Autopsy Round 6, 2023 : Positives and Negatives v Port Adelaide

[DanWCE]

I don’t think the Gaff criticism is out of place.

It’s all relative. If he was on a contract more befitting of his contributions it would be fine. Similar comments can be made of McGovern, but at least when he’s fit, he performs to a high standard.

Gaff is going okay at times but he’s way too costly for the value he brings.

Should we not then criticize the club, not the player? He got that long term deal when he was ripping sides apart. He was far and away the best winger in the league, and he was being heavily poached to leave as we approached our premiership window.

Gaff turns up each week, he plays injured, he cannot be accused of phoning it in ever. But the long term deal has exposed the limitations in his body and his game as the style has changed. That's not really on him.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Should we not then criticize the club, not the player? He got that long term deal when he was ripping sides apart. He was far and away the best winger in the league, and he was being heavily poached to leave as we approached our premiership window.

Gaff turns up each week, he plays injured, he cannot be accused of phoning it in ever. But the long term deal has exposed the limitations in his body and his game as the style has changed. That's not really on him.

I think that's completely fair. I don't think he's phoning it in. I do think he makes errors that a player of his experience and role shouldn't. Maybe that's where he's at now with his body. But while he's on the big cash I don't think it's unreasonable to expect/hope for more.

 

[DanWCE]

I think that's completely fair. I don't think he's phoning it in. I do think he makes errors that a player of his experience and role shouldn't. Maybe that's where he's at now with his body. But while he's on the big cash I don't think it's unreasonable to expect/hope for more.

Calling for the cheap kicks on his wrong side does my **** in. Maybe it's him trying to take on the responsibility when surrounded by youth, but it restricts our offensive flow.

With all that said, after last year I was expecting very little from Gaff. It was a depressing consideration that we would have someone who portrayed so much talent just slip away. What we've got from him this year is a positive and more than I anticipated. It doesn't equate to his contract value but it's closed the gap on 2022.

 

[DanWCE]

Wow, we can't say t!ts. I blame Jack Watts

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Calling for the cheap kicks on his wrong side does my **** in. Maybe it's him trying to take on the responsibility when surrounded by youth, but it restricts our offensive flow.

With all that said, after last year I was expecting very little from Gaff. It was a depressing consideration that we would have someone who portrayed so much talent just slip away. What we've got from him this year is a positive and more than I anticipated. It doesn't equate to his contract value but it's closed the gap on 2022.

Interesting hypothetical question re: Gaff for yourself and anyone else with an opinion also.

If Gaff was OOC this year, would you re-sign him? And if so, how much for per year?

 

[DanWCE]

Interesting hypothetical question re: Gaff for yourself and anyone else with an opinion also.

If Gaff was OOC this year, would you re-sign him? And if so, how much for per year?

Sheesh. Based on current form and durability I probably would, given those around his age are breaking down. He is an on field leader with his knowledge and his toughness.

I wouldn't have him go on for more than 400-500k though, with an overall list management view that we would have others retire, play a youth heavy team (most of which are not yet commanding top dollar) and banking 5% of TPP with intentions to lure over a big name in a couple of years.

 

[Godfather32]

Interesting hypothetical question re: Gaff for yourself and anyone else with an opinion also.

If Gaff was OOC this year, would you re-sign him? And if so, how much for per year?

Given our list position yes, 1 year contracts only on $400k-ish.
If Redden had of stayed on no.

 

[Campaigner for good]

Genuine question. Who has been a better value long term high dollar signing. Gaff or Gov? Gov's best is still unquestionably elite, but he misses a lot of games.

 

[ArdentEagle]

I must be the only one on this board that thought TK wasn't brilliant. He had a fair few clangers and was pissing me off a bit.

 

[Rowan18]

Depends what you specialise in also.

One of my friends is a junior paediatric doctor and she's basically said don't bother asking her anything outside of her field, because she'll have no idea.

Obviously there's shared general knowledge but you're not going to take the advise of a GP over a doctor specialised in sports injuries.

I remember when I was playing footy, nearly 20 years ago. I had a lower leg injury above my ankle. Went to the doc and got diagnosed as tendonitis and advised to take anti-inflammatories.

Fast forward 7 weeks, still in pain. Went back to the GP and saw a different doctor, who sent me next door to the x-ray clinic. Turns out my fibula was actually clean broken but had luckily healed properly.

So yeah, not personally going to take the advice of a 'doctor' on sports injuries unless they specialise in that field.

Yep - no different to an engineer or a solicitor. I'm not going to take tax law advice from an environmental law solicitor.

We saw the medical thing during COVID. A whole heap of nurses, neuro surgeons etc coming out of the woodwork and telling us stuff like everyone was going to die or not to lockdown etc. Even with epidemiologists, the only ones worth listening too were those who specialised in coronaviruses. In hindsight, they were also the ones talking about the risks of air-conditioning and enclosed spaces, which no-one wanted to hear about initially.

 

[Rowan18]

Calling for the cheap kicks on his wrong side does my **** in. Maybe it's him trying to take on the responsibility when surrounded by youth, but it restricts our offensive flow.

With all that said, after last year I was expecting very little from Gaff. It was a depressing consideration that we would have someone who portrayed so much talent just slip away. What we've got from him this year is a positive and more than I anticipated. It doesn't equate to his contract value but it's closed the gap on 2022.

The big contracts we handed out around 2018/2019 were almost like a kiss of death. They all seemed pretty reasonable at the time (with Gaff being a bit iffy but I was happy to keep him), but only a couple have worked out:
-Gov/Shuey/Yeo - have each missed about 50% of games due to injury and can't get back on the park
-Gaff - form has gone to shit and it doesn't look like injury is the core problem
-Nic Nat had his knee injury but then 2AA seasons. It's his 2 year extension that might be questionable (but the money might not be huge)

Darling is the only clear win who stayed on the park and earned his cash. Maybe JK too, if his rolling 1 year deals were still decent money.

 

[THE A5]

Rotham is like Schofield pre 2015. It was only after he was forced to play as a permanent full back he bulked up and became stronger on the tall forwards.

Schofield had physicallity/mongrel which some players don’t have and I vaguely tecall pre 2015 he did play on talls at times did way better than rotham has

 

[Mudguts12]

Genuine question. Who has been a better value long term high dollar signing. Gaff or Gov? Gov's best is still unquestionably elite, but he misses a lot of games.

Gaff will have played roughly 40 more games than Gov since their contract signings in early 18, and Gov is on around $200k more per season than Gaff.

I'd still back Gov though as being better value due to 2018 finals, being a genuine match winner, mentorship to Barrass who is elite in his own right now, and having managed to more or less maintain his form since 2018.

Gaff, whilst being durable as hell, has been progressively left behind more and more with the pace of the game since 2018 and imo has led the charge with the weak footy we've been subject to since 2021 (He's lifted his intensity more in the last few games than I've seen from him in years though so kudos to him there).

He arguably would've been cut Priddis style if we were in contention for the top 8 due to his limitations. Elite running/fitness doesn't cut it any more, everyone in the comp has that now.

 

[WCE_phil]

Should we not then criticize the club, not the player? He got that long term deal when he was ripping sides apart. He was far and away the best winger in the league, and he was being heavily poached to leave as we approached our premiership window.

Gaff turns up each week, he plays injured, he cannot be accused of phoning it in ever. But the long term deal has exposed the limitations in his body and his game as the style has changed. That's not really on him.

Thats not fair on the club either. They didn't know of all the rule changes when coming up with the contract and even if they did, they couldn't have foreseen how it would have made his role and how he performed his given role at the time redundant.

Now what would have been really beneficial to us is if Gaff decided not to take the option of the extra 4 years and then taken free agency at the end of 2020. We would have got tier 1 compensation which would have netted us pick 13 as after finals we finished 7th. (which astonishingly would have turned into pick 19, **** I hate priority picks and the academies. Particularly at that stage when all bids could be matched.

Here's not to say the club doesn't **** up that draft pick but we'd also have a shitload more salary cap space. (I strongly believe the club would have tried to pick up a player who was an outside leaning player and potentially from WA)

Gaff stayed on with us, on a contract that was for less than what he was offered to go back home and play for North. That means we at the time paid under market value. It's not Gaff's fault or the clubs fault that the AFL rule changes basically ruined our game plan and Gaffs role within the side. Sure it means we are now stuck with Gaff and we can debate his role and production in the side but the club at the end of 2018 didn't make the wrong decision.

We won the Grand final and looked to be adding Gaff, Shep and Nicnat into that premiership side as well as the 'potential' future development of Venables.

In the end it comes down to this. The AFL / rules committee ****ed us.

 

[DanWCE]

Thats not fair on the club either. They didn't know of all the rule changes when coming up with the contract and even if they did, they couldn't have foreseen how it would have made his role and how he performed his given role at the time redundant.

Now what would have been really beneficial to us is if Gaff decided not to take the option of the extra 4 years and then taken free agency at the end of 2020. We would have got tier 1 compensation which would have netted us pick 13 as after finals we finished 7th. (which astonishingly would have turned into pick 19, * I hate priority picks and the academies. Particularly at that stage when all bids could be matched.

Here's not to say the club doesn't * up that draft pick but we'd also have a shitload more salary cap space. (I strongly believe the club would have tried to pick up a player who was an outside leaning player and potentially from WA)

Gaff stayed on with us, on a contract that was for less than what he was offered to go back home and play for North. That means we at the time paid under market value. It's not Gaff's fault or the clubs fault that the AFL rule changes basically ruined our game plan and Gaffs role within the side. Sure it means we are now stuck with Gaff and we can debate his role and production in the side but the club at the end of 2018 didn't make the wrong decision.

We won the Grand final and looked to be adding Gaff, Shep and Nicnat into that premiership side as well as the 'potential' future development of Venables.

In the end it comes down to this. The AFL / rules committee ****ed us.

Good points. And I'd add to that the rules which the AFL changed on the fly didn't just disadvantage Gaff, but disadvantaged our style of play entirely. They went chips in with the Tigers rugby style. Thankfully coaches like McRae have been able to further evolve that into something far more aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Bender_]

I must be the only one on this board that thought TK wasn't brilliant. He had a fair few clangers and was pissing me off a bit.

If you check the votes thread you'll see you're far from alone.

 

[Mudguts12]

Good points. And I'd add to that the rules which the AFL changed on the fly didn't just disadvantage Gaff, but disadvantaged our style of play entirely. They went chips in with the Tigers rugby style. Thankfully coaches like McRae have been able to further evolve that into something far more aesthetically pleasing.

I dunno, I think rule changes or not, our game plan was well and truly cooked by late 2021.

After 5 years of executing it, our ability to play contested footy progressively got worse.

After Port Adelaide picked us apart in 2019, other teams followed suit. WCE found it increasingly more difficult to get the game back on their own terms as they couldn't get their hands on the footy.

 

[ArdentEagle]

Wow!!! It's obviously time I take a good hard look at myself in the mirror.
I don't normally give shit about reactions but a thumbs down from xInfected_Virus

Time I take stock of my life...Me and my shitty TK attitude

 

[xInfected_Virus]

Wow!!! It's obviously time I take a good hard look at myself in the mirror.
I don't normally give s**t about reactions but a thumbs down from xInfected_Virus

Time I take stock of my life...Me and my shitty TK attitude

View attachment 1670055

TK has been great this season, heck he may even be in AA form and having to carry this young midfield when the senior players are injured, he's going to get more attention which will make his disposals more under pressure since he's being asked to play as the main mid or more likely the primary extractor which isn't the most optimal position for TK since TK operates best as a second or third receiver type mid especially with Nic Nat, Shuey and Yeo injured plus our other mids are young and still developing such as Ginbey. To be fair he does lead the league in clangers with 36 but Oliver and Wines are both second with 34 each at the time of this post.

If Kelly has more support and isn't being asked to carry the midfield I'm sure the clangers will reduce. His clanger rates weren't as bad in 2020 and 2021 when we had Nic Nat (in AA form) and Shuey and Yeo available even though the latter two have been having injury issues in 2020 and 2021 but they were available nonetheless even though it wasn't for every game. He was really bad with his clangar rates in 2022 though since teams are tagging him more then but then the team as a whole bad with the club's outdated stale gameplan and injuries and COVID but I think the rot began after the 2021 bye.

What pisses me off more is Gaff's lack of penetrating kicking and his refusing to use his right foot when it's the best time to (he does sometimes use his right but mainly in pressure situations). He used to be elite at kicking inside 50 but now he's lost that ability and his lack of burst and speed forces him into disposing it under pressure compared to a more explosive mid who can get separation and have extra time to make a decision. Worst when he demands a handball on his wrong side only to waste precious seconds getting onto his left, by then he's already tackled, having to hack kick it forward blindly or the forwards leading space gets shut down by a zoning defender.

TK will be crucial in leading this new brigade midfield in years to come especially when the senior guys like Shuey retires. Hopefully guys like Ginbey and Hewitt or even Culley become the team's primary extractor or even BBBW for that matter like he shown in the Port game for TK to operate at his best.

 

[DanWCE]

I dunno, I think rule changes or not, our game plan was well and truly cooked by late 2021.

After 5 years of executing it, our ability to play contested footy progressively got worse.

After Port Adelaide picked us apart in 2019, other teams followed suit. WCE found it increasingly more difficult to get the game back on their own terms as they couldn't get their hands on the footy.

Yep. Call it rule changes/resistance to adapt to rule changes. In fairness, if I developed a plan to chop teams like the Tigers apart and win a flag, I too would be reluctant to bin it all prematurely. The evolution of our game plan came slowly, but the execution was possibly slower still, given some players are still reverting.

 

[WCE_phil]

The club was already partially rolling out the current gameplan in the second half of 2021. In the games where we rolled it out in the first half or start of quarters we got monstered, when we tried in the back half of games and quarters we did pretty well.

Either way how does that go into the decision making on Gaffs contract at the 2018 when no-one at West Coast could have conceived we would be royally ****ed by rule changes and it would destroy Gaffs role. With Gaffs lack of penetration on his kicking and low speed the stand rule / players standing 5 metres back from the mark has killed what he was elite at. Running his body into the ground last year (because we/he basically had no other option) and now wearing career saver boots has made the situation even worse.

He has however played some decent quality footy in a different role in a struggling side and always gives 100%

Now with a fully fit best 22 I don't see Gaff in it and my posting history will show that, but here I am being the one defending him and the club. Who'd have thought.

 

[Balls In]

The club was already partially rolling out the current gameplan in the second half of 2021.

During the second half of 2021 we produced some of the worst footy in WCE history, and here in 2023 we still are.

 

[RedWeddingGuest]

Jeez, there’s a lot of tosh being bandied about on this Board atm. Gov, Gaff, Yeo… even TK. Wouldn’t it be bloody fantastic if we (and the Club) had a crystal bloody ball! There’s always room for disagreement (about EVERYTHING, if this forum is anything to go by), but the Club did what it thought was best. Who’s to say Gaff or TK won’t get injured next? I’ve mentioned Dermott Brereton’s analogy before: your car is getting older, not running as smoothly as it used to and starting to need some repairs – do you trade it in for a new (or newer) car while it still has some value, or do you keep driving it until it conks out and has no value? I reckon trade it in while you still can; others aggressively disagree. On that basis, I reckon we should have traded Gaff while we still could. Trading senior players while they still have value prevents log jams: junior players move to be mid-range players, mid-range players have a chance of taking the next step etc. Sometimes junior players can take pretty big strides. Look at BBW: he’s improving every game because he has to, and because – very, very regrettably – a major impediment to his on field development is not currently there. Whether I’m right or wrong, you have to have some sort of guiding principle. Hawthorn does it the right way, for mine. I know, I know, plenty of you reckon that’s horse s**t etc etc, but we’ll see which club benefits from its rebuild soonest.

Oh, and I’m not a doctor (or a tax lawyer).

 

[Godfather32]

Jeez, there’s a lot of tosh being bandied about on this Board atm. Gov, Gaff, Yeo… even TK. Wouldn’t it be bloody fantastic if we (and the Club) had a crystal bloody ball! There’s always room for disagreement (about EVERYTHING, if this forum is anything to go by), but the Club did what it thought was best. Who’s to say Gaff or TK won’t get injured next? I’ve mentioned Dermott Brereton’s analogy before: your car is getting older, not running as smoothly as it used to and starting to need some repairs – do you trade it in for a new (or newer) car while it still has some value, or do you keep driving it until it conks out and has no value? I reckon trade it in while you still can; others aggressively disagree. On that basis, I reckon we should have traded Gaff while we still could. Trading senior players while they still have value prevents log jams: junior players move to be mid-range players, mid-range players have a chance of taking the next step etc. Sometimes junior players can take pretty big strides. Look at BBW: he’s improving every game because he has to, and because – very, very regrettably – a major impediment to his on field development is not currently there. Whether I’m right or wrong, you have to have some sort of guiding principle. Hawthorn does it the right way, for mine. I know, I know, plenty of you reckon that’s horse s**t etc etc, but we’ll see which club benefits from its rebuild soonest.

Oh, and I’m not a doctor (or a tax lawyer).

Who do have that has enough value to be worth trading, isn't young enough to be part of our next finals tilt and would agree to a trade (because players have to agree to be traded)?

 

[RedWeddingGuest]

Who do have that has enough value to be worth trading, isn't young enough to be part of our next finals tilt and would agree to a trade (because players have to agree to be traded)?

That’s the question that should have been asked a couple of years ago. It’s a bit late now.