Club Focus Geelong 2024

[Ticky009]

Data from footywire. To check the draft order see the thread here.

Footywire says: "While we make every effort to keep up to date with player contracts, it is likely that our data may at times be out of date, incomplete or inaccurate. If you find any player contracts that need updating, please let us know using our brand new contract submission form."

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The ruck situation is an interesting one for me with Sam de Koning's emergence, along with Conway showing signs as a long-term prospect (while continuing to struggle to stay on the park).

It's a very iffy situation to me. IF Conway heads into the offseason healthy, IF we plan on continuing to use de Koning as a ruck at least part-time and IF Blicavs goes on, considering Mitch Edwards and Joe Furphy also currently reside on our list as ruck options, I'm not convinced we need anyone better than Ceglar was for us: someone who'd be happy to get a year on our senior list, but who would go into the season under no illusions that he may only be needed for two AFL games, if we're not decimated by injury, he may not be needed at all.

Considering all that, I know it isn't going to be the most fashionable suggestion, but wouldn't it have merit to at least consider giving Stanley another year in the Ceglar role, with the explicit understanding that some combination of de Koning, Blicavs and Conway is going into the season as our default AFL ruck set-up?

If we go chasing a younger, hungrier long-term option who's desperate for opportunities, I'm not really sure we can offer that: I'd be expecting Conway, de Koning, or Edwards (or a combination) to be our main ruck option into the next decade. If we just go out looking to grab anything we can get our hands on as a mature body to provide back-up, why would they be any better than Stanley (assuming he's happy to go on of course)? Sam Naismith

24

Sam Naismith

Age

32

Ht

205cm

Wt

108kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.9

2star

K

3.6

1star

HB

5.3

4star

CL

2.0

4star

HO

25.5

5star

D

9.5

2star

K

7.5

3star

HB

2.0

1star

CL

3.0

4star

HO

26.5

5star

D

9.2

3star

K

3.2

2star

HB

6.0

4star

CL

1.4

4star

HO

25.4

5star

seems to be a pretty good comparison from the 23/24 offseason: dominating the VFL, years of experience on an AFL list, as good a bet as anyone to join an AFL club in need of ruck support and provide solid service for about 5-15 senior games. Unfortunately for him, it hasn't worked out that way, with his body letting him down again and he wasn't exactly setting the world on fire prior to that.

Of course the idea of simply offering Stanley one more year and serving as our fourth string option on the depth chart is moot if Blicavs retires, de Koning returns to primarily being a cog in defence or Conway goes into the offseason needing any significant surgery.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

The ruck situation is an interesting one for me with Sam de Koning's emergence, along with Conway showing signs as a long-term prospect (while continuing to struggle to stay on the park).

It's a very iffy situation to me. IF Conway heads into the offseason healthy, IF we plan on continuing to use de Koning as a ruck at least part-time and IF Blicavs goes on, considering Mitch Edwards and Joe Furphy also currently reside on our list as ruck options, I'm not convinced we need anyone better than Ceglar was for us: someone who'd be happy to get a year on our senior list, but who would go into the season under no illusions that he may only be needed for two AFL games, if we're not decimated by injury, he may not be needed at all.

Considering all that, I know it isn't going to be the most fashionable suggestion, but wouldn't it have merit to at least consider giving Stanley another year in the Ceglar role, with the explicit understanding that some combination of de Koning, Blicavs and Conway is going into the season as our default AFL ruck set-up?

If we go chasing a younger, hungrier long-term option who's desperate for opportunities, I'm not really sure we can offer that: I'd be expecting Conway, de Koning, or Edwards (or a combination) to be our main ruck option into the next decade. If we just go out looking to grab anything we can get our hands on as a mature body to provide back-up, why would they be any better than Stanley (assuming he's happy to go on of course)? Sam Naismith seems to be a pretty good comparison from the 23/24 offseason: dominating the VFL, years of experience on an AFL list, as good a bet as anyone to join an AFL club in need of ruck support and provide solid service for about 5-15 senior games. Unfortunately for him, it hasn't worked out that way, with his body letting him down again and he wasn't exactly setting the world on fire prior to that.

Of course the idea of simply offering Stanley one more year and serving as our fourth string option on the depth chart is moot if Blicavs retires, de Koning returns to primarily being a cog in defence or Conway goes into the offseason needing any significant surgery.

Stanley wanted to retire last year and the club had to talk him into staying. He wont go again.
Theres a number of decent back up rucks that we could trade in at end of this year-otherwise will need to trade in a key defender.

 

[foxdog50]

The ruck situation is an interesting one for me with Sam de Koning's emergence, along with Conway showing signs as a long-term prospect (while continuing to struggle to stay on the park).

It's a very iffy situation to me. IF Conway heads into the offseason healthy, IF we plan on continuing to use de Koning as a ruck at least part-time and IF Blicavs goes on, considering Mitch Edwards and Joe Furphy also currently reside on our list as ruck options, I'm not convinced we need anyone better than Ceglar was for us: someone who'd be happy to get a year on our senior list, but who would go into the season under no illusions that he may only be needed for two AFL games, if we're not decimated by injury, he may not be needed at all.

Considering all that, I know it isn't going to be the most fashionable suggestion, but wouldn't it have merit to at least consider giving Stanley another year in the Ceglar role, with the explicit understanding that some combination of de Koning, Blicavs and Conway is going into the season as our default AFL ruck set-up?

If we go chasing a younger, hungrier long-term option who's desperate for opportunities, I'm not really sure we can offer that: I'd be expecting Conway, de Koning, or Edwards (or a combination) to be our main ruck option into the next decade. If we just go out looking to grab anything we can get our hands on as a mature body to provide back-up, why would they be any better than Stanley (assuming he's happy to go on of course)? Sam Naismith seems to be a pretty good comparison from the 23/24 offseason: dominating the VFL, years of experience on an AFL list, as good a bet as anyone to join an AFL club in need of ruck support and provide solid service for about 5-15 senior games. Unfortunately for him, it hasn't worked out that way, with his body letting him down again and he wasn't exactly setting the world on fire prior to that.

Of course the idea of simply offering Stanley one more year and serving as our fourth string option on the depth chart is moot if Blicavs retires, de Koning returns to primarily being a cog in defence or Conway goes into the offseason needing any significant surgery.

I'm in the minority here, but I'm not the biggest fan of SDK in the ruck.
We have 2 young rucks in Conway and Edwards ( and we have Furphy as a rookie ) Stanley will retire.
I'm in the same view in as Pure, we need to go for a mature age ruckman. And I'd be happy in Ladhams or Reidy. Which they could push to play 10-15 games a season if needed.
Ladhams is contracted, but will cost peanuts in a trade as he really doesn't have much value in approx 3rd rounder.
Reidy will be basically free as well..
Conway body is unknown as he seems to injured alot.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I'm in the minority here, but I'm not the biggest fan of SDK in the ruck.
We have 2 young rucks in Conway and Edwards ( and we have Furphy as a rookie ) Stanley will retire.
I'm in the same view in as Pure, we need to go for a mature age ruckman. And I'd be happy in Ladhams or Reidy. Which they could push to play 10-15 games a season if needed.
Ladhams is contracted, but will cost peanuts in a trade as he really doesn't have much value in approx 3rd rounder.
Reidy will be basically free as well..
Conway body is unknown as he seems to injured alot.

It's a real balancing act I agree. I admit that I rolled my eyes a bit seeing SDK in the ruck against Carlton, as it seemed to be a desperation move, but it appears to have quickly become the preferred option for his role in the team, especially with Conway unavailable. With O'Sullivan developing in the VFL and presumably expecting to become an established part of the senior defence next year, I think that should cover us quite well with tall defenders and rucks, whether SDK is our primary ruck next year or Conway is.

It would be irresponsible to not consider the potential of injury, especially with Conway, but I think it's almost as important to consider: what if there aren't any major injuries to worry about with our rucks next year? I would think that Edwards, would/should be aiming to earn a taste of senior football too next year. If we target someone, I think it has to be an older player who clearly understands that he won't be playing in thr AFL, unless injuries necessitate. Not sure Ladhams or Reidy would accept that.

With his age and physical maturity, Furphy would seem ideal for that role, if they can see him being able to hold his own at AFL level and I think if they keep him on the list, it will tell us a lot about their optimism for him next year. They may as well cut him if he hasn't shown AFL potential by the end of the year.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

It's a real balancing act I agree. I admit that I rolled my eyes a bit seeing SDK in the ruck against Carlton, as it seemed to be a desperation move, but it appears to have quickly become the preferred option for his role in the team, especially with Conway unavailable. With O'Sullivan developing in the VFL and presumably expecting to become an established part of the senior defence next year, I think that should cover us quite well with tall defenders and rucks, whether SDK is our primary ruck next year or Conway is.

It would be irresponsible to not consider the potential of injury, especially with Conway, but I think it's almost as important to consider: what if there aren't any major injuries to worry about with our rucks next year? I would think that Edwards, would/should be aiming to earn a taste of senior football too next year. If we target someone, I think it has to be an older player who clearly understands that he won't be playing in thr AFL, unless injuries necessitate. Not sure Ladhams or Reidy would accept that.

With his age and physical maturity, Furphy would seem ideal for that role, if they can see him being able to hold his own at AFL level and I think if they keep him on the list, it will tell us a lot about their optimism for him next year. They may as well cut him if he hasn't shown AFL potential by the end of the year.

I get the rationale but i disagree with it.
Conway is very promising but made of glass.
Edwards is even further behind than him physically he needs 2 years in the gym and can barely play consecutive games.
Blitz will be 34 and is needed for other roles anyway.
COS doesnt have the body strength yet and would get snapped in half as a frontline ruck.
Furphy has only played like 2 games of footy in his life and could be tsapolitis for all we know.
They will want to keep neale fwd with hawkins gone next year.

So from that list youve got 1.5 bankable ruck options at best 1 of whom is blitz and the other is your fullback sdk.
Saying thats enough is as silly as saying 5 30s picks should get you pick 2. Yes you have numbers but the quality isnt there.

A ladhams type doesnt have to come to be vfl only they just have to do the math and realise they are likely to play at least 10 games next year and if they play well wont go out-because our alternatives are thin.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'm with MC. Cheap ruck on the proviso you are only break in case of emergency.
SDK should now be prioritised in the ruck and let COS take fullback.

Scott has said it numerous times. The Neil Balme quote that you either have not enough rucks or too many.
I don't want anything more than a last resort back up. Conway, SDK and Blicavs is enough for next year with Neale forward rucking and Edwards/Furphy developing in the VFL.

 

[foxdog50]

It's a real balancing act I agree. I admit that I rolled my eyes a bit seeing SDK in the ruck against Carlton, as it seemed to be a desperation move, but it appears to have quickly become the preferred option for his role in the team, especially with Conway unavailable. With O'Sullivan developing in the VFL and presumably expecting to become an established part of the senior defence next year, I think that should cover us quite well with tall defenders and rucks, whether SDK is our primary ruck next year or Conway is.

It would be irresponsible to not consider the potential of injury, especially with Conway, but I think it's almost as important to consider: what if there aren't any major injuries to worry about with our rucks next year? I would think that Edwards, would/should be aiming to earn a taste of senior football too next year. If we target someone, I think it has to be an older player who clearly understands that he won't be playing in thr AFL, unless injuries necessitate. Not sure Ladhams or Reidy would accept that.

With his age and physical maturity, Furphy would seem ideal for that role, if they can see him being able to hold his own at AFL level and I think if they keep him on the list, it will tell us a lot about their optimism for him next year. They may as well cut him if he hasn't shown AFL potential by the end of the year.

SDK playing CHB in 2022 was alot of the reason we won a flag... yes the last 18 months has been below par, but I still think he can be a AA playing at CHB.
SDK is only best as a 2nd ruck..
But Reidy and Ladhams would rather play 10 games a year next year atm , rather then not even getting a game and both would most likely get delisted at the end of there contracts. Especially Reidy when you have Dary n Jackson, who won't get a game before them 2.

I wish I could back in Conway but his body is all unknown.
And Edwards is not even close to get a game , even next year

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I get the rationale but i disagree with it.
Conway is very promising but made of glass.
Edwards is even further behind than him physically he needs 2 years in the gym and can barely play consecutive games.
Blitz will be 34 and is needed for other roles anyway.
COS doesnt have the body strength yet and would get snapped in half as a frontline ruck.
Furphy has only played like 2 games of footy in his life and could be tsapolitis for all we know.
They will want to keep neale fwd with hawkins gone next year.

So from that list youve got 1.5 bankable ruck options at best 1 of whom is blitz and the other is your fullback sdk.
Saying thats enough is as silly as saying 5 30s picks should get you pick 2. Yes you have numbers but the quality isnt there.

A ladhams type doesnt have to come to be vfl only they just have to do the math and realise they are likely to play at least 10 games next year and if they play well wont go out-because our alternatives are thin.

Fair enough. Just to clarify, I wasn't proposing O'Sullivan as a ruck option, merely saying that he should be a regular next year - logically in defence - and if he can do that, we'd have Henry, Kolodjashnij and O'Sullivan as tall coverage in defence, even if de Koning was deployed in the ruck predominantly.

Saying we have 1.5 bankable ruck options at best (and that being Blicavs) is way too far the other way for me. If we have that little faith in Conway and Edwards, then they're a waste of list spots as far as I'm concerned. As with Furphy, even though he's only a category B, he's no spring chicken, so he needs to develop quickly if he's to be an AFL player.

You need depth and injury coverage of course, but there's limits, particularly with permanent ruckman, where cheap ones can rarely be realistically expected to play any other role. Assuming we lose Stanley and don't add any others, I think we have two clear #1 options in de Koning and Conway, along with the perfect modern #2 option, Blicavs. Since SDK can also play defence, I don't see any issues with de Koning and Conway sharing the ruck duties in a given game either.

Then we have Edwards, whom I think should have a goal to play a senior game next year, just as Conway did in his second year (coming in against the AA ruckman). In a pinch, I think he should be ready to answer the call, he's going to come up against veteran AFL ruckmen in the VFL after all. If he finds himself in the VFL matched up against Toby Nankervis, or Mason Cox, or Rory Lobb, or Sam Draper or Ned Reeves, he just has to deal with it. With de Koning, Conway, Blicavs and Neale, it would take something pretty crazy for him to go into an AFL game as the ruck next year with zero support as Blicavs famously did for his debut.

And Furphy's a complete unknown: as mentioned, I think that unless they think he's capable of being able to play AFL next year if required, they may as well cut him. We need support for 2025. I think we currently look fine beyond that in the ruck.

At this stage I can deal with adding a veteran ruck, soneone who's just happy to have another year on a senior list. Anything more than that I think is overkill, unless we dump Furphy and either Blicavs retires or Conway's looking at an interrupted preseason as we head to the trade period. If we have the same stocks, minus Stanley as we do now, I think it's a reasonable gamble that should be sufficient.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Fair enough. Just to clarify, I wasn't proposing O'Sullivan as a ruck option, merely saying that he should be a regular next year - logically in defence - and if he can do that, we'd have Henry, Kolodjashnij and O'Sullivan as tall coverage in defence, even if de Koning was deployed in the ruck predominantly.

Saying we have 1.5 bankable ruck options at best (and that being Blicavs) is way too far the other way for me. If we have that little faith in Conway and Edwards, then they're a waste of list spots as far as I'm concerned. As with Furphy, even though he's only a category B, he's no spring chicken, so he needs to develop quickly if he's to be an AFL player.

You need depth and injury coverage of course, but there's limits, particularly with permanent ruckman, where cheap ones can rarely be realistically expected to play any other role. Assuming we lose Stanley and don't add any others, I think we have two clear #1 options in de Koning and Conway, along with the perfect modern #2 option, Blicavs. Since SDK can also play defence, I don't see any issues with de Koning and Conway sharing the ruck duties in a given game either.

Then we have Edwards, whom I think should have a goal to play a senior game next year, just as Conway did in his second year (coming in against the AA ruckman). In a pinch, I think he should be ready to answer the call, he's going to come up against veteran AFL ruckmen in the VFL after all. If he finds himself in the VFL matched up against Toby Nankervis, or Mason Cox, or Rory Lobb, or Sam Draper or Ned Reeves, he just has to deal with it. With de Koning, Conway, Blicavs and Neale, it would take something pretty crazy for him to go into an AFL game as the ruck next year with zero support as Blicavs famously did for his debut.

And Furphy's a complete unknown: as mentioned, I think that unless they think he's capable of being able to play AFL next year if required, they may as well cut him. We need support for 2025. I think we currently look fine beyond that in the ruck.

At this stage I can deal with adding a veteran ruck, soneone who's just happy to have another year on a senior list. Anything more than that I think is overkill, unless we dump Furphy and either Blicavs retires or Conway's looking at an interrupted preseason as we head to the trade period. If we have the same stocks, minus Stanley as we do now, I think it's a reasonable gamble that should be sufficient.

Theres some reasonable points there but on the bolded you are confusing short and long term.
We rate those players long term.
But short term edwards is 100/1 to play afl next year and furphy is probably 1000/1.conway will play games if fit but we simply have to insurance given his record, we have to. And we cant keep relying on blitz at 34 to carry the ruck. So we need to bring one in.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Theres some reasonable points there but on the bolded you are confusing short and long term.
We rate those players long term.
But short term edwards is 100/1 to play afl next year and furphy is probably 1000/1.conway will play games if fit but we simply have to insurance given his record, we have to. And we cant keep relying on blitz at 34 to carry the ruck. So we need to bring one in.

My point is if Furphy doesn't play AFL by next year, he never will. He turns 26 next year. If Edwards is 100/1 to play AFL next year, that's a good thing because it means that two of Blicavs, de Koning and Conway have stood up.

If we have injury concerns next year with say Conway and de Koning going down at the same time, I'd suggest it becomes more like line-ball that Edwards is called up to partner with Blicavs or we may just give him an end of season taste regardless, as we did with Conway in 2023 (I'm not expecting us to be in contention next year). Regardless, I'd much prefer we roll the dice with what we already have, or maybe get a big body who is in no uncertain terms the fourth string option to consider if we end up having three of our other rucks all go down at once. I'm not even remotely interested in bringing someone in who expects to be competing for the #1 mantle.