There are plenty better when it comes to defending.
Height is utterly irrelevant if you don't use it. Lukosius could be 180cm and play the exact same game.
Draft Expert Knightmare's 2021 Draft Almanac
- Thread starter Knightmare
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
On Lukosius, I don't think he has the ceiling of some from his draft, but his floor is very high. Worst case scenario sees him develop into an absolutely elite distributor from half back. He reminds me a lot of Goddard with how he moves and how he kicks the ball.
- Sep 19, 2018
- 424
- 1,221
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
If that's what you value in defence that's completely fine, I also value those traits in defenders. However, I, and many others, also want my defenders to be competitive defensively. So whilst I agree those qualities are key, and I don't think anyone is arguing that, the defensive flaws in JL's game are still flaws and have really hurt his team in patches this year. So whilst the praise is justified, I don't think the criticisms are unfair.
Completely agree. I have all the faith in his ability to develop those things as I don't believe the deficiencies are due to a lack of skill, rather application.
This really isn't a fair representation of historical data though is it given the rule changes this year that have opened up the game and made it much easier to achieve metres gained.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,604
No one will disagree with you there are many who are better at defending than Lukosius. That isn't his role.
Height is something Lukosius may still learn. I do agree with you he has yet to learn how to use it, but he still does take more contested marks and intercept marks than those who are certainly 180cm. He's at 12 contested marks from his 20 games, mid sizers don't even commonly hit the 0.5 mark, let alone exceed it, and even less with smalls. I would like Lukosius if he's in defence to exceed at least one per game as a baseline. More than anything, it's his marking I'd like to see him develop, in particular his contested marking. Develop that, develop into a strong 1v1 mark and intercept more and that's probably where the most dramatic leap could come.
Lukosius definitely has a very high floor, and we're already seeing it and have really since that second half of season one upon shifting into defence.
I do still see a high degree of upside to his game. The Suns just need to develop him. And same applies with Rankine and the rest of their young players. Their player development needs to lift several gears, as their best players have for a number of years now been for the most part those they have brought in from other clubs - be it Witts/Greenwood/Lyons/Ellis/Weller.
In terms of competitiveness defensively I look for those who can turn 1v1s into 1v1 intercept marks. They're the ones I love most in those situations, when you can turn defence into offence, winning the ball back for your team.
Interestingly Lukosius' contested defensive loss % is only 9.1% (an elite number). He hasn't been involved in many as he hasn't played in defence all season and isn't normally playing against talls, but if he continues to play against those who aren't tall and can not only maintain a contested defensive loss % of under 10% and turn more of those opportunities into marks when he is involved in those contests, he just adds to those weapons in his toolkit which is what it's about at the end of the day, as you're always looking for more ways guys can influence outcomes.
The topic of metres gained in the context of Lukosius is something I will cover in a future YouTube video. There is a particular long kicking champion of the past I also plan to draw upon in that video, and I'm sure this particular player based on the sheer volume of long kicks he managed would have higher metres gained seasons than Lukosius, if the state was recorded then, but nonetheless, in a handball happy, short kicking era, Lukosius does have the most average metres gained per game, and should at seasons end have the most ever publicly recorded in a home and away season given he doesn't miss games, beyond just the most in average per game. Hopefully we see more long kicking in future seasons as it we need more of those offensive attributes that can open games up which we need more of.
You'll find different statistical results in different eras of football. 20 years ago you had a lot less disposals and dramatically less tackles, but then you had a higher volume of long kicks and kicks to contests. So the game evolves over time. Just like it's unrealistic today with the way the game is played for someone to kick 120 goals, let alone three straight seasons as Gary Ablett Snr did in the 80s beyond the age of 30.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,606
The curious thing I've found, and this isn't just a football or sport related concept, but the more people know about something, the stronger ones opinion on that topic becomes and with it, as others also develop their knowledge, opinions really diverge and dramatically so. And beliefs become challenged which is a healthy thing in my view and something in society I'd love actually to be done more as solutions through vigorous discussion are more likely to emerge.
I find the same whether I'm talking to close friends about economics, politics, real estate, stocks, crypto currencies, or whatever the topic, it's the same thing as it is here when talking footy. And curiously there are a lot of methodologies or different solutions while very contrasting can actually be effective, with the quality of execution generally the determining factor in the success or otherwise of the outcome. And that's why you'll have people on either side often having more than valid points, or even sharing the same opinions often but then having entirely different ways of going about addressing that problem, or very different interpretations of how good/bad/or otherwise something is.
Ask most Lions fans, and they would take Lukosius in a heartbeat.
His ceiling is a taller Daniel Rich, who can take intercept marks, and provide more run down a wing.
Put him in the right team environment, with the right coaching, and he’s a top 3 most important and damaging player on a team.
His ceiling is a taller Daniel Rich, who can take intercept marks, and provide more run down a wing.
Put him in the right team environment, with the right coaching, and he’s a top 3 most important and damaging player on a team.
But he isn’t a contested marking monster and isn’t physical enough to play forward; therefore he is a bust.
Happily have him playing HBF at the dogs. Even give you a first rounder (although I would not normally take a HBF with a first round pick). I think they can be found later in the draft.
So you’ll be happy when we trade our future second round pick and a 2021 fourth round pick to you for Ed Richards.But he isn’t a contested marking monster and isn’t physical enough to play forward; therefore he is a bust.
Happily have him playing HBF at the dogs. Even give you a first rounder (although I would not normally take a HBF with a first round pick). I think they can be found later in the draft.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,611
But he isn’t a contested marking monster and isn’t physical enough to play forward; therefore he is a bust.
Happily have him playing HBF at the dogs. Even give you a first rounder (although I would not normally take a HBF with a first round pick). I think they can be found later in the draft.
Does a key position player need to be a key forward to be a success?
Is Jeremy McGovern not successful? Brian Lake? Alex Rance? Harris Andrews? I could go on naming great key defenders all day.
The curious thing today is, the value of great key defenders has dramatically increased whereas key forwards are substantially lower usage as a point of comparison, and much lower usage than in generations past.
Did anyone watch Sam Taylor on the weekend? The game has changed dramatically and that GWS game is a prime illustration of how much with the volume key defenders are taking intercept marks, shattering any records from seasons past. Key defenders are now weapons and that second component in the scoring off turnovers chain. Forward pressure needs to be applies to the ball carrier as stage one and you need those key defenders behind the ball who can read it in flight to an take intercept marks to an elite level. Then you need the drivers of the footy as stage three in that process and get the ball moving before the other side can set up their defences.
For the type of position/role Lukosius plays, he does take a good number of intercept and contested marks, and even actually wins his 1v1s at a high rate as already mentioned by his elite sub 10% 1v1 loss rate (albeit off low volume). But if he was to become say that McGovern level contested marking beast and reader of the ball in flight, he'd be the best player in this generation as he's playing an integral part in two of those key components to winning football games in intercepting and then as he already can, murder teams on the rebound with the drive he generates. Ben Reid in 2010/2011 was as close to that perfect combination as I've seen, kicking those bullets with the precision of Lukosius, but then reading the game as well as any and intercepting to a high rate. And of course in the years following his game with injury declined badly, but in the 2011 home and away season it was in my view at least Reid who was best on list special and better even than what Travis Cloke, Scott Pendlebury, Dane Swan, Dale Thomas and Leon Davis were doing that really historically great home and away season that group managed, with Reid that secret sauce and before his time the way he played that year. If I've got that kind of piece, or a few like that, with the forward pressure forward of centre, that's cheat code stuff and much more influential than anything any key forward could do to contribute towards winning in this era.
As for general defenders though. They can I agree be had later in the draft and often even in the form of mature agers. All that can happen. And this year there are actually a good number I will be including on my draft board. It doesn't take away their value from winning though and their importance to the puzzle though. That's why I'm always talking about teams needing to improve their best-22s. You have to relentlessly keep improving that best team as you don't want any weak links and have as close to a complete team as possible, always looking for ways to keep moving that standard for that whole group forward. The contributions from every position matters and counts. As for general defenders though, without their rebound, you're going to have a hard time generating meaningful drive and ball movement to score off of those turnovers. There aren't many in the conversation with Lukosius as those better kicks in the competition, so if I'm after meaningful drive generation, he's the first guy I'm calling, and we're talking about a 195cm 3rd year player which makes it all the more incredible.
McGovern always that ‘you can’t beat me’ attitude. Lukosius doesn’t have that. Just like Schache / Watts in that respect. Lukosius is an elite 3rd tall defender. IF he can develop that contested marking, then he would be in the top 10 players in the AFL. It’s a huge IF though.
We don’t need future picks…. With this draft being rather shallow, a late late first is about right. IF it was a stronger draft, I would say mid-second plus a future fourth would be fine.
I don’t see Richards as a HBF. We keep playing him as a HFF. That position is of more value.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,614
I'm not nearly expecting Lukosius develops anything near that level of contested marking. McGovern is all-time special as a contested mark and intercept mark. I'd settle for Lukosius becoming a good contested mark, though if he remains in defence he really needs to put substantial time into that and his intercept marking as having him launching the rebound from an intercept mark would dramatically open up the field and substantially increase how many of his touches translate to goals at the other end of the field.
If a HFF more valuable than a HBF?
They're very different roles and played very differently, but I wouldn't give one a higher valuation than another. Both can equally have as great of an impact on winning, just depends on the game, the situation and the personnel.
We have found AA level HBF in the third round: Dale & Daniel
But only ever found good HFF in earlier rounds. The level of skill to be good is higher for HFF, as the field they kick into is smaller.
- Aug 9, 2019
- 37,867
- 65,564
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Panthers, GWV Rebels, Central Augusta
That view is not shared by several club head recruiters I've heard speak recently, the latest GWS's Andrew Caruso on Twomey's "Road To Draft" podcast, all seem to agree it's a bit light on for talls but otherwise a good draft pool to select from.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,617
A lesson in veteran leadership. Why early picks without sufficient veteran leadership doesn't lead to success. The possible disruptor in the AFL recruiting industry. (Podcast)
*The podcast explores Carlton, Melbourne, Gold Coast and GWS as case studies.
Key idea: you can't build a list no matter how many early picks you have without sufficient veteran leadership and established players in place.
Point of discussion: What makes the optimal veteran addition to a team to help support young players? What qualities would you be looking for and who would be some of the leaders you would start a team with?
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaDw6CdiluY
*The podcast explores Carlton, Melbourne, Gold Coast and GWS as case studies.
Key idea: you can't build a list no matter how many early picks you have without sufficient veteran leadership and established players in place.
Point of discussion: What makes the optimal veteran addition to a team to help support young players? What qualities would you be looking for and who would be some of the leaders you would start a team with?
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaDw6CdiluY
Last edited:
You don't need to use pick 2 in the draft to find player to fill that role. Gold Coast could have just kept Aaron Hall, who has been more effective than Lukosius in that role this year, and used the pick on a player who can play in a much harder position to fill. But this was never the plan, Jack just isn't the player many thought he was.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,620
Interesting to hear some believe it's a good draft.
Talls aside from Darcy are poor early, though I wouldn't be crediting the first round as anything spectacular either. I'm expecting an above average rate of first round misses.
Depth I also would suggest below average, though admittedly there are some who should be available late and may go undrafted I like, so as with any draft, it's still not without opportunity.
Gold Coast should have kept Aaron Hall and should have kept Jarryd Lyons. They both were sensational for the Suns with Lyons by far and away their best midfielder and Hall their best for offensive drive.
You're right a primary rebounding role is ideal for Hall and it's shouldn't be surprising that he can generate meaningful offense, he has been doing that for years at a high volume.
Lukosius, and I've mentioned this in other posts though, he isn't limited to playing in defence. He was playing wing during the first half of the season and can play across half-forward. I'd love to have multiple of him. That said, I'd have no hesitation playing him in the same back half as Hall. If you want Hall playing higher, Lukosius can play deeper and take more kickouts. It's a bonus having two offensive weapons in defence, just as the Suns are finding with the emergence of Wil Powell.
As for not needing pick 2 to get a general defender of high quality, you're right proportionally a relatively high % compared to other positions come late and rookie draft. That said, there isn't one position where you necessarily have to use a first round pick to get a good one. You could say you need a key forward and I could mention Jake Riccardi or Blake Schlensog as targets, despite the perception that most good ones come early. Or if I need a mid, and early draft mids, particularly inside mid are as high % as they come as pick. But that said, there are always going to be plenty around, and late draft too, and there is always Haiden Schloithe and Jye Bolton in the state leagues if I want someone who can step into my team and play good football.
A lot of the best rebounding defenders, and far from all of them, but a lot of the best ones were once first round picks. From Lukosius, to Rich, to B.Smith, Ziebell, Docherty, Hurn. And that's far from an exhaustive list and just among those who are top-10 for metres gained by type/position. So there are still a good number who went early, and a good number of them who weren't drafted as defenders either, or haven't spent their whole careers in defence either.
So while in general absolutely you wouldn't always take a general defender necessarily with a pick 2 given you can more often than with say key forwards can find them later on at lower prices, and I feel like this year there are several who could be had late/rookie and others who go undrafted who have good scope to develop at AFL level if picked, but that doesn't mean there can't be one who isn't worth a pick 2.
Prochard123
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 28, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,773
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Interesting debate, but if I were GC I would be moderately disappointed by Lukosius' development to date.
From what I've seen, Lukosius is a long and occasionally creative kick, but definitely not an accurate kick, which is a MAJOR FLAW as a distributor from defence. In 2021, Lukosius is the #2 worst kick out of ALL DEFENDERS in the AFL by Turnovers Rate Per Disposal (behind Brodie Smith). That is simply unacceptable regardless of his metres gained. In fact, any kick that goes long to a contest (over 40 metres) is automatically classified as an effective kick, which makes the stat look even worse for Lukosius given the number of long kicks he has per game.
So look, with all things considered, perhaps his metres gained is more meaningful than that HUGE turnover rate, let's just assume that's true and call him an above average kick (which I personally don't agree with, I think he's average at best, but we digress).
So what else does he have going for him? He can't shut down opposition players like Maynard/Koladjashnig (geelong)/Grimes
He can't intercept like Moore/Howe/Lever/Stewart/Haynes etc.
His one weapon is his kicking, and even that is severely flawed. He can kick it long and set up plays INFREQUENTY, but he can turn it over just as often which is extremely dangerous since it's coming out of defence.
He needs to play as a high CHF/Wing as soon as possible. He's just an okay player down back at the moment, which is no where near what you expect given his innate talent and high draft pick.
And like other posters have mentioned, you simply don't pay pick 2 for a HBF.
The only HBF in the league I'd pay pick 2 for is Lachie Whitfield, who is an absolutely elite kick both coming out of half-back and into the forward 50, long and short as well. But the reason for this is that Whitfield virtually plays all over the ground, so his role is more of a midfielder if anything.
The only way Lukosius justifies pick 2 in a strong draft as a HBF is if he drastically improves his ability both defensively or as an interceptor.
From what I've seen, Lukosius is a long and occasionally creative kick, but definitely not an accurate kick, which is a MAJOR FLAW as a distributor from defence. In 2021, Lukosius is the #2 worst kick out of ALL DEFENDERS in the AFL by Turnovers Rate Per Disposal (behind Brodie Smith). That is simply unacceptable regardless of his metres gained. In fact, any kick that goes long to a contest (over 40 metres) is automatically classified as an effective kick, which makes the stat look even worse for Lukosius given the number of long kicks he has per game.
So look, with all things considered, perhaps his metres gained is more meaningful than that HUGE turnover rate, let's just assume that's true and call him an above average kick (which I personally don't agree with, I think he's average at best, but we digress).
So what else does he have going for him? He can't shut down opposition players like Maynard/Koladjashnig (geelong)/Grimes
He can't intercept like Moore/Howe/Lever/Stewart/Haynes etc.
His one weapon is his kicking, and even that is severely flawed. He can kick it long and set up plays INFREQUENTY, but he can turn it over just as often which is extremely dangerous since it's coming out of defence.
He needs to play as a high CHF/Wing as soon as possible. He's just an okay player down back at the moment, which is no where near what you expect given his innate talent and high draft pick.
And like other posters have mentioned, you simply don't pay pick 2 for a HBF.
The only HBF in the league I'd pay pick 2 for is Lachie Whitfield, who is an absolutely elite kick both coming out of half-back and into the forward 50, long and short as well. But the reason for this is that Whitfield virtually plays all over the ground, so his role is more of a midfielder if anything.
The only way Lukosius justifies pick 2 in a strong draft as a HBF is if he drastically improves his ability both defensively or as an interceptor.
Last edited:
Prochard123
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 28, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,773
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
For reference, Whitfield's Turnover Rate Per Disposal is 20.63% - so roughly 1 in 5.
Whereas Lukosius' Turnover Rate Per Disposal is 26.96%, so more frequent than 1 in 4.
This means that Lukosius is 30.68% more likely to turnover a disposal than Whitfield............ Like I said before, I won't comment too much on how productive Lukosius' kicking is or how much metres per game actually matter, but Lukosius is absolutely NOT AN ACCURATE KICK.
Whereas Lukosius' Turnover Rate Per Disposal is 26.96%, so more frequent than 1 in 4.
This means that Lukosius is 30.68% more likely to turnover a disposal than Whitfield............ Like I said before, I won't comment too much on how productive Lukosius' kicking is or how much metres per game actually matter, but Lukosius is absolutely NOT AN ACCURATE KICK.
Prochard123
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 28, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,773
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
On the other hand, Darcy Moore despite playing 3 out of 13 games up forward, is averaging 7.6 intercepts per game (let's not even mention Andrews who is 9+ and Lever who is 10+, these guys almost triple Lukosius in intercepts per game).
Whereas Lukosius is averaging 3.9 intercepts per game.
Lukosius as a defender atm is just nowhere near good enough. He has time to develop, but statistically he is very, very far behind than the top defenders in the comp - and even if he gets there - he might still not justify pick 2.
Whereas Lukosius is averaging 3.9 intercepts per game.
Lukosius as a defender atm is just nowhere near good enough. He has time to develop, but statistically he is very, very far behind than the top defenders in the comp - and even if he gets there - he might still not justify pick 2.
Prochard123
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 28, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,773
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I won't get into much detail regarding his contested marking... As others have mentioned/as you might expect, the numbers look pretty ugly atm.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #1,625
Does that stat only measure Lukosius' kicking over the second half of the season since shifting into defence? As his first half to the season was on a wing. He does kick long a high proportion of the time and the further away you are from your own goal, you'll see a direct correlation with kicking efficiency as the rate of difficulty dramatically decreases.
Lukosius has more than just his kick/vision going for him. He's an elite endurance athlete for someone his height and displays an elite work rate in game which allows him the far heightened frequency of involvements wherever he's used.
On Lukosius' kicking, he does as you rightly point out turn the ball over at times because he can try to do too much or overestimate the capacities of his teammates, but being able to launch those low and fast through the air daggers over distance, having the vision he has to spot out impossible targets, and the skill execution to hit them, I do look at his kicking overwhelmingly as a net positive and a difference making component to his game.
As for intercepting, I don't find it's something Lukosius is asked to do as much as he should. He reads the game incredible well, so if he was asked to do it, even without any meaningful development, it's something he should be able to do to a high level. It's just the role Ballard is asked to play, with Collins also a high volume intercept mark and Powell also intercepting at a high volume. I'd like to see Lukosius if he's to continue in defence to make it a primary focus of his role so that the speed of his rebound generates many more scoring opportunities.
Gold Coast are going to have to work hard on their player development if they're to make Lukosius into their centre-half forward. He was playing on a wing and played good footy there through the first half of the season as he did in defence. He's the volume marking player but needs to add that contested marking component to maximise his effectiveness in either spot, be it CHF or wing.
- Status
Similar threads
