Preview Changes: R4 2021 vs North Melbourne

[Betts are off]

Lynch's role as the "connector" as I've described earlier in this thread, is not what you are saying it is. He used to be the connection from the midfield and forward line, playing both roles.

Now he's just a midfielder. He basically plays as a forward half wing. None of this "connector" stuff, because he is literally ineffective as a forward. He just does not impact the scoreboard.

In fact Lynch is actually less effective as a "connector" than Ben Keays. He averages the same score involvements as Keays, but fewer inside 50s, goals, clearances, meters gained and effective disposals.

So our actual "connector" right now is Ben Keays. Not Tom Lynch. And Keays is also doubling up his roles by playing inside midfield at times AND being more of a scoreboard threat.

It would be trivial to reorganize our team to ditch Lynch and play an actual forward. Bring a player like Schoenberg, Berry or McHenry further up the field, insert Fog into the forward line.

This "connector" bullshit is just an excuse not to play Fogarty and a gross exaggeration of Lynch's inability to be replaced (he is very replaceable)

Damn Scorpus

 

[spexau]

No, unfortunately.
It was strange as that week they talked about Fog becoming our 'Dusty'. I thought he was going to playing 50/50 mid /fwd but it didn't happen.
They then played him deep forward for 90% of the first half. And not much more in the 2nd half.
Strachan was average in the ruck so our mids were already behind the eight ball. They played Hately and O'Connor on ball mainly, Jones on the wing

I watched the first quarter on SANFL stream and he played the first half of the quarter almost exclusively in the middle

 

[Vader]

Lynch's role as the "connector" as I've described earlier in this thread, is not what you are saying it is. He used to be the connection from the midfield to the forward line, playing both roles.

Now he's just a midfielder. He basically plays as a forward half wing. None of this "connector" stuff, because he is literally ineffective as a forward. He just does not impact the scoreboard.

In fact Lynch is actually less effective as a "connector" than Ben Keays. He averages the same score involvements as Keays, but fewer inside 50s, goals, clearances, meters gained and effective disposals.

So our actual "connector" right now is Ben Keays. Not Tom Lynch. And Keays is also doubling up his roles by playing inside midfield at times AND being more of a scoreboard threat.

It would be trivial to reorganize our team to ditch Lynch and play an actual forward. Bring a player like Schoenberg, Berry or McHenry further up the field, insert Fog into the forward line.

This "connector" bullshit is just an excuse not to play Fogarty and a gross exaggeration of Lynch's inability to be replaced (he is very replaceable)

You do realise that none of this makes the case for Fogarty being a suitable replacement for Lynch - if anything, you've achieved the complete opposite. Congratulations on kicking a huge own goal.

The more you make out Lynch's role to be a midfield position, the less relevant Fogarty is to the discussion. Fogarty isn't a forward, and he's miles off being fit enough to play an AFL midfield role. This is his problem - there's no position for him at the AFL level.

 

[Scorpus]

I guess these days you have to preface posts like that with "I'm not a Lynch hater".

At his peak, about 4 years ago, he was the best half forward "connector" in the league. His output forward of center was ridiculous.

But he's not that any more. It's time to discuss Lynch in a way that reflects his current output and role, not what he used to do under Pyke's slingshot

 

[GROTTO]

Fun Facts with Grotto

Tex's best goal haul versus North, is 6.5 on a sunny Sunday arvo back in 2015 @ Adelaide Oval.

It remains his second best Points scored v any team. He has kicked 7.1 v Lions in 2015 as well, most goals he has ever kicked in a game.

 

[Scorpus]

You do realise that none of this makes the case for Fogarty being a suitable replacement for Lynch - if anything, you've achieved the complete opposite. Congratulations on kicking a huge own goal.

The more you make out Lynch's role to be a midfield position, the less relevant Fogarty is to the discussion. Fogarty isn't a forward, and he's miles off being fit enough to play an AFL midfield role. This is his problem - there's no position for him at the AFL level.

I've said how you get Fogarty into the team, I guess you just need to read the entire post. Or read this:

In my opinion we need to replace Lynch and Frampton together with Fogarty and Thilthorpe. Not because one of these players is a direct replacement for the other, but because as a combination they should be superior and give us a future-looking forward line

Thilthorpe - Elite skills. Can replace Lynch's contribution outside 50 with laser passes from the wing while being a better inside 50 contested marking target than Frampton. Can also play ruck despite many not wanting him there.

Fogarty - Can replace Lynch's inside 50 non-performance by being a better lead up target and much stronger shot for goal, but can play mostly deeper like Frampton does. Can also pinch hit inside midfield which neither Lynch nor Frampton can do.

 

[Vader]

I guess these days you have to preface posts like that with "I'm not a Lynch hater".

At his peak, about 4 years ago, he was the best half forward "connector" in the league. His output forward of center was ridiculous.

But he's not that any more. It's time to discuss Lynch in a way that reflects his current output and role, not what he used to do under Pyke's slingshot

Regardless of what you think Lynch's role is, what part of his role do you think suits Fogarty's capabilities?

 

[Scorpus]

Regardless of what you think Lynch's role is, what part of his role do you think suits Fogarty's capabilities?

It's pretty simple stuff. You don't play them like for like.

You get rid of Lynch's role.

A forward half distributor that doesn't hit the scoreboard and applies no defensive pressure is not a "must have" role in today's game

 

[Vader]

I've said how you get Fogarty into the team, I guess you just need to read the entire post. Or read this:

Which, of course, assumes that Thilthorpe is coming into the side to replace Frampton. There is, unfortunately, no indication from the club that this is likely to happen. They are openly talking about Fogarty replacing Lynch, as the only change this week (not counting the sub).

So... do you want to revise, based on reality, where TT isn't being selected, and it is a straight swap?

 

[Scorpus]

Which, of course, assumes that Thilthorpe is coming into the side to replace Frampton. There is, unfortunately, no indication from the club that this is likely to happen. They are openly talking about Fogarty replacing Lynch, as the only change this week (not counting the sub).

So... do you want to revise, based on reality, where TT isn't being selected, and it is a straight swap?

My whole point revolves around this question

Is it worth carrying a player who's exclusive contribution to the game is kicking inside 50? Who offers nothing else other than this?

I would argue it isn't.

There are many players in our side who can play this role. We have guys like McHenry, Schoenberg and Berry playing significant forward minutes. Why can't they play Lynch's role, while also offering more versatility and impact in other areas of the ground? All three of those players have more strings to their bow than current day Lynch.

So I would drop Lynch, play Fogarty as a genuine forward and rotate these other guys into the Lynch "kick inside 50" role. We should be able to match the midfield contribution of Lynch while increasing our forward output if we do this

 

[Vader]

It's pretty simple stuff. You don't play them like for like.

You get rid of Lynch's role.

A forward half distributor that doesn't hit the scoreboard and applies no defensive pressure is not a "must have" role in today's game

For someone who plays a role which is supposedly non-existent, he's still equal 5th across the AFL for Goal Assists:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2021&rt=LT&st=GA

He's also equal 3rd for the Crows (equal 22nd for the AFL), alongside Keays, for Score Involvements:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2021&rt=LT&st=SI

Maybe it's time for you to quit while you're behind?

 

[Scorpus]

For someone who plays a role which is supposedly non-existent, he's still equal 5th across the AFL for Goal Assists:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2021&rt=LT&st=GA

He's also equal 3rd for the Crows (equal 22nd for the AFL), alongside Keays, for Score Involvements:
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_rankings?year=2021&rt=LT&st=SI

Maybe it's time for you to quit while you're behind?

Yes, he has the same score involvements as players who offer much more. Did you read the list?

He is matching guys like Josh Bruce without kicking goals, and midfielders like David Mundy without the inside work.

He is a literal one trick pony

 

[Vader]

My whole point revolves around this question

Is it worth carrying a player who's exclusive contribution to the game is kicking inside 50? Who offers nothing else other than this?

I would argue it isn't.

There are many players in our side who can play this role. We have guys like McHenry, Schoenberg and Berry playing significant forward minutes. Why can't they play Lynch's role, while also offering more versatility and impact in other areas of the ground? All three of those players have more strings to their bow than current day Lynch.

So I would drop Lynch, play Fogarty as a genuine forward and rotate these other guys into the Lynch "kick inside 50" role. We should be able to match the midfield contribution of Lynch while increasing our forward output if we do this

Our current forward line is working because it's not overloaded with tall forwards. Lynch, by your own admission, invariably plays further up the ground (I agree with this assessment). That leaves Tex & Frampton as our only talls, with a host of smalls (Berry, Rowe, Murphy, McAdam) running around at their feet. It worked even better last week, when Frampton was cleared out of the forward line completely (ideally he'd be cleared out of the AFL team completely).

... and you want to clog it up again with another lumbering slow tall forward?

Please... quit while you're behind. You make less sense every time you hit "Post reply".

 

[maxlilly]

I watched the first quarter on SANFL stream and he played the first half of the quarter almost exclusively in the middle

I watched the whole match from the oval and he played the first half almost exclusively in the forward lines

 

[Scorpus]

Our current forward line is working because it's not overloaded with tall forwards. Lynch, by your own admission, invariably plays further up the ground (I agree with this assessment). That leaves Tex & Frampton as our only talls, with a host of smalls (Berry, Rowe, Murphy, McAdam) running around at their feet. It worked even better last week, when Frampton was cleared out of the forward line completely (ideally he'd be cleared out of the AFL team completely).

... and you want to clog it up again with another lumbering slow tall forward?

Please... quit while you're behind. You make less sense every time you hit "Post reply".

I want a genuine extra avenue to goal without reducing our midfield delivery.

It's as simple as that.

Lynch's narrow contribution to the team presents a perfect upgrade opportunity

 

[Jack is Back]

Lynch's role as the "connector" as I've described earlier in this thread, is not what you are saying it is. He used to be the connection from the midfield to the forward line, playing both roles.

Now he's just a midfielder. He basically plays as a forward half wing. None of this "connector" stuff, because he is literally ineffective as a forward. He just does not impact the scoreboard.

In fact Lynch is actually less effective as a "connector" than Ben Keays. He averages the same score involvements as Keays, but fewer inside 50s, goals, clearances, meters gained and effective disposals.

So our actual "connector" right now is Ben Keays. Not Tom Lynch. And Keays is also doubling up his roles by playing inside midfield at times AND being more of a scoreboard threat.

It would be trivial to reorganize our team to ditch Lynch and play an actual forward. Bring a player like Schoenberg, Berry or McHenry further up the field, insert Fog into the forward line.

This "connector" bullshit is just an excuse not to play Fogarty and a gross exaggeration of Lynch's inability to be replaced (he is very replaceable)

And then Champion Data rank the best ”connectors” this year and the winner is.......Ten Goal Tommy.

Oh Dear, how embarrassing.

 

[WeeBlake]

Lynch's role as the "connector" as I've described earlier in this thread, is not what you are saying it is. He used to be the connection from the midfield to the forward line, playing both roles.

Now he's just a midfielder. He basically plays as a forward half wing. None of this "connector" stuff, because he is literally ineffective as a forward. He just does not impact the scoreboard.

In fact Lynch is actually less effective as a "connector" than Ben Keays. He averages the same score involvements as Keays, but fewer inside 50s, goals, clearances, meters gained and effective disposals.

So our actual "connector" right now is Ben Keays. Not Tom Lynch. And Keays is also doubling up his roles by playing inside midfield at times AND being more of a scoreboard threat.

It would be trivial to reorganize our team to ditch Lynch and play an actual forward. Bring a player like Schoenberg, Berry or McHenry further up the field, insert Fog into the forward line.

This "connector" bullshit is just an excuse not to play Fogarty and a gross exaggeration of Lynch's inability to be replaced (he is very replaceable)

Not sure I’d go quite this far but I definitely agree that Lynch is used *much* less than he used to be as the ‘connector’.

 

[Vader]

I want a genuine extra avenue to goal without reducing our midfield delivery.

It's as simple as that.

Lynch's narrow contribution to the team presents a perfect upgrade opportunity

... in which case you don't select Fogarty.

Adding Fogarty achieves the complete opposite of what you want - it reduces our avenues to goal, while simultaneously reducing our midfield delivery.

I'm not unhappy with the idea of replacing Lynch... but replacing him with Fogarty is pure unmitigated stupidity. Fogarty's strengths, and Lynch's strengths, share virtually nothing in common.

If you want to replace Lynch with a hard running HFF-type player, then I wouldn't have an issue. If you want to replace him with a slow, unfit, lumbering tall forward, then I have a huge issue.

 

[Scorpus]

... in which case you don't select Fogarty.

Adding Fogarty achieves the complete opposite of what you want - it reduces our avenues to goal, while simultaneously reducing our midfield delivery.

I'm not unhappy with the idea of replacing Lynch... but replacing him with Fogarty is pure unmitigated stupidity. Fogarty's strengths, and Lynch's strengths, share virtually nothing in common.

If you want to replace Lynch with a hard running HFF-type player, then I wouldn't have an issue. If you want to replace him with a slow, unfit, lumbering tall forward, then I have a huge issue.

We are clearly getting nowhere because you refuse to accept that changes can go beyond like for like.

Your descriptions of Fogarty are also bordering on bizarre hater levels. I don't think many here would describe him the way you currently are

 

[Vader]

We are clearly getting nowhere because you refuse to accept that changes can go beyond like for like.

Your descriptions of Fogarty are also bordering on bizarre hater levels. I don't think many here would describe him the way you currently are

Of course they can... but your proposal was based on a fantasy (TT & Fog replacing Frampton & Lynch).

The problem is that we're replacing a hard running "connector", with a slow unfit tall forward. Adding Fogarty reduces our scoring power, by clogging up the forward line, and reducing the pressure being achieved by our hard working forwards. Removing a hard running "connector" (even if he's only a glorified midfielder by your view) simultaneously reduces the input from midfield to the forward line. You're robbing both Peter and Paul, and paying nobody.

Lynch is going to miss due to injury. Even if he wasn't, I wouldn't have a problem with someone wanting to replace him. The problem is that the replacement is the wrong player.

You wouldn't get this complaint from me if the swap was Thilthorpe for Lynch, because TT is so much more fit & mobile than Fogarty.

 

[jackster83]

Lynch is going to miss due to injury. Even if he wasn't, I wouldn't have a problem with someone wanting to replace him. The problem is that the replacement is the wrong player.

Thilthorpe should come in if Lynch misses.

Reckon we'll go in unchanged though, with Fog copping the sub punishment.

 

[GROTTO]

Thilthorpe should come in if Lynch misses.

Reckon we'll go in unchanged though, with Fog copping the sub punishment.

Would much prefer, Frampton and Lynch out with TT and Fog in.

 

[Betts are off]

I just read on AFL.com that Matty Crouch is now listed as 4-6 away from his return from this lingering groin injury.

Lots of clear air for guys like Berry, McHenry and Schoenberg to start upping their rotations. Fingers crossed we get a look at Pedlar soon as well.

 

[WeeBlake]

Also, Fog only needs 15 touches to match Lynch’s 2021 output. If a mark is taken 50 out I know who I’d want kicking.

there is also the hugely important issue of one being young and with upside, in a year where we are supposedly rebuilding.

 

[Scorpus]

Of course they can... but your proposal was based on a fantasy (TT & Fog replacing Frampton & Lynch).

The problem is that we're replacing a hard running "connector", with a slow unfit tall forward. Adding Fogarty reduces our scoring power, by clogging up the forward line, and reducing the pressure being achieved by our hard working forwards. Removing a hard running "connector" (even if he's only a glorified midfielder by your view) simultaneously reduces the input from midfield to the forward line. You're robbing both Peter and Paul, and paying nobody.

Lynch is going to miss due to injury. Even if he wasn't, I wouldn't have a problem with someone wanting to replace him. The problem is that the replacement is the wrong player.

You wouldn't get this complaint from me if the swap was Thilthorpe for Lynch, because TT is so much more fit & mobile than Fogarty.

Well I disagree with most of this

Fogarty is not unfit. Based on what I've seen and also what our coaching group has said. But I don't think you will ever agree with that.

I don't think Fogarty reduces our scoring power. You are basing this on Fogarty being an ineffective forward which I disagree with. I actually find this comment bizarre given what he has shown so far.

If you're basing your discussion on these points there's no point going any further