Surely Caff is not in our best 22

[mike123]

He was and remains a wonderful servant of our Club, a premiership player, somebody who has got the most out of himself. But, he's just to small and does not look he would kick 20 to 30 goals in a season so unsure of his overall value.
Tackles yes, he does that.
I just want our team to go forward with even better players.

Not saying he's a superstar or that he'd be best 22 at years end, but as of now he's form is good and a couple of injuries will see him in the side.

 

[PicaBoo]

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news...to-build-on-solid-return-20160227-gn57ni.html

 

[davywap]

Goldsack is quicker as a defensive forward, Macaffer is virtually untried as a defender and as mids they're both useless.

2 years ago 'Caff was the best shut-down player in the comp. Not the best as in could blanket a player and get a lot of ball, I just mean purely the best at taking the opposition's best player out of the game. Hardly useless.

 

[mike123]

2 years ago 'Caff was the best shut-down player in the comp. Not the best as in could blanket a player and get a lot of ball, I just mean purely the best at taking the opposition's best player out of the game. Hardly useless.

He wasn't the best. Crowley and Curnow were better than him at blanketing. Problem is blanking players is useless and going out of the game, Maccaffer himself has acknowledged that.

When Caff shuts down a player, he does't get meaningful possesions so we essential break even with the match up at best. More often than not the midfielder he tags still contributes to opposition clearances and shows he's class, and at worst we basically play a man down. We are much better off backing our midfield in or just using Crisp or Greenwood as "run with" player then going in with Caff in the middle.

 

[davywap]

He wasn't the best. Crowley and Curnow were better than him at blanketing. Problem is blanking players is useless and going out of the game, Maccaffer himself has acknowledged that.

When Caff shuts down a player, he does't get meaningful possesions so we essential break even with the match up at best. More often than not the midfielder he tags still contributes to opposition clearances and shows he's class, and at worst we basically play a man down. We are much better off backing our midfield in or just using Crisp or Greenwood as "run with" player then going in with Caff in the middle.

Not saying he should be going back to that role, just disputing the 'useless' tag you've given him. And who knows, if playing a mix of midfield/forward without the responsibility of tagging or having to play the Mick Gayfer type role he may do OK, he hasn't really been given that chance too often.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

So its the whole Kyle Martin is better than Jarryd Blair argument all over again?

From everything you see/hear coming out of the club, Caff definitely deserves to be in the leadership group (and his teammates have voted him as such).

His role on field will come down to how well he can reinvent his game (for a 3rd time) - something both he and Bucks have talked about. But if he can becoming effective again as that defensive mid-sized forward (or if we decide to go with a tagger again.... Though much less likely) then I see no reason why he doesn't at least deserve a shot, and could easily see him becoming a regular again if he can do the right things on the field.

My personal favourite was Luke Rounds is better than Tarkyn Lockyer.


Tarks is pushing 36 this year and would still pants Rounds.

 

[Knightmare]

So you put as one example Goldsack ahead of Macaffer why? If we are going be very analytical I don't accept Goldsack is that more versatile

Goldsack like Macaffer is a role player. Both in much the same age group. So the question is fair.

I don't have either in my best 22 or best 30 for that matter (Macaffer I don't have inside my best 35). Same story with Toovey and Blair (who are not inside my top 30) or White who is not in my top 35. The young talent we have is plainly better and able to do more to affect winning.

In terms of Goldsack and Macaffer and where I see the differences. Goldsack can play a role down back adequately because he can offer versatility, shut down a guy and bring something to affect the game in his tackling and pressuring game. He doesn't find much of the ball or offer much rebound, whereas we have other options who can have an impact in more stanzas of the game.

Macaffer by comparison doesn't have a single role he can in my view play adequately. As a midfielder he doesn't win nearly enough of the ball. Up forward not enough scoreboard impact. I can't advocate for any games for someone who has such a flawed and limited game.

Where all these guys fall short is that they are limited in the stanzas of the game they can have an include- ie. when ball is in dispute, on offense and on defence. On our list why I suggest our younger players have superior talent because they have more universal games ie. can offer something in more or all stanzas of the game v these over 25s who don't.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Goldsack like Macaffer is a role player. Both in much the same age group. So the question is fair.

I don't have either in my best 22 or best 30 for that matter (Macaffer I don't have inside my best 35). Same story with Toovey and Blair (who are not inside my top 30) or White who is not in my top 35. The young talent we have is plainly better and able to do more to affect winning.

In terms of Goldsack and Macaffer and where I see the differences. Goldsack can play a role down back adequately because he can offer versatility, shut down a guy and bring something to affect the game in his tackling and pressuring game. He doesn't find much of the ball or offer much rebound, whereas we have other options who can have an impact in more stanzas of the game.

Macaffer by comparison doesn't have a single role he can in my view play adequately. As a midfielder he doesn't win nearly enough of the ball. Up forward not enough scoreboard impact. I can't advocate for any games for someone who has such a flawed and limited game.

Where all these guys fall short is that they are limited in the stanzas of the game they can have an include- ie. when ball is in dispute, on offense and on defence. On our list why I suggest our younger players have superior talent because they have more universal games ie. can offer something in more or all stanzas of the game v these over 25s who don't.

What are you even basing Macaffer up forward on? He's barely played forward since the 2010 grand final.

Having him outside your best 35 is plainly ridiculous. For someone that likes to string together such wordy responses your actual read of things is pretty ****ing piss poor.

 

[mike123]

What are you even basing Macaffer up forward on? He's barely played forward since the 2010 grand final.

Having him outside your best 35 is plainly ridiculous. For someone that likes to string together such wordy responses your actual read of things is pretty ******* piss poor.

Can you tell us why its ridiculous?

 

[Pie eyed]

It was great to see McCafe slot a sneaky goal with his first touch.

 

[Smoky]

Caff being best 22 might disappoint people in this thread... but not me.

He's easily AFL senior standard and an asset to our team.

People have short memories of how good Caff is and a closed mind to how he will further our quest for a flag.

Caff will be there.

 

[Knightmare]

What are you even basing Macaffer up forward on? He's barely played forward since the 2010 grand final.

Having him outside your best 35 is plainly ridiculous. For someone that likes to string together such wordy responses your actual read of things is pretty ******* piss poor.

Make a case for Macaffer as a midfielder. Forward. Any position.

What does he offer that makes him relevant from a best 22 context?

I see squat.

No ball winning ability. No ability to find it outside. Not a marking threat inside 50. No scoreboard impact. Not a linebreaker. Poor at stoppages leaking clearances to his direct opponents. There is no point of difference that can allow him to have an impact.

Make a case rather than angrily slagging off after your Sunday night frothies.

 

[jmac70]

Make a case for Macaffer as a midfielder. Forward. Any position.

What does he offer that makes him relevant from a best 22 context?

I see squat.

No ball winning ability. No ability to find it outside. Not a marking threat inside 50. No scoreboard impact. Not a linebreaker. Poor at stoppages leaking clearances to his direct opponents. There is no point of difference that can allow him to have an impact.

Make a case rather than angrily slagging off after your Sunday night frothies.

His best attribute is his physical presence. We are a young team with players who are going to get pushed around a bit. Caff can help even that up a bit. I think he can have an impact this year on the half forward flank.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

What are you even basing Macaffer up forward on? He's barely played forward since the 2010 grand final.

Having him outside your best 35 is plainly ridiculous. For someone that likes to string together such wordy responses your actual read of things is pretty ******* piss poor.

I think your last sentence could have been left out. We can all disagree ofcourse

 

[Knightmare]

His best attribute is his physical presence. We are a young team with players who are going to get pushed around a bit. Caff can help even that up a bit. I think he can have an impact this year on the half forward flank.

The comment regarding physical presence is correct. Macaffer has a strong body certainly and will use it willingly.

My question would be without Macaffer are we lacking big bodies? I don't personally believe we are.

De Goey while only a second year player plays with an incredible attack on the footy and has the height/size. Greenwood is very strong bodied. Same with Swan. Adams plays a hard brand of footy. Williams and Maynard down back have the size and strength along with the hardness. Cloke, Reid, Brown those guys have the size. Grundy won't be intimidated. With such a contested styled team I see size/physical presence relatively to even without Macaffer to be one of our great strengths because across the list we now have great height/size with a list filled with ball winners. Relatively in recent times it has been more in the offensive ball movement - skills/pace where we have been lacking, though with our offensive transition looking very impressive through the intra club match and NAB 1, our once great weakness may not be such a weakess. Similarly with our centre clearances where we ranked 17th last year. With Grundy a year older and De Goey winning all those centre clearances and the list addition of Treloar, to go with a healthy Greenwood, we have the guys through there now to get things done.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

There seems a great paradox going on with players like Macaffer (and I include with him Blair, Toovey and Goldsack).

The want for him (them) to be top liners for us AND the paradox, wanting our team to be premiership contenders.

So can the two exist in the brutal reality of football at the highest level?

Some wish it so, they see Macaffer as this extraordinary special talent. Or to Ve fair, a strong best 22.
Alas, he's a good ordinary player (thanks Jack Dyer or your immortal label).
Macaffer top shelf club man? Absolutely. Been a great club servant? Absolutely.
But after injury and even before, a fine competent footballer but no star. And the time clock on his career is getting closer to the end. Top 22 seems gone with the sands of time.

So if we are to rise above the competition it will be the newer players to deliver the success (potentially).

Goldsack, agree his pressure game is good, solid, strong. But I just can't shake he was player 23! For the grand final 2010, the draw came, he was in, Davis out, but in truth the Sack was player 23.
Now some 6 seasons later has he become a better player. No. He does not command best 22.

Blair. Tough nut, got so much out of himself. Great tackler. But, him v Aish. No contest. Blair v Fasolo, no contest. Sorry, I just can't see Blair being integral to winning another flag. I'd rather chance my arm on Phillips as an example. Blair isn't a patch on Greenwood. He at the end for me is a depth spare player. Not even close to top 22, I'd likely rate him bottom 30. Confession, I'm just not excited by especially small players unless they are elite. Blair is not elite. And here is the kicker, if I must choose only one of these two players to stay in the list, White v Blair, I'd keep White. Not sure what that says, other than White offers more, because he's taller.

Toovey. Defender, really admire him. But no way he helps us get another flag over players like Williams, Langdon, Scharenberg (personal favourite, I so hope he gets fully fit), Maynard, even Ramsay offers more upside.

We always thank our players but the great paradox is we prefer flags and we need to constantly improve the tream.
Sometimes it's just time to say "ahem, you'll be playing at Victoria Park for a little bit...."

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Caff being best 22 might disappoint people in this thread... but not me.

He's easily AFL senior standard and an asset to our team.

People have short memories of how good Caff is and a closed mind to how he will further our quest for a flag.

Caff will be there.

Would be great for him, but begs the question how we can fit in so many players into 22?
Who gets left out for Caff?
Greenwood? Varcoe? Aish? Howe? Crisp?
It will be a tough selection decision leaving out players

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Caff being best 22 might disappoint people in this thread... but not me.

He's easily AFL senior standard and an asset to our team.

People have short memories of how good Caff is and a closed mind to how he will further our quest for a flag.

Caff will be there.

Would be great for him, but begs the question how we can fit in so many players into 22?
Who gets left out for Caff?
Greenwood? Varcoe? Aish? Howe? Crisp?
It will be a tough selection decision leaving out players

 

[didaksrightfoot]

There seems a great paradox going on with players like Macaffer (and I include with him Blair, Toovey and Goldsack).

The want for him (them) to be top liners for us AND the paradox, wanting our team to be premiership contenders.

So can the two exist in the brutal reality of football at the highest level?

Some wish it so, they see Macaffer as this extraordinary special talent. Or to Ve fair, a strong best 22.
Alas, he's a good ordinary player (thanks Jack Dyer or your immortal label).
Macaffer top shelf club man? Absolutely. Been a great club servant? Absolutely.
But after injury and even before, a fine competent footballer but no star. And the time clock on his career is getting closer to the end. Top 22 seems gone with the sands of time.

So if we are to rise above the competition it will be the newer players to deliver the success (potentially).

Goldsack, agree his pressure game is good, solid, strong. But I just can't shake he was player 23! For the grand final 2010, the draw came, he was in, Davis out, but in truth the Sack was player 23.
Now some 6 seasons later has he become a better player. No. He does not command best 22.

Blair. Tough nut, got so much out of himself. Great tackler. But, him v Aish. No contest. Blair v Fasolo, no contest. Sorry, I just can't see Blair being integral to winning another flag. I'd rather chance my arm on Phillips as an example. Blair isn't a patch on Greenwood. He at the end for me is a depth spare player. Not even close to top 22, I'd likely rate him bottom 30. Confession, I'm just not excited by especially small players unless they are elite. Blair is not elite. And here is the kicker, if I must choose only one of these two players to stay in the list, White v Blair, I'd keep White. Not sure what that says, other than White offers more, because he's taller.

Toovey. Defender, really admire him. But no way he helps us get another flag over players like Williams, Langdon, Scharenberg (personal favourite, I so hope he gets fully fit), Maynard, even Ramsay offers more upside.

We always thank our players but the great paradox is we prefer flags and we need to constantly improve the tream.
Sometimes it's just time to say "ahem, you'll be playing at Victoria Park for a little bit...."

Except that every premiership team has players like this.
The Swans won 2 flags with LRT holding down a key position. They would not have won their last flag without Mitch Morton.

The Hawks 3-peat teams has included guys like: Spangher, Schoenmakers, Suckling, Duryea, Stratten, an aging Hale and Young
Trent West and Mark Blake have both won flags for the Cats.
The Rucks for the '08 flag were Robert Campbell and Brent Renouf - who compiled a whole 21 hitouts for the match.

And all of those guys mentioned in the above post played a role in our 2010 flag - Tooves, Caff, Goldsack & Blair were all their on that saturday in october.

The fact is that not only do guys like this play a role in winning a flag - often they play a very important role. Clearly a premiership team requires star players. As much as possible you want guys who are talented and will be better than their opponent - but more than anything, you need guys that are going to play their roles and just keep outworking their opponents.

I doubt they will all still be around in our 22 if we get back to that level - but I have no doubt that if this list does continue to improve some of the guys who BF bemoan (whether it's these guys, or guys like Sinclair, Oxley, Frost etc.) will be playing important roles.

 

[jjsmitty8]

It was great to see McCafe slot a sneaky goal with his first touch.

He should get a free macaroon with next latte.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Can you tell us why its ridiculous?

We have 43 listed players available for selection on season 2016. Wyatt, Golds and Gault are currently on the rookie list and in my view are not realistic prospects as AFL level players for a sustained period of time - Gualt probably the only one likely to earn games. That brings us to 40, though personally Caff is currently ahead of Cox too, I'm being conservative though.

In terms of our senior list, Macaffer offers more comfortably than Goodyear, Oxley and Frost - direct comparisons are difficult with all three but Frost, while occasionally capable of sensational defending too often does the inexplicably stupid and I don't rate as a permanent fixture. Oxley has nice skills and pace but isn't anywhere near the ball winner Macaffer is and has shown no ability to adapt his game. Invariably then we add Wills, Crocker, Phillips, Sier and Smith. I dont know how anyone could realistically rate any more than 2 of these five prospects ahead of an AFL capable player for season 2016 - I doubt any one of them will play more games than Macaffer and would be comfortable that more than two won't debut,

Then we consider the blokes that are around the same level - White, Toovey, Blair, Goldsack, Broomhead. Broomhead probably goes ahead because of youth but realistically hasnt produced anything above Macaffer in 2010 as a defensive forward - bear in mind that while people rubbish his output of 15 goals our highest goalscorer that year was Alan Didak with around 30 IIRC. Also notwithstanding is the fact that Macaffer was outside the best 22 until round six, and managed to keep the likes of Lockyer and Medhurst out of the frame for a senior spot. Of the others I mentioned, Goldsack is your genuine 25-30 player on the list and I place him behind Macaffer in terms of impact as both a forward and a midfielder. Macaffer while slightly slower for me is a much better reader of the play, and also stronger in the contest and the better mark. I love Tooves but in a hierarchy Macaffer outranks him comfortably on their most recent exposed form (both this preseason and in their last senior stints). Blair is a trier but I don't think there's any aspect of his game besides pace and potentially crumbling ability (though Caff is no slouch here, refer 2010 GF Ii QI) that is superior to Caff. White and Caff don't play remotely similar roles so are had to compare but I would suggest Caff is likely to have more impact on a high intensity, down to the wire type game so gets the nod for me. That puts him, at very worst in front of 13 blokes and I haven't included blokes like Marsh and Cox who have not established themselves at all as permanent features in our side. At worst he is a 30 prospect and I personally have him in our 22 for round one given our spate of injured players.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I think your last sentence could have been left out. We can all disagree ofcourse

I'd argue the same of his post.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Happy Birthday Brent.
A leap year lad, 28 or 7 leap years.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Happy Birthday Brendan.
A leap year lad, 28 or 7 leap years.

Any reason you keep calling him Brendan? Not having a go, just wondering if I'm missing an in joke.

But yes happy birthday for tomorrow (for me anyway) to the Caff.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Any reason you keep calling him Brendan? Not having a go, just wondering if I'm missing an in joke.

But yes happy birthday for tomorrow (for me anyway) to the Caff.

Oops, didn't notice.
Darn spell check, sorry my very bad, I wonder how long I've been doing that?
Happy Birthday Brent!