 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
I think I rate Beams higher than you do. He is a quality player and I see why it was tough for us to rebuff his desire to return. The hypothetical mid we could have added is just that and therefore difficult to compare. Who could we have got? We'll never know, so I'm not saying we made the wrong move, just that it wasn't ideal. One that can still work despite not being the best possible outcome. |
Alternatively, we could have traded for a high draft pick (e.g. next year). There are many possibilities. Many Nicksters prefer to insist that "we got Beams for pick 18", which is not even close to true. |
|
|
|
 |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
I think I rate Beams higher than you do. He is a quality player and I see why it was tough for us to rebuff his desire to return. The hypothetical mid we could have added is just that and therefore difficult to compare. Who could we have got? We'll never know, so I'm not saying we made the wrong move, just that it wasn't ideal. One that can still work despite not being the best possible outcome. |
Alternatively, we could have traded for a high draft pick (e.g. next year). There are many possibilities. Many Nicksters prefer to insist that "we got Beams for pick 18", which is not even close to true. |
We could have selected another Freeman instead of getting Beams. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
We could have wasted a pick 7 (or 6 or 10). Yes.
In the end, the success of the gamble will be measured in premierships, but nothing is gained by obscuring the terms of the gamble.
Even a very early draft pick is likely to take time to mature, so it's short term versus long term. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
I think I rate Beams higher than you do. He is a quality player and I see why it was tough for us to rebuff his desire to return. The hypothetical mid we could have added is just that and therefore difficult to compare. Who could we have got? We'll never know, so I'm not saying we made the wrong move, just that it wasn't ideal. One that can still work despite not being the best possible outcome. |
Alternatively, we could have traded for a high draft pick (e.g. next year). There are many possibilities. Many Nicksters prefer to insist that "we got Beams for pick 18", which is not even close to true. |
We could have selected another Freeman instead of getting Beams. |
The thing is though we already had a great group of midfield accumulators. Adding Beams isn't a huge influence on our prospects in my view. I wouldn't have traded for a pick next year, feeling that we needed to look at improving our team for the now first and foremost.
The Quaynor situation gave us pretty much a free hit to trade a first round pick (having to use later picks to match his bid is fairly low value). Add that to our 2019 pick and we had a decent trade hand. Maybe we were confident of landing May and missed out on more suited midfield opportunities. We'll never know, but it's a nagging thought for me because I just don't see Beams fitting well with our midfield group and really elevating us. I'd say he helps us in terms of covering for injuries but does not greatly improve our best 22. A more needed midfield type could have.
It's not really about his age either. The right type of older player (eg. a Walters) would have been very welcome.
We'll see how it develops, but I really feel that our midfield needs to win clearances and contested ball or it's a bit of a struggle. Hopefully we can keep tinkering with the mix and extract better performances.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
The Quaynor situation gave us pretty much a free hit to trade a first round pick (having to use later picks to match his bid is fairly low value). ... |
This is highly debatable.
I wonder how well Lachie Neale would go in our team. He is an extractor. (Why was he so keen to go to QLD?) |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | ...
Starting to become a bit worried about Beams. I've wondered whether we should play him as a half forward flanker rather than through the middle. He doesn't win many clearances and he's not a great two way runner either. He's a very handy player and will provide a solid contribution to the team, but I don't think he's greatly enhanced our team from last year. It will be interesting to see how he progresses as he begins his adjustment to the team.
Losing the clearances on a regular basis has become a pressing concern for mine. I don't know what the story is with him, but I think we're missing Sier more than we realise and he would go some way to addressing this problem.
... |
How was DB's role at Brisbane different? He was doing better than okay there. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
The Quaynor situation gave us pretty much a free hit to trade a first round pick (having to use later picks to match his bid is fairly low value). ... |
This is highly debatable.
|
^^In what way? We were never using pick 18 as it was always needed to secure Qauynor. The points system is dumb, those lower picks don't have the value of a first, so using those and trading pick 18 was a no brainer.
Unless you're saying Quaynor would not have been bid on before 18 had we kept it? I don't see that logic.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
A resurrected Wells is the midfielder we're looking for. Here's hoping he has one last effort in him.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
We obliterated Essendon out of the middle in the first quarter and then they convincingly turned it around for the remainder of the game.
I have specifically watched the replay a couple times to try and see why the turnaround and I’m only guessing here but it looks to me as though the bomber mids went more defensive and manned up after quarter time.
They seemed to stand beside our clearance players and the net result appears to be our players don’t collectively handle the extra attention.
Teams will go to their plan B more often against us when we start well and the challenge is to reply with our plan B to a satisfactory level.
Without wanting to shoot bambi, I still think Grundy taps down in close to often. It’s difficult to get the ball out cleanly in such congestion. Ideally you would want him to tap towards the open wings on occasions, so players can run into the ball and the wings can then offer support. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | We obliterated Essendon out of the middle in the first quarter and then they convincingly turned it around for the remainder of the game.
I have specifically watched the replay a couple times to try and see why the turnaround and I’m only guessing here but it looks to me as though the bomber mids went more defensive and manned up after quarter time.
They seemed to stand beside our clearance players and the net result appears to be our players don’t collectively handle the extra attention.
Teams will go to their plan B more often against us when we start well and the challenge is to reply with our plan B to a satisfactory level.
Without wanting to shoot bambi, I still think Grundy taps down in close to often. It’s difficult to get the ball out cleanly in such congestion. Ideally you would want him to tap towards the open wings on occasions, so players can run into the ball and the wings can then offer support. |
If we were likely to get the ball if it were tapped clear, that would certainly be correct. I am reasonably confident, though, that you will find he is hitting the ball exactly where the Coach wants it - our midfielders are typically more skilled but slower (Treloar excepted) than every other midfield in the competition - the challenge is to find a way to give our guys first use of the ball without too much risk that the opposition will get their hands on the outside ball on a fast break. The reason opposition teams get "easy" centre clearances against is not about the ruckwork, it is all about the fact that our midfielders are, as a group, physically incapable (I'm talking here about leg speed - I am certainly not criticizing endeavour etc) of running the opposition down when they are heading to their end of the field. Not much point in "belting it clear" if we're almost always going to be second to that clear ball. For that to be a serious option, we need to have JDG, Stevo and Callum Brown capable of starting and starring in the centre square. We are a long way from that. In the meantime, Grundy has to make sure he doesn't hit the ball too far away, since if it has to be chased on the ground, he probably has to chase it himself. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^^^
I get where you’re coming from and we agree to disagree on the level of culpability of our rovers ( as opposed to ruckman )
I agree our roving mids could improve but not to the extent your proclaiming.
The facts are this group of midfielders ( give or take ) got within a kick of the flag last year.
So I will put forward two thoughts -
1 ) “ we “ are looking for perfection from our mids when the reality is, although they aren’t perfect, they are collectively a better group than 15 / 16 other clubs.
2) that clearances are actually overrated and the real stat of any relevance is the consequence of the clearance ( as per Richmond’s premiership year of being 17th in clearances )
In recent years, it kills you if win a clearance and the opposition mark it, especially unopposed.
I have never been a huge fan of the clearance stat but I accept, along with inside 50s, it’s the stat that footy commentary hangs its hat on.
Our mids continue to be a work in progress and I believe there will be improvement as the year rolls on. I guess time will tell if the improvement is enough or not. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
P. Ryan:
"Carlton's centre clearances troubled Collingwood
It was obvious from the opening moments that Carlton had an off day against North Melbourne with their system standing up to Collingwood's pressure. Caleb Marchbank's intercept marking was important to steady the ship early and once the Blues began to get some ascendancy in the middle of the ground - an area where the absence of both Taylor Adams and Dayne Beams was most keenly felt - they had the Magpies in strife, with their overlap run creating dangerous foward entries and leaving the defenders under pressure with Curnow and Harry McKay dangerous in the air. The centre clearance king Patrick Cripps took over at quarter time in the centre which put the Magpies on the back foot for the rest of the game. After just five touches and no clearances in the first quarter Cripps put his foot on the pedal and had 10 clearances (including five centre clearances) in the next two quarters.
Tom Phillips is a mysterious footballer
So influential was Collingwood wingman Tom Phillips in the first half when he had 19 disposals and was responsible for most of the Magpies run that Carlton had no option but to send veteran tagger Ed Curnow to him. Curnow, who had performed well as a pressure forward, took on the job and although Phillips kept winning the ball his influence was restricted. His effort to kick a goal off the ground in the last quarter wasn't one for the highlight reel with a Champions League appearance unlikely and then he had a second brain fade late when he gave away 100-metre penalty to David Cuningham by running in the protected area which gave Carlton back the lead. He then received a warning under the 6-6-6 rule when he didn't go into the centre with five minutes left on the clock."
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/collingwood-break-carlton-hearts-in-thriller-20190511-p51mbu.html |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
I think I rate Beams higher than you do. He is a quality player and I see why it was tough for us to rebuff his desire to return. The hypothetical mid we could have added is just that and therefore difficult to compare. Who could we have got? We'll never know, so I'm not saying we made the wrong move, just that it wasn't ideal. One that can still work despite not being the best possible outcome. |
Alternatively, we could have traded for a high draft pick (e.g. next year). There are many possibilities. Many Nicksters prefer to insist that "we got Beams for pick 18", which is not even close to true. |
how is it not true?
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| E wrote: | | K wrote: | | ... Many Nicksters prefer to insist that "we got Beams for pick 18", which is not even close to true. |
how is it not true? |
Is that a serious question?
Last edited by K on Mon May 13, 2019 7:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | ...
The Quaynor situation gave us pretty much a free hit to trade a first round pick (having to use later picks to match his bid is fairly low value). ... |
This is highly debatable.
|
^^In what way? We were never using pick 18 as it was always needed to secure Qauynor. The points system is dumb, those lower picks don't have the value of a first, so using those and trading pick 18 was a no brainer.
Unless you're saying Quaynor would not have been bid on before 18 had we kept it? I don't see that logic. |
its not that easy to get if you dont get it. K doesn't seem to get the strategy we employed and why we really didnt give up the first rounder this year.
At one point, i thought he got it very well and was suggesting we should have traded up so that we could have used an early pick PLUS still secured Quaynor, but i bet we inquired about that and couldn't pull it off without losing an asset that we wanted to try and win the flag this year.
2018 draft/trade strategy was all about making our team as good as possible for the next three years and deal with the rest later. We are in prime time folks!
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
