Zac Smith vs Rhys Stanley

[Ray Donovan]

And we finished #2 H&A.

Needs to be some tough decisions made agreed

Lonergan, Mackie
Taylor position
Smith and Stanley

Is kolo ready to play CHB or FB probably not but our most promising young defender. Needs Size and time.

Will Henderson be able to be a no.1 key defender as Lonergan doesn't have long left and Taylor swung forward big question mark.

We know that the four key defenders in kolo, taylor, hendo and Lonergan really didn't work together well. And with thurlow And tuohy available it changes dynamics..

Very interesting season ahead the coaching panel will need to earn money this year. If they could push us into the top 4 I would be extremely impressed with the effort. I think we are more a 5-8 team fingers crossed

 

[Vdubs]

Needs to be some tough decisions made agreed

Lonergan, Mackie
Taylor position
Smith and Stanley

Is kolo ready to play CHB or FB probably not but our most promising young defender. Needs Size and time.

Will Henderson be able to be a no.1 key defender as Lonergan doesn't have long left and Taylor swung forward big question mark.

We know that the four key defenders in kolo, taylor, hendo and Lonergan really didn't work together well. And with thurlow And tuohy available it changes dynamics..

Very interesting season ahead the coaching panel will need to earn money this year. If they could push us into the top 4 I would be extremely impressed with the effort. I think we are more a 5-8 team fingers crossed

Agree, And other toughies for me-
Blicavs- where?
Bews or Ruggles?

 

[Ray Donovan]

Agree, And other toughies for me-
Blicavs- where?
Bews or Ruggles?

Exactly blic 2nd ruck? we have other guys to play defensive on ball roles and the lack of leg speed in our midfield really diminished his effectiveness. Half back we already have four key defenders in the side that play forward. He almost slips under everyone's guard but he is genuinely a tall.

Ruggles looks o.k he is depth his skills don't equate to being in front of thurlow or tuohy in terms of foot penetration. I heard bews is training further up ground which is probably the sweet whisperings of your next contract may not be coming because we have moved in a different direction.

 

[BORIS332]

My biggest worry here is that the ability to run doesn't automatically translate to being able to play the role.

We've seen before just how exposed he can be on a wing when Hill tore him to pieces

Who comes in if Blicavs goes out of the side? Who is on the fringes that could bring to the team what Blicavs does?

 

[Willo_]

Who comes in if Blicavs goes out of the side? Who is on the fringes that could bring to the team what Blicavs does?

Well that depends on what Blitz actually brings I guess... if he is running round on the wing adding not a great deal then it won't be hard to replace him.

Personally I'd like him to start in the midfield rotation using his size and endurance to be able to pressure and create space/options... but if he is struggling to impact the game he doesn't have a golden ticket from me and whoever is next in line gets a chance.

If he goes well then awesome

 

[Partridge]

Who comes in if Blicavs goes out of the side? Who is on the fringes that could bring to the team what Blicavs does?

As a midfielder Lang is the obvious one to me.

 

[cynical]

Who comes in if Blicavs goes out of the side? Who is on the fringes that could bring to the team what Blicavs does?

We already have a second ruck in the team in Stanley.

Darcy Lang should be coming into the side for Blicavs, not to play Blicavs role but to get the ball on the outside and help us offensively by making good decisions and hitting up players in the forward line (something blicavs doesnt do well).

If we want someone to run around guarding space then i'd suggest a kenyan long distance runner.

 

[BORIS332]

We already have a second ruck in the team in Stanley.

Darcy Lang should be coming into the side for Blicavs, not to play Blicavs role but to get the ball on the outside and help us offensively by making good decisions and hitting up players in the forward line (something blicavs doesnt do well).

If we want someone to run around guarding space then i'd suggest a kenyan long distance runner.

In terms of having an impact on the game Blicavs is miles ahead of Lang.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

In terms of having an impact on the game Blicavs is miles ahead of Lang.

I think there's much greater potential in Lang developing into a damaging mid than in Blicavs doing so.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

I think there's much greater potential in Lang developing into a damaging mid than in Blicavs doing so.

I agree.
I also think Lang has 2 intangibles that Blicavs doesn't and perhaps never will, the ability to weave through traffic and find space and general football intelligence. He's a smart footballer Lang, he has a knack of bobbing up in spots to kick vital goals.
Lang and Cocky are 2 that almost HAVE to play 20 games this year.

 

[Seeds]

We are having a discussion on ruckman with the idea we have one to many but are banned from even talking about dropping one of those ruckman. Apparently the thought of Blicavs being dropped is just too hard for some to comprehend.

 

[Seeds]

Who comes in if Blicavs goes out of the side? Who is on the fringes that could bring to the team what Blicavs does?

Menzel needs to come back. As does thurlow, cockatoo and probably Touhy. Out goes Bartel, Enright and ..... you need two more. Havnt even thought about Lang yet. You are asking the wrong question.

 

[you pick one]

Blicavs needs to find a different role with the 3rd man up rule changing. I'm not sure what that is but he has said and it's clear he struggles without a defined role.

Would they be prepared to move half cat on to accommodate him.

 

[Cursed Cat]

We are having a discussion on ruckman with the idea we have one to many but are banned from even talking about dropping one of those ruckman. Apparently the thought of Blicavs being dropped is just too hard for some to comprehend.

Talk about what you like Seeds, just please spare the drama and persecution complex - 'banned', pffft - I used the word 'prefer' in the OP - if you want to put forth the suggestion that Blicavs gets dropped that is fine.

My preference in starting the OP was to gauge who posters might favour out of Stanley and Smith given a scenario where Blicavs is the 2nd ruck.
We largely already know what the Smith/Stanley combination will provide..

As I stated, I've seen a lot of posts during the off-season where people have suggested the team would be best served utilizing Blicavs as the 2nd ruckman.
Given that scenario, who would be the 1st ruckman?
That's why the thread was titled 'Smith vs Stanley' and not 'Who rucks?' - but really, overall I'm not fussed what you want to focus on.

 

[Cursed Cat]

We are having a discussion on ruckman with the idea we have one to many but are banned from even talking about dropping one of those ruckman. Apparently the thought of Blicavs being dropped is just too hard for some to comprehend.

Further on this: I actually thought the Smith/Stanley combination did better than expected last year and I was largely content with what they produced.

However with Taylor penciled in at CHF in 2017, it does make it hard to rotate Smith and Stanley through the forward line (yes, we could have three talls in the forward line, but personally I don't think that is an ideal set-up) as they did in 2016. We'd basically have to rotate them from the bench most of the time.

Blicavs as a 2nd ruckman may have the advantage in this scenario as he is fit enough to 'rest' in a variety of other positions and needn't necessarily spend a whole lot of time recovering on the bench (I actually think his tap-work is reasonable too, when he manages to get his hand to it).
The more I have thought about it the more I see the advantages. However I genuinely have a tough time separating Smith and Stanley as footballers, they have different attributes yet both produced roughly the same level of output last year ...

 

[Stucky]

I'm happy for both Smith and Stanley to play in the same team but also playing Blicavs is playing too tall.

l think Blicavs should be used as a 2nd ruckmen only. His awareness and reaction time is worrying to be a 2nd tier midfielder. It may stand up against the lower ranked teams but when we play finals quality teams it is a concern. He's not a natural footballer, and l think that's easy to see when he cant consistently take overhead mark. This is one area with his fitness where he could become a real weapon, but l dont see it happening.

I would much prefer for games to be given to Lang, Prafitt, Cockatoo. Natural footballers who have some tricks up their sleeve.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

Would they be prepared to move half cat on to accommodate him.

With his fitness he could keep the kids entertained all day

 

[steady2]

We are having a discussion on ruckman with the idea we have one to many but are banned from even talking about dropping one of those ruckman. Apparently the thought of Blicavs being dropped is just too hard for some to comprehend.

As far as I am concerned I think there is little between Smith and Stanley as #1, I would like to see Blicavs as a #2 but any of Smith, Stanley or Blitz should be dropped as I think playing all three has not worked. I know Blitz has other attributes aside from rucking (which is average at best) but I don't like his position as a mid-fielder, he couldn't produce any midfield work in the first fifteen minutes in the Prelim to justify his position there. For me Smith #1, and Stanley and Blicavs fight it out for #2 the other one plays in the VFL.

 

[Jon Douglas]

This thread underlies what maybe a significant matter for us. How do we fit Smith, Stanley and Blitz all in the same side ? Particularly now there is no third man up, which does impact on Blitz's role to some extent.

It is possible to do so - as all are fairly quick and agile for their size - so we do not become too slow over the ground. Secondly I suspect one of the three will be off the ground on the interchange.

I think Smith had a pretty good season straight up for us. I think he can improve as 2016 was his full season in a while, he is still under 100 games and did not play footy as his first sport. For me that means he has every chance to improve in 2017. Not sure how much - but 10 % would be a reasonable guess. And given his height and weight - he is the first ruckman - the person most likely to get their hands on the centre bounces.

Stanley seems to play ok, then have a pearler and then get injured. He is super quick for his height, I have read he is very strong, has good height and has played enough senior games to be called an experienced player. He needs to really add say 15 % to his game. As a ruckman he is a bit short but has a decent leap and with his leg speed and agility he should make a decent second ruckman, especially in around the ground work. He has the added potential of being able to play CHF if we get an injury during a game to a KPF.

Together Smith and Stanley could make a top 6 ruck combo. In other words good enough to make the midfield effectiveness better, to be able to take marks around the ground and still go forward and occasionally kick goals. Maybe the best ruck set up we have had in some time.

Blitz lost ground last year IMO. Can he play 90 % as a pure mid and 10 % ruckman - to give Smith and Stanley a break or letting one of them go forward ? I think this could be a challenge for him as does play third man up quite often. He has the body, the mass and the run to be an effective mid -but he would need improve 15 % + to be make him a really effective mid for us. He should be running to spots to get alone or get a mismatch in height more often when we have the ball. Jury out on Blitz for me - but all 3 will start in the senior side.

 

[Seeds]

If I give an honest opinion I dont think any 3 have earned an automatic spot on the team. Their form is each too inconsistent to say with certainty who will be the better combination. Form should dictate which of the 3 play. I think Smith and Stanley have more talent as rucks given their actual rucking abilities but inconsistency prevents me from saying they are definately the two that we should go with each week. Hopefully that view changes as the year progresses.

 

[catempire]

We are having a discussion on ruckman with the idea we have one to many but are banned from even talking about dropping one of those ruckman. Apparently the thought of Blicavs being dropped is just too hard for some to comprehend.

Turn it up. Who has banned anything? There are other threads for you to flog that dead horse. The OP has put forward a particular topic which is worthy of its own debate. It's not unreasonable to ask that that the other debate be left out of it.

 

[Seeds]

Turn it up. Who has banned anything? There are other threads for you to flog that dead horse. The OP has put forward a particular topic which is worthy of its own debate. It's not unreasonable to ask that that the other debate be left out of it.

Well the op clearly preferred it would not be discussed. If the mods have changed their minds and happy for really specific threads now then I'm all for it. Might go start my thread on which ruck should we drop out of Stanley and Blicavs and then follow it up with an original Smith or Blicavs thread, who should we drop?

Does this also mean we can now start a thread on who should be our next coach rather than having it merged with the Scott thread and then one page later being told we can't discuss our next coach in the Scott thread?

 

[Cursed Cat]

Well the op clearly preferred it would not be discussed. If the mods have changed their minds and happy for really specific threads now then I'm all for it. Might go start my thread on which ruck should we drop out of Stanley and Blicavs and then follow it up with an original Smith or Blicavs thread, who should we drop?

Does this also mean we can now start a thread on who should be our next coach rather than having it merged with the Scott thread and then one page later being told we can't discuss our next coach in the Scott thread?

When was anyone told they 'can't' discuss anything?
All that was stated was that I preferred to focus on the scenario in which Blicavs is paired with either of Stanley or Smith - but if you'd prefer to take it in another direction I'm not going to spit the dummy and pout.
The thread title cleary asks who is the better ruckman of Stanley and Smith, but I can understand if people would like to use the thread as a launching place for an alternate view.
If poster's don't make 'really specific' threads then we might as well just open one free-for-all mega-thread ..

 

[Ricketz]

I agree.
I also think Lang has 2 intangibles that Blicavs doesn't and perhaps never will, the ability to weave through traffic and find space and general football intelligence. He's a smart footballer Lang, he has a knack of bobbing up in spots to kick vital goals.
Lang and Cocky are 2 that almost HAVE to play 20 games this year.

We are challenging for a premiership this year. Players won't be gifted games for development. The only way those two or any others get 20 games is by earning them - this HAVE to play is the opposite of what they will do unless we have injuries or incumbent form lapses.

 

[Cursed Cat]

I agree.
I also think Lang has 2 intangibles that Blicavs doesn't and perhaps never will, the ability to weave through traffic and find space and general football intelligence. He's a smart footballer Lang, he has a knack of bobbing up in spots to kick vital goals.
Lang and Cocky are 2 that almost HAVE to play 20 games this year.

To be honest I haven't seen a helluva lot of weaving through traffic from Lang so far; to me he has often looked a bit tentative in traffic.
Blicavs has his faults, but I've always liked his ability to hold onto the ball and find a target by hand despite having a player or two on his hammer.
I do think Lang can improve in this area though, and once he gets the ball in space he is a far better user of the pill than Blicavs.