Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
21
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by Lods -
It's actually a mixed bag...and the knock on Florent is somewhat exaggerated.

2025 Kicking efficiency

Out
Silvagni 72.7%
Docherty 62.6 %
Curnow 57.6%
TDK 57.2%
Fantasia 56.1%
Durdin 55.6%
E Hollands 52.9%

In
Hayward 67.4%
Florent 66.9%
Ainsworth 64%
Chesser 57.9%

One thing that has to be considered is that 'defender' kicking efficiency is often inflated by taking kick-ins and switches of play which occur without a lot of pressure meaning that accuracy is better.

Our top12 for kicking efficiency all played as defenders this year.

22
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by kruddler -
Quote from: DJC – on
On the other hand, seven of the players who left us were among our worst ball users.
A weird statement.
Charlie is one of the best ball users we've ever had.
Durdin was good too.
Fantasia wasnt terrible....just soft.
Silvagni was good for a taller guy.
Tdk was great for a ruckman.
Docherty and anyone else I've missed are all far superior to acres.

The knock on florent is his kicking.
23
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by DJC -
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Training and the VFL are a lot different to senior footy when the pressure is on.
Those players you mentioned are not in the same parish as what Morris has giving him the ball. Three of them haven't played a game and you failed to address the issue of our main midfield group still doing the majority of the work including delivery. I'd expect Ison, Byrne and Chesser to start in the VFL and Voss to stick with his experienced players initially given the reality that he is coaching for his future.

Yes, training is very different from playing but you missed the point; our ball movement is markedly different to what it was last season. 

McCluggage and Zorko are no slouches when it comes to spraying the ball and Charlie is going to be disappointed with the poor service he gets from the likes of Warner, Gulden and Roberts.  I wonder why Sydney let two of their better ball users go  :-\

On the other hand, seven of the players who left us were among our worst ball users.
25
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by ElwoodBlues1 -
Quote from: DJC – on
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Brisbane get away with Morris at FF because they have a red hot midfield delivering dimes.
We have a history of trying to cheat with non specialist players in key roles but always avoid fixing the underlying problems.
Cripps, Walsh, Hewett,Acres, Ollie etc will still be doing the majority of the delivering so nothing will change.
Haywood will find the ball lobbed on his head like Charlie did and same with Harry.
HOK is a good colt and will have his moments but as Freo have found out with the talented Luke Jackson, playing him forward as a tall forward works best as a shock tactic not as a regular event.
Hampson and Kruezer are a reminder of trying to cheat ending in disaster.

You've not watched the training sessions and seen how our ball movement is very different and quite precise?  Florent, Smith, Ison, Byrne, Hayward, Chesser, etc rarely miss a target and it's apparent that sharpening our kicking skills has been a major off-season focus.

Skull has always played as a key forward/ruck in the VFL.  His 10.6 from 9 games last season helped propel him into the seniors and his 3.4 from his three games was a decent return.  Time will tell if he is to emulate Paul Salmon, Charlie Dixon, Sam Darcy, Riley Thilthorpe and other ruckmen who succeeded as key forwards.
Training and the VFL are a lot different to senior footy when the pressure is on.
Those players you mentioned are not in the same parish as what Morris has giving him the ball. Three of them haven't played a game and you failed to address the issue of our main midfield group still doing the majority of the work including delivery. I'd expect Ison, Byrne and Chesser to start in the VFL and Voss to stick with his experienced players initially given the reality that he is coaching for his future.
26
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by DJC -
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Brisbane get away with Morris at FF because they have a red hot midfield delivering dimes.
We have a history of trying to cheat with non specialist players in key roles but always avoid fixing the underlying problems.
Cripps, Walsh, Hewett,Acres, Ollie etc will still be doing the majority of the delivering so nothing will change.
Haywood will find the ball lobbed on his head like Charlie did and same with Harry.
HOK is a good colt and will have his moments but as Freo have found out with the talented Luke Jackson, playing him forward as a tall forward works best as a shock tactic not as a regular event.
Hampson and Kruezer are a reminder of trying to cheat ending in disaster.

You've not watched the training sessions and seen how our ball movement is very different and quite precise?  Florent, Smith, Ison, Byrne, Hayward, Chesser, etc rarely miss a target and it's apparent that sharpening our kicking skills has been a major off-season focus.

Skull has always played as a key forward/ruck in the VFL.  His 10.6 from 9 games last season helped propel him into the seniors and his 3.4 from his three games was a decent return.  Time will tell if he is to emulate Paul Salmon, Charlie Dixon, Sam Darcy, Riley Thilthorpe and other ruckmen who succeeded as key forwards.
27
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by ElwoodBlues1 -
Brisbane get away with Morris at FF because they have a red hot midfield delivering dimes.
We have a history of trying to cheat with non specialist players in key roles but always avoid fixing the underlying problems.
Cripps, Walsh, Hewett,Acres, Ollie etc will still be doing the majority of the delivering so nothing will change.
Haywood will find the ball lobbed on his head like Charlie did and same with Harry.
HOK is a good colt and will have his moments but as Freo have found out with the talented Luke Jackson, playing him forward as a tall forward works best as a shock tactic not as a regular event.
Hampson and Kruezer are a reminder of trying to cheat ending in disaster.

28
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by Lods -
And those same 'Navy glasses' have you rating the departing players based on their 2025 form more highly.

At the end of the day this is pretty much a futile debate because no-one is changing their mind.

The bar has been set.
Who is right and who is wrong willl be determined by this time next year.
10+ wins and 10th place and the optimists take it
8 wins or less and a lower than 11th finish and the pessimists take the prize.
9 wins and 11th place...and we'll call it a draw.

This thread topic has probably run its course.
We have 4 players who make the bench

Hollands (6)
Lord (5)
O'Keefe (5)
Evans (4)

(I'm actually happy with that... it's similar to mine

Florent (3)
Motlop (3)
McGovern (3)  are in a contest for the last spot.



29
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by kruddler -
@DJC....
The 'covering the loss of' comments are about exactly what you are describing.
Loss of output in one area is covered by an increased performance in another area. Thats the point i'm getting at.

I've said i'm trying to be simplistic.
I could do a deep dive into statistics and marginal improvements in ability to get open for an easy mark inside 50 to increase likelyhood of shots on goal vs 50-50 contests that we would win with Charlie there instead......but nobody would read it, understand it and/or agree with it, so i'm keeping it simple. Perhaps too simple for some.

In order for team performance to improve SOME areas must get better. Correct?
With some of the players we lost, SOME areas will get worse (Ability to kick goals off 1 step from outside 50 is one nobody could argue with, but there would be others). Correct?
Without going into the minutia of who, where and why each individual area of the performance will change, i'm simplyfying it to a hypothetical number. The number itself is not important. The variation to it is what is important and debateable.
Overall, i say some areas of the ground some numbers will get worse. In others it might stay the same or improve.
Your thoughts on those numbers will be different to mine and different to the next guy.
Overall, i've got no interest in debating the numbers, they are just there as a point of reference to highlight areas where i think our team performance will struggle compared to years previous.

Those same numbers will vary dramtically with injury and confidence....week to week, month to month, year to year.

Its the exact same logic i was using in the 2 ruck debate previously.
Despite 'getting worse in hitouts' by using a SOJ/Cripps/Kennedy as backup ruck compaired to the TDK+Pitto combo....
....around the ground the amount we would improve would more than cover for the loss of a few hitouts.
So its not a like for like, its a 'covering for' to get a benefit elsewhere.

Now perhaps the difference in team performance will be largely made irrelevent if the injuries and confidence of the playing group is superior to what it was last year.....and i hope that is true.
But without knowing how those 2 factors will play out, its best to remove them from the debate.

So with that in mind, this debate is centered around ability and ignoring form and fitness....as the latter may get better or may get worse. Ability, will largely stay the same, with small increases in developing kids and small decreases in senior players as they get older.

So in conclusion....
I think we will get weaker, up forward and in the middle with the changes we've had overall. I accept some areas within that will improve, but you must also concede some areas within that will be down as well.
The debate centers around how much and where.
IMO, Navy glasses are responsible for overestimating some of these areas on your side of the debate.
30
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench
Last post by kruddler -
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Those numbers are a factor but using the video game analogy ive signed a player with the high rating and then swapped him for another who didnt have as high a rating but had some skills that were more complimentary and most importantly moved in a way that strengthened the whole.

This is where the discrepancy on both sides of the argument begins.  We had skull and kemp.  They will get theor time in the sun. We have a young moir and maybe a wildcard option in Ison. Using Brisbane Logan Morris is a 191 cm key forward. 

Kemp, ison and moir all have him for size. 

We dont know how this goes for them, and skull would be the player you wanted drafted.  Hes 20 years old and 200cm and played 5 games.

Using the Judd into cripps analogy, we all though cripps would do a job for us moving forward but he has gone from strength to strength in a way only thr most optimistic of people expected after his debut season.

Ultimately its the I told you so bit thats tripping you over.  You cant see the clubs attempts because you dont agree with it.  We havent neglected these spots at all, weve just taken alternatives to the types and players you would have.  Thats ok too, but the pudding is still in the oven and you are lamenting the ingredients used.  Thing is the oven could break before we get the pudding out.  We wont know but the change of ingredients wouldnt have likely impacted that.

I understand what you are saying about skill set, and as i said i tried to keep it simplistic as to not go into every attribute, but ultimately the argument remains the same.
A decrease in marking power vs an increase in tackling etc. It balances out somewhat for forwards if you want to play it that way (Personally i disagree, but there is no way for one to be proven right or wrong at this stage).

The area of midfield was the contentious one as there is very little improvement in that area from an incoming point of view, its all about development of those already in the system, largely off the back of the hope that Jagga can add something over and above what we already had to help cover for the tdk downgrade.

As for HOK being 'the guy'....well up until this off-season, he was a ruck. Now he's the answer up forward?
I'd like to hope so, but i think he's a long way off ticking that box at this stage. He averages 8 hitouts and 7 posessions. and 0.6 goals a game. Sure he will get better, but Lewis Young offered us 3 hitouts, 10 touches and .5 goals a game last year and is far from the answer.....and HOK hasn't got to that yet.

Kudos for understanding the analogy though, which is more than i can say for some others.