Furthermore, if all goes well, clubs are going to be trying to contain Naitanui, not the other way around. Imagine if Naitanui does line up on a wing, or on a HFF, and spends that time between the arcs. What a nightmare match-up for other clubs. Do you play a midfielder against him, hoping to curb his influence at ground level? What happens when Naitanui drags that 6'1 midfielder into the F50?

Bottom line, to get the most out of Naitanui, we need to be able to deploy him between the arcs, even when he's not rucking. That's how we exploit his unique natural attributes and cause opposition sides the most headaches. Dumping him in the goal-square or the FP, where defences can reshuffle and make sure there's an extra tall defender available to take him, doesn't tick that box nearly as well.

For mine, we should be looking at how Kouta played in his prime, or at the games Goodes has dominated playing on a wing. That should be the blueprint for how we use Naitanui when he's not rucking.

 

[swannies]

Will be interesting to see if so much as one of them can land a blow more coherent than: "OMG NN = Tippet his a forward".

I have my doubts.

So do I, so do I.

When I think about some champion WA ruckman off the past with similar athletic attributes to Naita I don't recall any of them becoming champions by playing on the wing.
So why do you want to reinvent the wheel?

You're not reinventing the wheel with Naita, he's different to your stock standard, or indeed champion, ruckman. He has more speed and agility than most ruckmen, in fact more than many mids, and he loves getting down and dirty more than most too.

 

[Long Sleeves]

Well, Naitanui isn't going to be playing on Ablett. I'm not suggesting we make him a tagger.

But, at the end of the day, if Naitanui has to develop more accountability, then so be it.

Look, I agree with you to an extent. He is pretty impressive at this stage.

I'm not sure accountability is the right word though. He'll have the willingness I'm sure
Elite midfielders have unique ways of making their way around/through traffic.
I'm not sure how he'll handle those situations when he is not solely focused on the ball, and the punishment could be severe going the other way, while our favourite palm tree bobs up and down wondering what just happened

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'm not sure accountability is the right word though.

Well, you used it first.

Elite midfielders have unique ways of making their way around/through traffic.

So does Naitanui.

I'm not sure how he'll handle those situations when he is not solely focused on the ball, and the punishment could be severe going the other way, while our favourite palm tree bobs up and down wondering what just happened

So we should just plonk him in the goal-square instead?

"Sorry kid, 10 games in, you're not the finished product, and we're not going to give you time to learn."

Imagine if, after their rookie season, Shuey or Sheppard or Stevens or anther young mid, although useful enough at winning their own footy, was found to be not quite up to the mark in terms of curtailing their direct opponent. Imagine if another poster then seized on that and insisted they should no longer be played in the midfield because of a lack of accountability, and should instead just be used as a small forward. You'd laugh in their face. You would point out that young players need time to develop, to work on parts of their game that aren't 100 per cent there. Same goes for Naitanui. If that part of his game needs work, let him work on it. Don't just draw a line through it and limit our flexibility in how we use him.

Either we back Naitanui's unique attributes and give him a chance to play as a midfielder – with a potentially massive payoff – or we pussy out and say "well, most ruckmen just play forward when they're not rucking, so let's do that". For mine, he's 19 and we should be as ambitious as possible with his development. Aim high. We didn't draft him to play it safe. We all like to talk about his massive upside and how he's a unique package; well, put your money where your mouth is. If he's truly special, truly one-of-a-kind, then let's give him a chance to play as a 6'7 ruck-rover.

 

[Long Sleeves]

Well, you used it first.

So does Naitanui.

So we should just plonk him in the goal-square instead?

"Sorry kid, 10 games in, you're not the finished product, and we're not going to give you time to learn."

I'm one who values ruckmen...When you have one of those who could possibly give you the ultimate dominance in that position, where he could be used to devastating effect and get a massive advantage? I'd use him there.

I just think his value becomes diluted...a bit
You say "the goal square" like it's a pox clinic...Lot's of contests there too

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'm one who values ruckmen...When you have one of those who could possibly give you the ultimate dominance in that position, where he could be used to devastating effect and get a massive advantage? I'd use him there.

Yeah – we're talking about when he's not rucking.

 

[WCEforeverman]

Resting on a wing? No. He would end up running more than in the ruck.

He will have significantly more time in the ruck than Seaby did in his last few years. Seaby wasn't performing as well as Cox which is why he wasn't getting too many minutes. This year, however, Cox is coming back from injury, and is lacking fitness, and Naitanui has been in very good form. Why would the coaches drop someone back to playing 5 - 10 mins a quarter when he has been performing?

I can see him playing through a hff to forward pocket role. Most hff's push into the midfield now anyway. And he always seems to be a threat when he pushes forward. He won't be able to do that as much playing on a wing as he would a hff.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Resting on a wing? No. He would end up running more than in the ruck.

Well, that depends how much time he spends in the ruck.

He will have significantly more time in the ruck than Seaby did in his last few years. Seaby wasn't performing as well as Cox which is why he wasn't getting too many minutes. This year, however, Cox is coming back from injury, and is lacking fitness, and Naitanui has been in very good form. Why would the coaches drop someone back to playing 5 - 10 mins a quarter when he has been performing?

This all remains to be seen, doesn't it?

If Cox is up and running and back to his best by, let's say, R8, are we going to cut Cox's minutes to give Naitanui more time? In that scenario, how do we get the best out of Naitanui?

If Cox breaks his leg, then of course the equation changes.

I can see him playing through a hff to forward pocket role. Most hff's push into the midfield now anyway. And he always seems to be a threat when he pushes forward. He won't be able to do that as much playing on a wing as he would a hff.

This isn't that far away from my suggestion that he should play between the arcs with a remit to drag an under-sized opponent deep into the F50.

Playing him on a wing is absurd, but playing him on a HFF makes perfect sense. Is that how it goes?

 

[SwiftforPM]

What is Naita's aerobic capacity? Up there with the mids - i think not.
Why do think he would have the aerobic capacity to play in the ruck and then run between the arcs in between?
Why is it that the WC coaching staff play him in the ruck/forward line and not on the wing, are they wrong too?

 

[WCEforeverman]

Well, that depends how much time he spends in the ruck.

This all remains to be seen, doesn't it?

If Cox is up and running and back to his best by, let's say, R8, are we going to cut Cox's minutes to give Naitanui more time? In that scenario, how do we get the best out of Naitanui?

If Cox breaks his leg, then of course the equation changes.

This isn't that far away from my suggestion that he should play between the arcs with a remit to drag an under-sized opponent deep into the F50.

Playing him on a wing is absurd, but playing him on a HFF makes perfect sense. Is that how it goes?

Resting on the wing implies that he plays the majority of his time in the ruck. Otherwise it is Naitanui playing on a wing, and having stints in the ruck.

If Cox goes back to rucking 75 - 80% of the game (which I'm not sure he will) then I still don't think he would be played on a wing. He is up against some pretty good runners. We know he is fast but does he have comparable endurance to Rosa, Dalziell and Houlihan? And is he the guy we want delivering it into the forward line from the wing?

If he plays a midfield position, I think he would be much more effective as a ruck-rover, starting in the centre square. Watching the preseason games, he can get to the ball first and has great disposal by hands that seem to bring other players into the game.

Hff don't do nearly as much running as wings, and rotating him through a hff to a forward pocket would reduce his required running even more. Most of the forwards tend to rotate from playing close to goals, to up the ground for some periods of time or vice versa. JK usually has a break in the goal square, and Lecca pushes up the ground a bit.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

What is Naita's aerobic capacity? Up there with the mids - i think not.

Why do think he would have the aerobic capacity to play in the ruck and then run between the arcs in between?

It comes down to how much time he spends in the ruck.

If he's doing 80 per cent of the ruckwork, then obviously there's less of a window to have him run around between the arcs at other times than if he's doing 40 per cent of the ruckwork.

But if Cox is ready to go, then Naitanui isn't going to be spending as much time in the ruck, opening the door for us to deploy him on a wing/HFF and have him work between the arcs, with a remit to drag an under-sized opponent forward.

That's going to develop Natitanui's game more long-term and, in the short-term, it's going to allow us to get more out of him than plonking him in the goal-square or the FP.

Why is it that the WC coaching staff play him in the ruck/forward line and not on the wing, are they wrong too?

Pre-season, he's been the first ruck, so we haven't got much of an idea of how they want to use him when he's not rucking. Depending on how Cox is travelling, that may persist for the early part of the season proper.

 

[Snooperclyde]

But if Cox is ready to go, then Naitanui isn't going to be spending as much time in the ruck, opening the door for us to deploy him on a wing/HFF and have him work between the arcs, with a remit to drag an under-sized opponent forward.

That's going to develop Natitanui's game more long-term and, in the short-term, it's going to allow us to get more out of him than plonking him in the goal-square or the FP.

Sorry, totally disagree with this statement.

Best for Eagles short and long term if Naita learns to dominate a forward line when he is not rucking.............no question!

We have plenty of up and coming mids that can be used to send the footy forward but none of them have the capacity to dominate a forward line.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Resting on the wing implies that he plays the majority of his time in the ruck. Otherwise it is Naitanui playing on a wing, and having stints in the ruck.

Not really.

We're talking about ruckmen, and what they do when they're not rucking. People call that resting, regardless of whether they spent 49 or 51 per cent of their time in the ruck. Quibble if you like, but I think if you've been following the conversation, those parameters are pretty clear.

If Cox goes back to rucking 75 - 80% of the game (which I'm not sure he will) then I still don't think he would be played on a wing. He is up against some pretty good runners. We know he is fast but does he have comparable endurance to Rosa, Dalziell and Houlihan? And is he the guy we want delivering it into the forward line from the wing?

If he plays a midfield position, I think he would be much more effective as a ruck-rover, starting in the centre square. Watching the preseason games, he can get to the ball first and has great disposal by hands that seem to bring other players into the game.

I think it might be a stretch to have him in the engine room. I'm happy for him to chase kicks between the arcs, but unless he's among our best 4-5 clearance players, I'm not sure he belongs in the centre square.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Sorry, totally disagree with this statement.

Best for Eagles short and long term if Naita learns to dominate a forward line when he is not rucking.............no question!

OK – go ahead and explain why. Don't just give me blanket statements and exclamation marks.

We have plenty of up and coming mids that can be used to send the footy forward but none of them have the capacity to dominate a forward line.

We have plenty of midfielders, but how many of them can create the same kind of match-up nightmares as Naitanui?

You want Naitanui to be dangerous in the F50 – surely the best way to do that is to have him matched up against a smaller opponent and then push forward. Why start him deep and give the opposition the chance to shuffle their defence to match him up against another tall?

I don't want to labour the point, but I reckon we should be looking at how Carlton used Kouta in his prime and how Sydney used Goodes on a wing. These guys were basically over-sized mids able to win their own footy and provide some run and carry. But they were also nightmares for opposition teams because they had to send a run-with player to them, who was generally out-sized, leaving them vulnerable if Kouta or Goodes dragged them forward. If Kouta or Goodes had just started deep in the F50, it would have been much easier to deal with than finding an opponent also able to run with them between the arcs.

 

[new breed]

Gunnar..... Natanui would be a sight at 202cm playing on the wing ... other then being effective at the centre bounce down he would struggle with reading the play and would watch the ball sail to and fro over his head !

Admit it Gunnar Nic Nat would be very good resting in the forward line and provide plenty of space for Lecras and McKinley