Player Reviews NAB Cup Rd 1

[forwardflanker]

Although this is true, Hawthorn were scored against very easily in the finals series and late in the season. They could've done with a Toovey or a Nathan Brown. That said, they have recruited Brian Lake and Guerra was injured.

But point remains that you need a few role players. Toovey and Maxwell are valuable commodoties and I wouldn't trade them. Shaw is prone to an odd skill error, but overall is a very good player and importantly also has a strong defensive element to his game. Reid and Brown and solid key posts. Where we may fall down is that our 2 attacking defenders are Harry and Ben Johnson...and neither are elite ball users.

It is why I see Seedsman going back, and why we recruited a guy like Ramsay. It is also why I see Lachie Keefe breaking back into the side when fit to free up Reid to distribute the ball.

Hawthorn definitely have skill coming out of defence, but ultimately they leaked too many goals in the finals series.

Yeah I guess the good positive thing for Hawthorn is that the goals they were leaking weren't so much from their running defenders as from opposition midfielders and Scoenmakers struggling and Gibson playing kpb whilst being undersized. Which is why Lake could help them a lot.

I think you're right about Toovey being a valuable commodity, but if Keefe comes back I wonder where Maxwell is going to play because ideally we would want Reid in his spot as the third man up and rebounding.

 

[KJpie]

Difference between our back 6 and Hawthorns back 6 is that Reid and Shaw are about the only ones who I have any faith in with ball in hand and under a lot of pressure. Hawthorn have Burgoyne, Suckling, Birchall, Guerra, Gibson - all are better kciks than anyone in our back 6 bar Reid.

Spot on FF.

Take the worst kick out of our back line (most are pointing to Harry) and add a player or 2 with precise foot skills and things change dramatically. Russell is a chance and Seedy was V good in the back half last week when trusted with the kick in's. Didak would also generate precision from defence as a loose man although if fully fit I feel his best position is still HF providing quality service to the KPF's.

 

[Gone Critical]

Again, no. His history means nothing. He should get games on merit like everyone else.

Again you are missing the point. Everyone should get games on merit. My question to you is should Russell replace Harry based on the evidence of a round 1 NAB cup match. That's what we are discussing

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

You forgot Maxwell who is the worst at it. Shaw clearly makes better decisions than Toovey, O'Brien and Maxwell imo even if he does bomb to much like the other 3. I can cop Toovey making mistakes because he's a very good defensive player, as is Shaw imo and he gives us more rebound than the other two.

The second part of your answer is my major problem with O'Brien. We overrate him as a rebounding player because his disposal and decisions aren't that good and I don't think he makes up for that in his defensive player to demand a spot in the best 22.

I'm not sure what it is with Harry.

- He can't lock players down anymore. His defensive ability has gone to shit
- His disposal is nowhere near the top tier
- He doesn't kick enough goals to be considered an attacking defender, or to make up for the plethora he costs us

I'm hoping we have the depth to put legitimate pressure on his spot in the team this year, and I also hope Bucks has the cojones to drop him if necessary.

 

[KJpie]

The problem is that he is not getting a game playing on medium forwards in front of Maxwell. If Keefe gets back the tallish players in our back six would look like Brown, Reid, Keefe, Toovey, Maxwell, O'Brien - that's way to many, especially if Goldsack is playing as a utility since he can play through there as well if needed. O'Brien and Maxwell are the worst of that group and as I said noones going to bet against the captain.

Agree, could not possibly play Brown, Reid, Keeffe, Toovey, Maxwell and O'Brien all in the same side.

O'Brien and Max may well be the worst of that group, however Max is a mile in front of Harry when it comes to all the one per centers in the game including putting his body on the line and leaving his man to assist others.

Would like to see Johnson and Seedy switched between the wings and defence pending opposition, possibly Shaw every now and then as well.

Harry to a wing as some have suggested does not work IMO, I saw enough long thoughtless bombs into the forward line last week to last a life time.

 

[KJpie]

My question to you is should Russell replace Harry based on the evidence of a round 1 NAB cup match.

I'm not privy to the majority of the discussion GC, there for I will only comment on the above.
Yes IMO.

 

[Gone Critical]

I don't think there is a need to compare Harry's cv to Russell's cv. Harry does have more runs on the board and has been a core player of the club for a long time...but he should not be given any more lattitude than anyone else. His spot is vulnerable if his form is not good. Russell's opening game for Collingwood was very good, and he will challenge for a spot in the top 22, so everyone needs to be on their game to retain their spot. If Russell's form justifies it, then he deserves his spot like anyone else. History counts for little.

.

Can't really believe you think this. A players history is the basis of all the arguments we are having about various players. People who are down on Harry or Maxwell in the thread are doing it mainly on the basis of their playing history not last Fridy nights game. When Lynch is immediately named as our CHF it is mainly on the basis of his history at WCE not on what happens in the NAB cup.

Pendles could play 4 shockers in the NAB cup and no one would question his spot in the team. Why ? Because of his history of long standing elite performance. That's why the comparison of say Harrys and Russells CV counts. Harry hasn't been dropped in many years, he has a large body of performance to be judged by. That counts. If he doesn't perform by all means drop him, he doesn't have a guarantee. But lets wait for that to happen before we drop him.

Now that there are a number of posters here who clearly have a differece of opinion to the Collingwood match committee on Harry's worth is an altoghether different question

 

[KJpie]

I also hope Bucks has the cojones to drop him if necessary.

Don't worry about Buck's SE, he has "cojones" the size of water melons.

 

[KJpie]

Really? Shaw?

He, Toovey and Harry are currently in a contest for who can be the most ineffective kicking it out of there.

Shaw'ly Shaw is in front of the other 2 when it comes to all round kicking skills SE, you don't see Toov's or Harry kicking out from FB to often.

On top of that Shaw and Toov's have an advantage in that they can continually close down some of the best opposition forwards going around.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Shaw'ly Shaw is in front of the other 2 when it comes to all round kicking skills SE, you don't see Toov's or Harry kicking out from FB to often.

On top of that Shaw and Toov's have an advantage in that they can continually close down some of the best opposition forwards going around.

He's in front, but not by a whole lot.

He's an all round better player, but purely on kicking out of the defensive region, they're pretty close. The 3 of them kick out on the full A LOT. Watch the 2010 Prelim again, even Cometti has noticed it from Shaw for a while as far back as then.

 

[jonbe54]

Ed you need to keep in mind that we have been boundary hugging for ages, the more you hug the boundary the more often mistakes will be made. It's simply not possible to fill your side with elite disposers and when boundary hugging permanently - as we have been doing - the lesser lights will always make mistakes.

It's terribly frustrating to put it over the line when your team has possession but every team does it and again the boundary line play worsens the problem.

 

[forwardflanker]

Ed you need to keep in mind that we have been boundary hugging for ages, the more you hug the boundary the more often mistakes will be made. It's simply not possible to fill your side with elite disposers and when boundary hugging permanently - as we have been doing - the lesser lights will always make mistakes.

It's terribly frustrating to put it over the line when your team has possession but every team does it and again the boundary line play worsens the problem.

Works the other way imo. One of the reasons why we kept boundary hugging in 2012 is because our back 6 and mids lacked the footskills to be trusted with going through the center. If Toovey or Shaw or Maxwell kick it out on the full it's just a turn over, if they turn it over in the middle of the ground it usual results in a goal. The downside of boundary hugging is its predictable and way to easy for good sides to defend against.

 

[KJpie]

He's in front, but not by a whole lot.

He's an all round better player, but purely on kicking out of the defensive region, they're pretty close. The 3 of them kick out on the full A LOT. Watch the 2010 Prelim again, even Cometti has noticed it from Shaw for a while as far back as then.

The difference is Shaw is a sound kick until he tries to kick the cover of the ball, Toov's and Harry (more so) are average most of the time.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Again you are missing the point. Everyone should get games on merit. My question to you is should Russell replace Harry based on the evidence of a round 1 NAB cup match. That's what we are discussing

I think we can play both, with Harry playing further up the ground

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Ed you need to keep in mind that we have been boundary hugging for ages, the more you hug the boundary the more often mistakes will be made. It's simply not possible to fill your side with elite disposers and when boundary hugging permanently - as we have been doing - the lesser lights will always make mistakes.

It's terribly frustrating to put it over the line when your team has possession but every team does it and again the boundary line play worsens the problem.

Boundary line play is a tactic that is used to limit turnovers

 

[KJpie]

One of the reasons why we kept boundary hugging in 2012 is because our back 6 and mids lacked the footskills to be trusted with going through the center.
turn it over in the middle of the ground it usual results in a goal.

Boundary hugging itself requires skill by foot, something our 2010/ 11 teams did well amongst other aspects. For mine other teams have taken foot skills and game plans to another level whilst our skills have stagnated for a number of reasons.

Yes turning the footy over in the center is worse than doing so on the boundary, however possession is King in the modern game and a kick out on the full will more than often result in a quick transfer of play from the opposition and ultimately come back to bite you on the arse more times than not.

I would suggest that when selection between players is a 50/50 kicking efficiency may decide who plays seniors Vrs playing in the VFL.

 

[jonbe54]

Works the other way imo. One of the reasons why we kept boundary hugging in 2012 is because our back 6 and mids lacked the footskills to be trusted with going through the center. If Toovey or Shaw or Maxwell kick it out on the full it's just a turn over, if they turn it over in the middle of the ground it usual results in a goal. The downside of boundary hugging is its predictable and way to easy for good sides to defend against.

It's a self reinforcing cycle FF, glad bucks has dared to turn away from the boundary line crutch.

 

[Avatar]

I would suggest that when selection between players is a 50/50 kicking efficiency may decide who plays seniors Vrs playing in the VFL.

Of course that is likely the case but it would be very rare for the decision to be 50/50 in regards to everything bar kicking efficiency

 

[jonbe54]

Boundary line play is a tactic that is used to limit turnovers

And results in more loss of possession - not turnovers - due to boundary proximity.

 

[jonbe54]

Lots of boundary line play worshippers here, its a dual edged sword guys. What happens when a player slightly misses his target midfield? There's a chance he can run onto it and regain possession for the team, what happens when the same happens on the boundary? Loss of possession of course. What happens when the ball is punched away in a marking contest mid field? Again its possible for our player to regain the pill. What happens with a punch away on the boundary? Again loss of possession.

No such thing as a perfect tactic.

 

[Avatar]

I noticed a tactic Bucks was trialling on Friday to move away from the boundary style.

Put Young on the wing not favouring left footers, he will be naturally inclined to re-direct to the middle. Think he did this with his very first kick, was funny how easily he managed to get on his left, not sure who the bulldogs player was who he got around.

 

[KJpie]

I think we can play both, with Harry playing further up the ground

You've got to be kidding. His skills and marking are questionable in the back line so we move him to a wing or forward. His only minimal value in the forward line is to receive a handball from outside 50 for a shot at goal, something he can do playing in defence as in the past.

We already have Caf and Goldy possibly fighting for one position and both can play HF, HB & wing; add to that Paine who would be a far better forward option.

 

[KJpie]

Of course that is likely the case but it would be very rare for the decision to be 50/50 in regards to everything bar kicking efficiency

Absolutely.

 

[KJpie]

Boundary line play is a tactic that is used to limit turnovers

I thought it was a safety first option, how does it limit turnovers?

 

[jonbe54]

I thought it was a safety first option, how does it limit turnovers?

If the ball goes over the line in a contest the opposition doesn't gain possession KJ. So lower turnovers but higher possession losses.