Preview AFL Round 19 - North Melbourne v Geelong, Etihad Stadium, 7:40PM Saturday 2 August

[witsend]

I think this is the game where we see what CS and MC feel is "Best 22" subject to availability. Time to get the team settled.
Blicavs in for Simpson and Bundy back in for Hartman.
Murdoch may be out for McCarthy but if not, I reckon he's on his last chance this season...needs to kick goals and I think MC like Linc for a genuine crumbing forward.

 

[Partridge]

I think this is the game where we see what CS and MC feel is "Best 22" subject to availability. Time to get the team settled.
Blicavs in for Simpson and Bundy back in for Hartman.
Murdoch may be out for McCarthy but if not, I reckon he's on his last chance this season...needs to kick goals and I think MC like Linc for a genuine crumbing forward.

I think the word "settled" has never been more inaccurate than this year for Geelong. The team will never be truly settled as not even they know what the best 22 is. It's going to change every week no matter who's available. Just how it is this season.

No way should Simpson be getting chopped after last week either. But I bet he is.

 

[catempire]

Six possessions and one mark per game for Simpson this season. Like it or not, that's what will hold him back unless he drastically improves that output. Same thing that happened to West last year (although West wasn't that bad).

 

[Partridge]

Six possessions and one mark per game for Simpson this season. Like it or not, that's what will hold him back unless he drastically improves that output. Same thing that happened to West last year (although West wasn't that bad).

Absolutely. And it is his biggest weakness. No doubt whatsoever.

But - last week a guy called McIntosh had exactly the same stats, with one quarter more, and didn't kick a goal. Simpson did. Just pointing out that if last week is clear evidence that Simpson doesn't do enough, then McIntosh from that same sample doesn't either.

 

[manboob]

Six possessions and one mark per game for Simpson this season. Like it or not, that's what will hold him back unless he drastically improves that output. Same thing that happened to West last year (although West wasn't that bad).

But he's been subbed a bunch - need to work out his average over 4 quarters and not games.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

I'm with you Daz, but I'm not a Murdoch fan, so it stands to reason that I'm happy to see him out of the side. My main issue with him is that he looks great when we are winning comfortably, but he seems to struggle badly when we are getting beaten. He's obviously not on his lonesome as a poor player in a losing side, but it's the consistency of this pattern (poor player in a losing side) that is my concern. I reckon he is Geelong's version of Isaac Smith - a pacy, raking left footer who is a great front runner, but is not the guy who is going to drag his team back into a game when the chips are down.

Some pretty harsh assessments on a 36 gamer I would of thought. How many players are match winners with that little experience? Not many. Not to mention when you're surrounded with guys like Bartel, Hawkins, Selwood, Kelly, Johnson, Stokes et al who live for those moments. Don't really remeber those guys doing it after 36 games though either.

Mind you, he did ok in the last qtr vs the Hawks last year with 3 crucial goals. Maybe revisit in 50 games time?

 

[catempire]

Absolutely. And it is his biggest weakness. No doubt whatsoever.

But - last week a guy called McIntosh had exactly the same stats, with one quarter more, and didn't kick a goal. Simpson did. Just pointing out that if last week is clear evidence that Simpson doesn't do enough, then McIntosh from that same sample doesn't either.

Yes, McIntosh was poor also. Has roughly double the output over the course of the season though, which will explain the decision to prefer him when it happens.

But he's been subbed a bunch - need to work out his average over 4 quarters and not games.

I'm happy to guesstimate it won't improve his numbers by much. Even a 25% improvement, adjusting for subs, wouldn't make those numbers more impressive.

 

[manboob]

I'm happy to guesstimate it won't improve his numbers by much. Even a 25% improvement, adjusting for subs, wouldn't make those numbers more impressive.

Just did the mathematics then - you're 100% correct it make almost no difference

 

[Partridge]

Some pretty harsh assessments on a 36 gamer I would of thought. How many players are match winners with that little experience? Not many. Not to mention when you're surrounded with guys like Bartel, Hawkins, Selwood, Kelly, Johnson, Stokes et al who live for those moments. Don't really remeber those guys doing it after 36 games though either.

Mind you, he did ok in the last qtr vs the Hawks last year with 3 crucial goals. Maybe revisit in 50 games time?

There are a few guys on our list who would kill to have 36 senior games under their belt by now.

 

[nohairandfair]

Yes, McIntosh was poor also. Has roughly double the output over the course of the season though, which will explain the decision to prefer him when it happens.

They both played more a tagging role on Mumford and were reasonably effective at that.

HMac is our #1 ruck by a fair margin.

Simpson has some issues to iron out. One is his marking or lack thereof. His ability to judge the ball in flight is ordinary and when he does manage to get in position his hands are stiff meaning one grabs are a rarity. The fact he often flops to the ground under little marking pressure is also an area that needs attention.

 

[Shai]

They all could be dangerous , but if we are the side that CScott says we are , then they should be worrying about us , not us about them.

Always been a fan of this philosophy..

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

There are a few guys on our list who would kill to have 36 senior games under their belt by now.

Agreed and I'd love to see that too. Wasn't really my point though. I just think people criticising a 36 gamer for not being a match winner yet is a bit ridiculous.

 

[Pivo]

Six possessions and one mark per game for Simpson this season. Like it or not, that's what will hold him back unless he drastically improves that output. Same thing that happened to West last year (although West wasn't that bad).

Agreed.

I'm happy to accept Simpson's primary role is getting us first use of the ball but I would like to see him doing more around the ground (purely on my eye test, Simpson looked to be doing that more last year).

And since we aren't winning the clearances/stoppages (which, I hasten to add, I don't believe to be all the ruckmen's fault), I think I'd rather take a chance on getting some additional disposals and extra marks that McIntosh appears better able to provide.

EDIT: for those interested, Footywire states that Simpson has spent around 64% Time on Ground (during his 12 matches), while McIntosh has spent 79% in 15 games.

 

[goyoucatters]

There are a few guys on our list who would kill to have 36 senior games under their belt by now.

I imagine there's plenty.

In the end, you have to back some in over others, thouigh.

Your options for how you spread such an opportunity are (roughly):

(1) Delay your decision on who is 'most likely' and give three different guys around 12 games apiece. Then work out who you go forward with from there.

(2) Make a call on who you're going to 'believe in' and give him the 36 games or so to really establish whether he's starting to make a significant contribution at senior level.

Of course, you could do all sorts of tinkering with these numbers to suit your circumstances. But I think the general principle holds that provided you get the initial call right, option (2) is going to smash option (1) out of the park in both the medium and long term. And potentially quite often in the short term as well.

I'm comfortable that the club gets most of these big calls on who merits the majority of the senior opportunities quite right.

And as long as they continue to get the initial calls right I'm far happier with more chances for fewer players (if you want to put it that way).

Talent identification is still the biggest challenge. Both for Wells and for the MC. And I believe they're up to it.

By the way, I still think Murdoch will make it.

And I don't regret the games he's been given in preference to others right now.

Well, that's my subjective view of the objective reality, anyway.

 

[catempire]

I've got no problem with pumping games into Murdoch at this stage as I think he has worthwhile attributes and has shown enough from time to time. However, I do query whether it needs to continue after he has played all matches this season (IIRC), has hit a flat spot in form, and we have several other VFL players with form warranting promotion.

I'd be minded to freshen him up with an extra week off then at least another in the VFL before returning him, hopefully fresh and hungry, for the pointy end of the season.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Some pretty harsh assessments on a 36 gamer I would of thought. How many players are match winners with that little experience? Not many. Not to mention when you're surrounded with guys like Bartel, Hawkins, Selwood, Kelly, Johnson, Stokes et al who live for those moments. Don't really remeber those guys doing it after 36 games though either.

Mind you, he did ok in the last qtr vs the Hawks last year with 3 crucial goals. Maybe revisit in 50 games time?

Was just about to draw that game to Rankin's attention Well done!

 

[Rankin_1925]

Agreed and I'd love to see that too. Wasn't really my point though. I just think people criticising a 36 gamer for not being a match winner yet is a bit ridiculous.

My point wasn't that he should be a renowned match winner after 36 games, it was that he is a downhill skier. This point could have been better made by adding the word 'help' into the sentence "but (he) is not the guy who is going to help drag his team back into a game when the chips are down."

In the 36 games he has played, he has kicked multiple goals on 9 occasions, but never in a losing side (9 of his 36 games have been losses). In our 4 losses this year, he has kicked one goal in total. In games we lose, more often than not his output is below his average for the year, especially for team oriented aspects such as tackles and 1%ers. 36 games is not a large sample size, but the early signs of him being anything but a downhill skier are not good.

 

[sk8er_in_town]

don't know why hanky isn't in anyone sides for next week, BOG in the 2's last week, wins contested ball and is a goal kicker, seems like an obvious choice.

 

[Strangled Cat]

All I have to say is "that is awesome"!

 

[Spazz Cat]

Just on form,
In: Schroeder, Bundy, Blitz, Mcarthy, Bews
Out: Hartman, Caddy, Hmac, Murdoch, Mackie.

Know it's not gonna happen, but one of our tall backs has to go, Hartman didn't touch it last week, Murdoch is really out of form, Caddy isn't doing that much and I just think we look better with the Daws/Blitz combo.

 

[catempire]

Just on form,
In: Schroeder, Bundy, Blitz, Mcarthy, Bews
Out: Hartman, Caddy, Hmac, Murdoch, Mackie.

Know it's not gonna happen, but one of our tall backs has to go, Hartman didn't touch it last week, Murdoch is really out of form, Caddy isn't doing that much and I just think we look better with the Daws/Blitz combo.

Drop a tall back then - Taylor, Rivers or Lonergan. Mackie doesn't play tall.

 

[vinum coupe]

Who the f*%k is hanky?

 

[Corio cat]

Just on form,
In: Schroeder, Bundy, Blitz, Mcarthy, Bews
Out: Hartman, Caddy, Hmac, Murdoch, Mackie.

Know it's not gonna happen, but one of our tall backs has to go, Hartman didn't touch it last week, Murdoch is really out of form, Caddy isn't doing that much and I just think we look better with the Daws/Blitz combo.

Thurlow again good , from vfl website had 24 at 80% and 2 goals, 2nd highest ball winner , although under the radar he would be on the edge of selection somehwere as well, has had a good couple months and is kicking goals off a wing regularily.....if we need some run/pace, he would be in mix at some point

 

[Turbocat]

I've got no problem with pumping games into Murdoch at this stage as I think he has worthwhile attributes and has shown enough from time to time. However, I do query whether it needs to continue after he has played all matches this season (IIRC), has hit a flat spot in form, and we have several other VFL players with form warranting promotion.

I'd be minded to freshen him up with an extra week off then at least another in the VFL before returning him, hopefully fresh and hungry, for the pointy end of the season.

Ive like him from early days but as the third tall , I think he needs to work on his marking. He is sort of playing as a tall short. I could live with him giving someone else a go for a while

 

[InnocentBystandr]

Not at all confident about the NM game:
1. North more often than not get up for us, especially at Etihad.
2. We are lucky to get two decent quarters in a game, and we'd need more than that to beat North
3. North are 112.5%, and we are 112.1% (and I think % is a good indication of where teams really are)
4. North played crap last week, so they are due for their 'up' cycle.

Might put $20 on North to win. Win/Win - if Cats win, I'd happily surrender $20 to out-fox the footy gods; and if North win I'll have the cash to buy a slab and drown my sorrows.