Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 5 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grant is head of football so doubt its a demotion for Power

Likely just assisting him while he sorts out of the contracts

I am hoping that it means Grant has identified our areas of weakness and is prioritising them for Power to chase, rather than Bevo requesting another small mid with poor skills from Footscray.
 
We did but realistically KPP are harder to find and we've got a CHB and CHF for 15 years and if you develop and scout well you can find mids in the 2nd round
Yep would much rather have spine sorted for the next 10 years, as we’ve shown in the past we can build a good midfield in no time, and you can draft good mids and have them AFL quality in no time too.

Plus we still have one of the best u21 mids in the comp in Baz to build around, and there’s good mids who can plug roles available for trade or FA every year - most clubs only have a star mid or two surrounded by role players, we’ve been the exception not the rule.

But in saying that if we sort out defence at the trade table I am happy to use our top pick on another midfielder either this year or next, ideally a big bodied mid with a bit of burst pace would be a nice addition.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's a fair question. The countering argument is to say that the systems will only change when the coaches have more confidence in the defensive capabilities of the backmen. Then it becomes a chicken and egg situation.
If anything though our system makes it harder for our defenders, you’d think if we thought they were poor we’d try and mask that a little bit & help out the defence. Instead we ask them to take super aggressive positions, fill the backline with offensive minded players and put in crazy defensive tactics up the field that encourage quick, long ball movement.

But yeah either way the system needs to change and the personnel needs to be improved, if we only improve the personnel it’s probably not enough but it’s still an improvement either way so
Shouldn’t change how we attack the off season
 
I think the system and the players are both issues down back.

With better players, our current system would likely provide better results. I’m not convinced an improved system with the same players would net a better result though, if that makes sense.

Bring in the players and build a system to their strengths imo.
 
I think the system and the players are both issues down back.

With better players, our current system would likely provide better results. I’m not convinced an improved system with the same players would net a better result though, if that makes sense.

Bring in the players and build a system to their strengths imo.

I still think we press up way too high which leaves us extremely vulnerable down back especially if we let teams move the footy so easily from defence to attack. We really need to tighten up that area in the off season.

There was footage against the lions of a lions player marking it in our goal square and we had Crozier and another defender literally at the 50m arc. They went end to end and our back 6 were in no man’s land. It needs to be rectified.
 
If we lose Dunkly we should have enough to bring in Lobb and Logue (our first?) plus Jones and still have a first (Port's?) to use on the best burst mid available. As much as it'd suck to lose Dunks that'd be pretty exciting.
Yeah I’m all for this, I know with the way our midfields performing right now we think we need Dunks and he’s had a great couple of weeks but honestly if we can’t get by with Bont, Macrae, Baz, Libba, Treloar I mean, we’ve got bigger problems than personnel - that’s still one of if not the best & deepest midfields in the comp. Our issues run deeper than personnel.

If Dunks is happy to sign long term at what he’s worth (600k a year probably around the mark) then I’d love to keep him and bank on him as a key part of our leadership group going forward, if he wants big money he won’t get it here considering our list makeup then props to him but we should probably cash in.

Give West some midfield minutes and draft another big bodied midfielder to start coming through with a decent pick (ie first or second rounder)

Our midfield is just not dominant enough currently for what chunk they take up out of our salary cap, honestly spreading it out to other parts of the ground (which we’d be doing with a Lobb/Logue in/Dunks out off-season) is not the worst idea
 
If anything though our system makes it harder for our defenders, you’d think if we thought they were poor we’d try and mask that a little bit & help out the defence. Instead we ask them to take super aggressive positions, fill the backline with offensive minded players and put in crazy defensive tactics up the field that encourage quick, long ball movement.

But yeah either way the system needs to change and the personnel needs to be improved, if we only improve the personnel it’s probably not enough but it’s still an improvement either way so
Shouldn’t change how we attack the off season
The way I see it we set up aggressively and play a team defence style to minimise one on one contests in deep sefence. If we had more confidence in our ability to defend a direct opponent then the systems can be a bit more nuanced
 
Yeah I’m all for this, I know with the way our midfields performing right now we think we need Dunks and he’s had a great couple of weeks but honestly if we can’t get by with Bont, Macrae, Baz, Libba, Treloar I mean, we’ve got bigger problems than personnel - that’s still one of if not the best & deepest midfields in the comp. Our issues run deeper than personnel.

If Dunks is happy to sign long term at what he’s worth (600k a year probably around the mark) then I’d love to keep him and bank on him as a key part of our leadership group going forward, if he wants big money he won’t get it here considering our list makeup then props to him but we should probably cash in.

Give West some midfield minutes and draft another big bodied midfielder to start coming through with a decent pick (ie first or second rounder)

Our midfield is just not dominant enough currently for what chunk they take up out of our salary cap, honestly spreading it out to other parts of the ground (which we’d be doing with a Lobb/Logue in/Dunks out off-season) is not the worst idea
I think our midfield is a tad over-rated. We can beat up the poor sides but struggle against powerful running, breakaway teams, such as Melbourne with Oliver and Petrucca. He lack the gut running wingers what the best teams have as well.

Bont is the stand out.
Macrae is an accumulator, a very good player, yet no pace, no penetration and no burst away.
Libba is the grunt, gives his all, yet has limitation as well if the ball is out in space.
Treloar can provide burst away and is a vital player yet the least defensive of the group.
Baz is good running yet has a long way to go in ball use and defensive side.

I would be targeting the best onballer available with our first pick in the draft. You need to constantly add to this area of the ground. There is nothing new in the names above all from many drafts ago. All sides are improving in that area as well. You can trade for key positions who take longer to develop.
 
We did but realistically KPP are harder to find and we've got a CHB and CHF for 15 years and if you develop and scout well you can find mids in the 2nd round

I think it would be negligent of the club to leave it to picks outside the top 20 to find our next midfield group.

Bont Pick 4
Macrae 5
Treloar Top 5 if not taken under age.
Dunkley 20
Smith 7

We got lucky with father sons Libba and Hunter, but the core of our group were high end draft picks.

I don’t have time to look at other teams, but I’d almost guarantee the majority are built around at least 2 players that were taken high in their draft years.

History tells us you can find gems later in the draft, but 3,4,5 midfield players good enough to take a team to a flag, all outside the top 20? I’d say it’d be highly unlikely.
 
I tend to agree, I don’t think losing Dunkley is the worst thing in the world
Losing Dunkley won't hurt as much next year if Libba is still playing as he is now. The issue is that losing BOTH Dunkley & Libba in the short term significantly impacts out hardness and contested ball around the contest. Treloar is also ageing and the club may look to a permanent half back move as he hits 30.

Who knows, Libba may surprise me and play until he is 33-34.
 
Losing Dunkley won't hurt as much next year if Libba is still playing as he is now. The issue is that losing BOTH Dunkley & Libba in the short term significantly impacts out hardness and contested ball around the contest. Treloar is also ageing and the club may look to a permanent half back move as he hits 30.

Who knows, Libba may surprise me and play until he is 33-34.

Libba's form is fine so would not be surprised.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Losing Dunkley won't hurt as much next year if Libba is still playing as he is now. The issue is that losing BOTH Dunkley & Libba in the short term significantly impacts out hardness and contested ball around the contest. Treloar is also ageing and the club may look to a permanent half back move as he hits 30.

Who knows, Libba may surprise me and play until he is 33-34.
Libba at least has genes on his side. His old man was pretty beat up at 29, Plough famously thought he was done in 1996 (as seen in Year Of The Dog) but Tony still had 6 more good years in him.
 
I think the system and the players are both issues down back.

With better players, our current system would likely provide better results. I’m not convinced an improved system with the same players would net a better result though, if that makes sense.

Bring in the players and build a system to their strengths imo.
i watched our defenders closely last week in terms of reading play and positioning, they are sub AFL standard
 
Libba at least has genes on his side. His old man was pretty beat up at 29, Plough famously thought he was done in 1996 (as seen in Year Of The Dog) but Tony still had 6 more good years in him.
I was convinced that Libba was done a while back given his knee history and pretty ordinary form from 2017 - 2019. He's been absolutely superb over the past 2-3 years though.
 
Reckon Barrass talk is like: “I see Elvis in Maccas!”

Of course would ask but West Coast would block it at every turn - and they should. We would.

Young guy like Harry Edwards would be harder to hold - still learning but looks great for a 21 year old.

Assuming we get Jones - then Logue is a good fit for us. We tried with TOB to get someone who can play on talls and mediums and it hasn’t worked (at least yet).

Jones makes sense - We saw the wheels fall off when Keath got injured and hasn’t made it back. The Angry Accountant is still an AA level player if fit and so will be fine next season but having Jones allows Gardner and Darcy to continue to develop.

Problem is that we will likely be too tall in defence and few teams have stretched us with extra height - it has been one tall and/or smalls.

If we play Darcy, Jones, Keath and Gardner we have four players over 197 - we will be to slow and cut to ribbons.

If we get Logue then we also have to play in Duryea’s spot - or Dale’s and that makes us worse:

Team could look like:

Darcy/Gardner Keath Duryea
Dale Jones Richards

Logue on rotation works.

Daniel to wing opposite Hunter - two great gut runners. Reckon Fernando will break out next year - he showed some really exciting flashes and is really hard to match up on. Still could do with a fast winger - Jones is a maybe for this and hope he can grow to his potential has shown something.

If Duryea down again then we have Cleary and Khamis but are either of them fast enough to play on a fast small like Cameron, Bolton, Papley? I honestly don’t know either way. We only have Scott and Roarke as back up and while both are great triers they have not nailed it. JJ is OK but can switch off - I think he still could do a job - but closer people than me don’t think so and maybe still have nightmares of Adelaide prelim when Betts got away. So reckon this is still a hole that will need to be filled - genuine small hard defender.
 
I think our midfield is a tad over-rated. We can beat up the poor sides but struggle against powerful running, breakaway teams, such as Melbourne with Oliver and Petrucca. He lack the gut running wingers what the best teams have as well.

Bont is the stand out.
Macrae is an accumulator, a very good player, yet no pace, no penetration and no burst away.
Libba is the grunt, gives his all, yet has limitation as well if the ball is out in space.
Treloar can provide burst away and is a vital player yet the least defensive of the group.
Baz is good running yet has a long way to go in ball use and defensive side.

I would be targeting the best onballer available with our first pick in the draft. You need to constantly add to this area of the ground. There is nothing new in the names above all from many drafts ago. All sides are improving in that area as well. You can trade for key positions who take longer to develop.
I get what you’re saying and we definitely struggle a bit against Melbourne who have both the dominant ruckman and also the two powerful bull mids which match up well on us but looking around the league at the rest of the top teams and their main midfielders -

Lions? Neale, Lyons, Mcluggage - some good ball winners and runners no real power though

Geelong? Selwood, Guthrie, Danger - Danger aside quite one paced and dull

Swans? Mills, Warner, Parker - quite dynamic and a good mix of grunt, speed and power

Freo? Not including Fyfe as he’s barely played this year but a mix of Brayshaw, Serong, Mundy & Brodie - again decent mix of everything here but no real star power aside from Brayshaw

Just to name a few off the top of my head - I just don’t believe our midfield is overrated personnel wise against the rest of the comp, the fact it’s not dominant is an indictment on our coaches & gameplan IMO.

Bont is one of the best players in the comp of course when fit but I actually believe he’s the best defensive mid in the comp too. Macrae I think you’re underselling, he’s a 192cm bull in his own right, and at his best is a clearance & tackling machine - Libba is Libba. These 3 are a bit one paced sure but wipe any of the groups listed above.

You then have the luxury of throwing in Baz & Treloar for pace who yes aren’t brilliant defensively but mixed with Bont, Macrae, Libba and Dunks as another bull - we should be beating up on every midfield in the comp besides Melb. The fact we’re not I don’t think is because these players are overrated but there’s gotta be more to it than that.

Anyway I agree we should draft another big bodied mid to start bringing through - but also we should be setting West free in there, he’s probably got a more powerful first few steps in traffic than any other player on our list maybe Baz aside
 
If we lose Dunkly we should have enough to bring in Lobb and Logue (our first?) plus Jones and still have a first (Port's?) to use on the best burst mid available. As much as it'd suck to lose Dunks that'd be pretty exciting.
As good (and unlikely) as Barrass is the cost would be huge. I think I’d prefer Logue and a chance of keeping a first than blow 2 firsts on Barrass. Assuming Dunkley leaves.
 
As good (and unlikely) as Barrass is the cost would be huge. I think I’d prefer Logue and a chance of keeping a first than blow 2 firsts on Barrass. Assuming Dunkley leaves.
me too, it often backfires when you get players at peak value, you need some upside from a moneyball perspective
 
If anything though our system makes it harder for our defenders, you’d think if we thought they were poor we’d try and mask that a little bit & help out the defence. Instead we ask them to take super aggressive positions, fill the backline with offensive minded players and put in crazy defensive tactics up the field that encourage quick, long ball movement.

But yeah either way the system needs to change and the personnel needs to be improved, if we only improve the personnel it’s probably not enough but it’s still an improvement either way so
Shouldn’t change how we attack the off season

The way I see it we set up aggressively and play a team defence style to minimise one on one contests in deep sefence. If we had more confidence in our ability to defend a direct opponent then the systems can be a bit more nuanced
I think something that gets missed in this discussion is that "team defence" doesn't happen in a vacuum. Offence and defence are spoken about as separate, but in reality they are enmeshed in a tug of war dynamic. If you struggle to score, one thing you can do is play more aggressively, which has ramifications for your defence. If you struggle to defend, you can play more conservatively - but that harms your ability to generate scoring opportunities.

After round 1 I posted a table showing our standing relative to other teams for both points for and points against, to highlight where we have stood on this tug of war under Beveridge. With one round to go, I'll re-post the table with 2022 added:
Points For
Points Against
2015
4th
7th​
2016
12th​
3rd
2017
15th​
8th
2018
15th​
13th
2019
3rd
13th​
2020
6th
10th​
2021
2nd
4th​
2022
5th
11th​
*Note: green = clearly the better phase; yellow = mildly better phase

Under Beveridge we have fluctuated between struggling to score and struggling to defend. In 2015 we played balls to the wall football that consistently killed us defensively. As a result, we focused more heavily on defence in the years thereafter, which hurt our ability to score considerably. We won the premiership in 2016 because our forward line 'clicked' at the right time, which allowed us to score despite relatively conservative off-ball defence.

After that, though, our forward line could not replicate its good form. We moved away from defence-first football in 2019 in order to accommodate this and find other avenues to goal, and we haven't deviated from this since. 2021 aside, we have struggled to find the right balance - but with Bruce, Naughton, Keath, English and our mids firing on full cylinders, we could play very aggressive football and not get hurt too often defensively.

This year we haven't been as lucky. Between Bruce's injury, Keath's form, English's inconsistency due to injury and our mids being a bit down, we haven't been as reliable offensively. While we're still scoring at a high rate, it's taking really aggressive football to do so - which is exposing us defensively.

My point is that people sometimes ignore this, and focus too much on (1) fixing one of these phases (e.g. defence) by targeting that phase specifically (i.e. by getting new defenders); and (2) criticising the coaches for being too aggressive. In reality, there are reasons why we have gone down this path (which, realistically, point to us overestimating our capabilities this season - which is partly due to injury/form) and it is possible to improve your defence by improving your offence - which allows you to play less aggressively.

This is why the target of Lobb makes so much sense. A greater marking presence in the forward line, combined with more rest for English and more consistent tap work as a result, will enable us to focus more on the defensive phase of the game, irrespective of who is down there in 2023.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top