Snoops Annual List Strategy incl Trade & DRAFT targets

[doodles98]

I'm wondering what people see as our most pressing list needs.

Myself I want Dangerfield to sort our midfield issues but as that's unlikely I think Treloar will also help solve them.
I want Yarran to solve our rebounding issues.
I want a speedy mid-forward but since Motlop is signed and we don't want Bennell because of off field issues I can't see another player on the market that suits.
I don't think we need Kreuzer and I don't think we need Aish, except maybe if we lose Freeman.
And I want to avoid using our 2016 first rounder to get all this, so I would be keen on trading Witts for a pick around 16-20 that we would use to get Yarran.

Thanks for the summary. But before I could comment I might need you to expand and flesh out your ideas a bit more for me though. I am with you here mostly but I think Treloar is a better catch than Danger for us in the long run. I would have loved either Bennell or Motlop too as they would really fit a need, what about Jetta from Sydney? Yarran fits a need but you have to wonder about him fitting into a Buckley team with his tendency to sulk and not give his all. We also have a few youngsters who could really grow to make this position their own (Oxley, Berg) Carlisle similarly would have bee a perfect fit for the team but his attitude has ruled him out. I think a Carlisle type who can play key forward or back would be huge for our list... rare specimens though. Howe maybe?

 

[Axl the great]

I'm wondering what people see as our most pressing list needs.

Myself I want Dangerfield to sort our midfield issues but as that's unlikely I think Treloar will also help solve them.
I want Yarran to solve our rebounding issues.
I want a speedy mid-forward but since Motlop is signed and we don't want Bennell because of off field issues I can't see another player on the market that suits.
I don't think we need Kreuzer and I don't think we need Aish, except maybe if we lose Freeman.
And I want to avoid using our 2016 first rounder to get all this, so I would be keen on trading Witts for a pick around 16-20 that we would use to get Yarran.

 

[mike123]

If you put Trav in Blair's position on those occasions, he take a lot more grabs.

Thing is Blair doesn't attract the double team that Trav does.

 

[Vankri]

Thanks for the summary. But before I could comment I might need you to expand and flesh out your ideas a bit more for me though. I am with you here mostly but I think Treloar is a better catch than Danger for us in the long run. I would have loved either Bennell or Motlop too as they would really fit a need, what about Jetta from Sydney? Yarran fits a need but you have to wonder about him fitting into a Buckley team with his tendency to sulk and not give his all. We also have a few youngsters who could really grow to make this position their own (Oxley, Berg) Carlisle similarly would have bee a perfect fit for the team but his attitude has ruled him out. I think a Carlisle type who can play key forward or back would be huge for our list... rare specimens though. Howe maybe?

I think Danger is a better fit because of his elite speed in our midfield that lacks a strong offensive weapon, but at the end of day what we need is a top end mid and Treloar is that too, although more as an in and out all-rounder.

With culture, if we're confident that the changes we made since Bucks took over have created a strong an healthy culture, then taking in players like Yarran who don't have major issues shouldn't be a problem. But anyway it's looking more and more likely he's off to Richmond unfortunately.

I don't think we're in a dire need of another tall. Most teams play with 2 tall forwards only and we have the options of having Brown, Frost, Marsh and Reid there (with Keeffe perhaps back in 2017) and as for forwards we have Cloke, Moore, White, and again Reid (and perhaps Cox in time as a ruck forward). If you're looking for a versatile third tall the answer is Scharenberg, I think his strong marking ability will allow him to be swung forward if need be as well. I would much rather us get a speedy half forward with x factor.

 

[mike123]

I think Danger is a better fit because of his elite speed in our midfield that lacks a strong offensive weapon, but at the end of day what we need is a top end mid and Treloar is that too, although more as an in and out all-rounder.

I like Dangers speed, but most of ball he gets is inside contested possesions, which were first for. Treloar finds it more on the outside and isn't exactly slow himself.

 

[ThePhantom777]

I like Dangers speed, but most of ball he gets is inside contested possesions, which were first for. Treloar finds it more on the outside and isn't exactly slow himself.

Yep, watched a bit of Treloar he gets in good spots inside and outside.

 

[Vicky Park]

I honestly think that our forward line issues are a system and structure issue, as opposed to a player issue. There was never any space for guys to move.

Why cant we resolve this? Its been a festering sore for several years now.

In 2010, Bucks was the forwards coach and many credit him with the successful structure and setup of that year. Mick, in his infinite wisdom, removed Bucks from the role in 2011, and I cant recall who replaced him, but given we had the highest percentage in history(?), the forward structure obviously worked - we were also still playing the press.

Then we had Lappin in charge for 3 years, and many blame him for the onset of our forward line woes.

Then Grace got the gig for 2015, and the forward line worked well for about half this season, and then fell apart. Jamie lost form, White got dropped, and Cloke was Cloke. I think Fas was close to our best forward in the second half of this season, with little cameos and glimpses of the future from Moore.

Have we - over the last 4 years - had a perfect storm of ineffectual forward line coaching, players losing form and being injured, a declining Cloke, and disappointing results from Dawes, Qstick, PK and Gault?

 

[dayna36]

I am at a loss as to who we blame about our problems in the forward line .. The structure and game plan in 2010 was all based on pressure .. We tackled and harassed like rabid dogs .. But then how do we explain the yips or inability to kick goals??? It's like the virus in The Walking Dead It spreads through everyone just about .. Fasolo can take a strong contested grab but lately even his kicking has deteriorated .. Billy? Pendles? Blair? Crisp is better on the run .. I'm at a loss .. Shouldn't we be trying to get a good established forward in there to help Clokey or will we just persevere with Jesse, REIDY etc????
if only Reid could remain fit and uninjured

 

[MagpieBat]

Why cant we resolve this? Its been a festering sore for several years now.

In 2010, Bucks was the forwards coach and many credit him with the successful structure and setup of that year. Mick, in his infinite wisdom, removed Bucks from the role in 2011, and I cant recall who replaced him, but given we had the highest percentage in history(?), the forward structure obviously worked - we were also still playing the press.

Then we had Lappin in charge for 3 years, and many blame him for the onset of our forward line woes.

Matthew Lappin. Was signed in the 2010 off-season, was forwards coach in 2011 as well as 2012 to 2014.

 

[soreplums]

Promote Tapping as forward line coach.

 

[Snoop Dog]

Its a real issue the forward 50 structure and not sure it is a quick fix. large part of it would get fixed if Cloke and White could influence a game and a few others like Elliott, Blair, Fas could demand the footy as alternate options. I reckon Elliott loves getting sucked up the ground, Blair thinks he is 6 foot and Fas has all the tools but needs to do it vs the best.

 

[frizzle]

Promote Tapping as forward line coach.

With our current game plan it wont matter who is the forward line coach. There are no players inside our forward 50 most of the time to coach.
Hmmmmm - Sounds like my kind of job.

 

[mike123]

Its a real issue the forward 50 structure and not sure it is a quick fix. large part of it would get fixed if Cloke and White could influence a game and a few others like Elliott, Blair, Fas could demand the footy as alternate options. I reckon Elliott loves getting sucked up the ground, Blair thinks he is 6 foot and Fas has all the tools but needs to do it vs the best.

I think fixing the structure would help Cloke and White influence games.

 

[Kappa]

I think fixing the structure would help Cloke and White influence games.

If either of them had the guts to kick goals when they feel pressure it would help them influence games too

 

[sr36]

Why cant we resolve this? Its been a festering sore for several years now.

My take is that we are obsessed with the concept of forward pressure and locking the ball in our forward line, therefore we clog up the space to make it difficult for opposition teams to exit. This results in no space for our forwards to operate in or lead into. When someone has the ball 70-80 metres out, it's astonishing and dysfunctional how many stationary players we have in our forward 50.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

My take is that we are obsessed with the concept of forward pressure and locking the ball in our forward line, therefore we clog up the space to make it difficult for opposition teams to exit. This results in no space for our forwards to operate in or lead into. When someone has the ball 70-80 metres out, it's astonishing and dysfunctional how many stationary players we have in our forward 50.

It's something I've always thought for a long time.

I see our midfield get blamed for the "delivery" a lot. Don't get me wrong, I've seen some terrible entries over the years, but honestly? I don't think we have many forward that actually know how, when and where to lead. Cloke included.

So because of this, our mids just bomb it in and hope for the best. Then when a forward actually DOES manage to make a decent lead, our mids have no idea what to do with themselves because they weren't expecting it. I think our mids also need to force their hand a bit. If you see space in front of Cloke, don't wait for Cloke to lead to it, FORCE him to lead into it by placing your kick there. If that doesn't get him moving, then the problem is clearly with our forwards and has nothing to do with the mids.

It's no coincidence that Fas was comfortably pretty much the only forward our mids were hitting up on the lead with any sort of regularity. He was the only one actually leading.

 

[Buena]

My take is that we are obsessed with the concept of forward pressure and locking the ball in our forward line, therefore we clog up the space to make it difficult for opposition teams to exit. This results in no space for our forwards to operate in or lead into. When someone has the ball 70-80 metres out, it's astonishing and dysfunctional how many stationary players we have in our forward 50.

Well said. Imagine if Cloke, Billy and Fasolo - all strong over head marks - had space to lead into inside 50. Instead, we have to bang and hope, because there are 25+ bodies in our forward line. Hitting a needle in a haystack is not easy.

A side like Hawthorn who create space inside 50, and deliver it lace out, make the game look so easy at times.

 

[DaVe86]

A lot of our forward line issues have stemmed from playing too many negative type players up forward.

In recent years it was not uncommon to see goldsack, blair and sinclair up there.

Bucks made the decision this year that you wouldnt play forward unless you had scoreboard impact. So we saw goldsack and sinclair go to defence.

It started well. Even blair was hitting the scoreboard.

But when elliott and cloke went down, the forward line lost its bite and became reliant on make shift structures. Fasolo was pretty good really.

In the first half of the year, we were the highest ranked team for marks inside 50. So there was clearly a good setup in place. I think we slowly began allowing our opposition to move the ball out of our forward 50 too easy though.

I think we also suffered mid year from playing 2 ruckmen who cant play forward. It made our team slow and too easy to rebound against.

The names on paper are good. I think the emregence of moore is the missing piece of the puzzle. He can just about play any position on the field.

Id just love an eddie betts type. Either that or a jack gunston. That probably completes us.

 

[Matt_352]

A lot of our forward line issues have stemmed from playing too many negative type players up forward.

In recent years it was not uncommon to see goldsack, blair and sinclair up there.

Bucks made the decision this year that you wouldnt play forward unless you had scoreboard impact. So we saw goldsack and sinclair go to defence.

It started well. Even blair was hitting the scoreboard.

But when elliott and cloke went down, the forward line lost its bite and became reliant on make shift structures. Fasolo was pretty good really.

In the first half of the year, we were the highest ranked team for marks inside 50. So there was clearly a good setup in place. I think we slowly began allowing our opposition to move the ball out of our forward 50 too easy though.

I think we also suffered mid year from playing 2 ruckmen who cant play forward. It made our team slow and too easy to rebound against.

The names on paper are good. I think the emregence of moore is the missing piece of the puzzle. He can just about play any position on the field.

Id just love an eddie betts type. Either that or a jack gunston. That probably completes us.

Need a Betts and Gunston type

 

[Snoop Dog]

A lot of our forward line issues have stemmed from playing too many negative type players up forward.

In recent years it was not uncommon to see goldsack, blair and sinclair up there.

Bucks made the decision this year that you wouldnt play forward unless you had scoreboard impact. So we saw goldsack and sinclair go to defence.

It started well. Even blair was hitting the scoreboard.

But when elliott and cloke went down, the forward line lost its bite and became reliant on make shift structures. Fasolo was pretty good really.

In the first half of the year, we were the highest ranked team for marks inside 50. So there was clearly a good setup in place. I think we slowly began allowing our opposition to move the ball out of our forward 50 too easy though.

I think we also suffered mid year from playing 2 ruckmen who cant play forward. It made our team slow and too easy to rebound against.

The names on paper are good. I think the emregence of moore is the missing piece of the puzzle. He can just about play any position on the field.

Id just love an eddie betts type. Either that or a jack gunston. That probably completes us.

Spot on. Has Jeremy Howe name been raised. Probably not going to happen but he was v v v good up front against us during the year

 

[Justlokan]

Need a Betts and Gunston type

makes me wonder if we'd done more to persist with Karnezis. I guess we'll never know

 

[Unknown Identity]

Given the amount of players off our list we need a couple of mature age recruits to help with depth.

Jed Adcock and Shane Yarran i would throw a couple of list spots to given the lack of talent in this draft.

I'd also look at Mitch Brown.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Given the amount of players off our list we need a couple of mature age recruits to help with depth.

Jed Adcock and Shane Yarran i would throw a couple of list spots to given the lack of talent in this draft.

I'd also look at Mitch Brown.

None of the players delisted added much to our depth, if they were ever selected we would have had so many injuries our year would be shot anyway

We turn over about the same amount of players EVERY year

 

[Quicky]

Given the amount of players off our list we need a couple of mature age recruits to help with depth.

Jed Adcock and Shane Yarran i would throw a couple of list spots to given the lack of talent in this draft.

I'd also look at Mitch Brown.

Shane Yarran is the clever list fit there.

I like Mitch Brown too. I would love for Cloke to have some selection pressure and for us to have a post Cloke plan.

 

[northpie]

Mitch brown would be an interesting one if Moore can develop a bit more bulk to do the pinch hitting role int eh ruck
For mine I agree with snoop that we have had too much focus on defensive forward players which has made us one dimensional when moving ball into forward 50.
Another issue is a lack of true crumbers in the fed line with our small Feds flying too frequently against our KPF ( Fasolo worse than Elliott in this aspect)
Round 1 next year you would expect a fed line up of
Swan Cloke Varcoe
Moore White Elliott with Fasolo rotating off bench
Looks solid enough but probably lacking some outright speed and crumbling ability
Is Broomhead one who could fit the crumbing role I not sure but does seem to be able to create something out of nothing
Who comes out for him? Has to be Fasolo or Elliott which seems unlikely?
Anyone else come to mind either on the list or another team or in draft

Andersen from the Hawks?
Interested in anyone's thoughts?