Backing Jamar [Thread bumped - poll disabled]

[1858 265]

I still think we will looking for this player in October next year.

Quite likely.

[jacey 333]

Martin and Fitzpatrick are the players currently on our list that fit the mould

Spencer I see as a first ruck - I think he'll develop in to a good ruckman

Don't know enough about Gawn other than the fact that he's a man mountain and by all reports, fairly mobile for his size. I think he'd be years away from being a threat to anyone or anything.

I'm really looking forward to Gawn. Unbelievably good hands for a big man.

The days of Jamar and Spencer playing together might be over. Both are first rucks and with new interchange rules, you can't really play both. I see Jamar as a ruckman who drifts forward rather then a 50/50 ruck/forward.

Martin is an interesting one. Got smashed against legit ruckmen but with new rules, there will be more Leigh Browns playing. He will be able to compete with other second ruckmen. I still prefer him to go back to FB but this rule might save Martin. PJ is useless.

[H_T 2,941]

It is also unrealistic to use Jamar as the only example of a ruck coming on and to use his progress as the benchmark for all others.

I don't think it's unrealistic to say a player of any type should be in and around the 22 5 years after he's drafted.

Agree.

By 2014 I'm hopeful of seeing some of the above mentioned 'coming on'. I doubt it will be 'AA coming on' like Jamar, but I'm sure we'll take it if it occurs.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

I like the idea of Jamar playing in the forward line for extended periods in the game. He is a bloody good contested mark and is a reasonably accurate kick.

However, we can only do this if we have another ruckman who can actually handle the ruck duties. I think we should persist with Johnson (given that we missed out on Hale).

Johnson is capable. He's just inconsistent and has been plagued with injuries. It's possible he could turn his career around next year.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

As an aside, any reason we didn't go in hard for Jacobs?

[Summer Blease 0]

Why can't we swap Warnock for Jacobs and re establish Martin as a defender. As it is were hanging onto Warnock for depth, which while i recognise is important, we can't have our cake and eat it too. If trading Warnock for this second ruck we are seeking is the answer, why not bite the bullet.

[dee-luded 2,958]

The second question is a very good question indeed rpfc. I hadn't considered it, on account of Jamar being an AA in his current role, but if we played Jamar as we were thinking of playing Hale, that leaves the door open for someone like Spencer to play Jamar's current role.

Clearly now with the new substitute rules Spencer could only make it as a number 1 ruck. You can't carry a player like him into a match as a second ruck.

However I'd still prefer to go with Jamar as the number 1 ruck and work on developing Stefan Martin. That's what I'd like, but I expect the FD to use PJ in this role instead, which I don't like.

I don't think Spencer, & maybe Martin would have the engine Yet,, to do Jamars job... Maybe wrong on Martin, I'm not sure, but I feel they would need to be played with increased game time, to start to increase their endurance.

Nowadays Jamar is proficient in front of goal, so less risk of 2 rucks in the side that's trying to enter the 8.

IMO big guys improve with work & continuity.

[rpfc 27,676]

Agree.

By 2014 I'm hopeful of seeing some of the above mentioned 'coming on'. I doubt it will be 'AA coming on' like Jamar, but I'm sure we'll take it if it occurs.

I didn't mean that they needed to become AA ruckmen.

Jamar took until 2009 to shore up his position on the list, let alone the 22 (or 21).

No reason why they cannot come on before then, but they are both speculative nonetheless.

I just think that they would have to get to a higher level in a few years due to the fact that we will be much better than we are and much less willing to allow a 21/22 year old ruckman/forward to take someone's position for little effect, or if they take the 21st position on the field whether they would be a burden for the forward line to carry.

[rpfc 27,676]

It's a more salient question than that I think. A player like Spencer, who clearly has the FD's faith, is really only going to flourish as a first ruck, so instead of [censored]-farting around with NQR back-ups like PJ, or even Dunn/Sylvia/Newton, putting Spencer in the team and giving him the majority of the ruck work might speed up his development and be the best 2-man combination we can come up with.

I'd still prefer to go with Jamar as the number 1 though.

I think it would be 'in-name' only if we went in with Jamar as our 'No.2.'

Who do you think would be the preferred ruckman in the second half of a close game?

I don't think it would work.

[Mono 454]

I like the idea of Jamar playing in the forward line for extended periods in the game. He is a bloody good contested mark and is a reasonably accurate kick.

.......

Contested mark? - yes

Accurate kick? - definitive NO: never field kicks; kicking for goal very iffy more than 15-20 metres out.

Pinch hitting forward only.

[titan_uranus 23,142]

Contested mark? - yes

Accurate kick? - definitive NO: never field kicks; kicking for goal very iffy more than 15-20 metres out.

Pinch hitting forward only.

Disagree. Jamar's better than a pinch hitter, his kicking for goal is quite good nowadays (set shot kicking anyway. I still remember that kick vs Collingwood I think it was where he streamed into goal and from about 20 metres missed everything).

[titan_uranus 23,142]

Contested mark? - yes

Accurate kick? - definitive NO: never field kicks; kicking for goal very iffy more than 15-20 metres out.

Pinch hitting forward only.

Disagree. Jamar's better than a pinch hitter, his kicking for goal is quite good nowadays (set shot kicking anyway. I still remember that kick vs Collingwood I think it was where he streamed into goal and from about 20 metres missed everything).

[Summer Blease 0]

Just heard on SEN that Warnock will be a blue by Monday. I know it's not exactly a reputable source, but would anybody else be surpprised if this happens?

Warnock to blues, gets to play football and be with his brother, they give us Jacobs or Hanson. Win, win if ever I've seen one (I see a backup ruckman more important to our structure than a depth player)

Hopefuly we wont have to worry about any of these people backing Jamar next year.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Just heard on SEN that Warnock will be a blue by Monday. I know it's not exactly a reputable source, but would anybody else be surpprised if this happens?

Warnock to blues, gets to play football and be with his brother, they give us Jacobs or Hanson. Win, win if ever I've seen one (I see a backup ruckman more important to our structure than a depth player)

Hopefuly we wont have to worry about any of these people backing Jamar next year.

Will be interesting to see if this eventuates. As much as I like Warnock, I liked your earlier point about trading him for Jacobs and getting Martin to develop his Key Position Defender role. I've been a big fan of Martin being our big forward for ages, but you have turned me! Having thought about your idea, I'd even prefer trading Warnock for Jesse White as he is a proven goal kicker (pretty much averages a goal a game).

If it doesn't happen, I'd go back to my Martin for Full Forward role, to play that "Hale" position that we wanted. He will be 24 next season, can do the job as a relief ruck when required, but can still play that deep forward target. While he hasn't really proven himself as a key forward target, if they gave him a KPI of kicking 30 goals a year, I think it's a very achievable target for this guy.

[Summer Blease 0]

Interesting.. the Matin in the forward line experiment has been tried and failed, due to poor kicking and bad forward thinking, unless this had been ironed out at Casey (and considering we were chasing Hale- it probably hasnt) I would keep Martin as a backman. And he would be backup (just as Warnock was) so he would only have to be capable of filling in back there- which he already is.

If we retain Warnock and fail to play him again, we might have a situation at the end of next year where we loose Warnock and Marin because they both become frustrated, meanwhile we still dont get our back up ruckman. Let's make a move MFC.

[rpfc 27,676]

BUMP (AND PLEASE DON'T FILL OUT THE POLL - IT IS THREE YEARS OLD)

I thought about Gawn today and I vaguely recalled starting a thread about when we thought he would 'come on' and be able to command a spot in the 22.

It's the third question in the poll; 75% thought it would have happened already. I thought 2016 or beyond would be the year.

I bring up this not to pick on Gawn but to point out how long ruckmen take and that, in the future, we should not bother taking teenage ruckman with early picks, or even in the ND at all.

[rjay 24,184]

BUMP (AND PLEASE DON'T FILL OUT THE POLL - IT IS THREE YEARS OLD)

I thought about Gawn today and I vaguely recalled starting a thread about when we thought he would 'come on' and be able to command a spot in the 22.

It's the third question in the poll; 75% thought it would have happened already. I thought 2016 or beyond would be the year.

I bring up this not to pick on Gawn but to point out how long ruckmen take and that, in the future, we should not bother taking teenage ruckman with early picks, or even in the ND at all.

Grundy???

Not all players are created equally, you can't have rules on this stuff that's why Grundy dropped to the low teens and the Pies got a bargain.

NikNat???

[DeeSpencer 23,642]

BUMP (AND PLEASE DON'T FILL OUT THE POLL - IT IS THREE YEARS OLD)

I thought about Gawn today and I vaguely recalled starting a thread about when we thought he would 'come on' and be able to command a spot in the 22.

It's the third question in the poll; 75% thought it would have happened already. I thought 2016 or beyond would be the year.

I bring up this not to pick on Gawn but to point out how long ruckmen take and that, in the future, we should not bother taking teenage ruckman with early picks, or even in the ND at all.

Disagree. Because ruckman take longer does not mean you shouldn't take one when available. I agree you have to be cautious with early picks but I bet Grundy for Collingwood goes up and down over the next few years but will likely be good value long term.

I'm all for drafting young rucks even if they sit on the list for years without doing much because you've got 44 spots and you've got time to give them AFL development. Sandilands and Cox might have taken a while in the system to get good but they were still in the system. There's no guarantee that if they were playing local footy or WAFL reserves that they ever would've got their skills and body up to standard.

And Gawn was our best ruck for a fair stretch of this year it was just Clark's injury and Fitzpatrick's ruck skills not being developed meant we couldn't over stretch big Max. So he might not have commanded a best 22 spot but he's still been contributing.

I hope we rookie a ruck this year with the lack of talent of smaller players apparent in this draft I think it's worth taking a speculative big boy and giving him a year to see what we get from it. Whether that ruck is aged 18 or 24 doesn't fuss me too much.

[rpfc 27,676]

Drafting someone to play at Casey for 4 years is a waste of a pick.

There are always exceptions. But as a rule, I would not be bothering with ruckmen until they are 20+ and only with late picks or trades.

[rpfc 27,676]

Mods: Sorry for the bump, if you could put Old Poll in the title so people don't vote, that would be super.

[Trisul 654]

I bring up this not to pick on Gawn but to point out how long ruckmen take and that, in the future, we should not bother taking teenage ruckman with early picks, or even in the ND at all.

Surely a couple of knees alters his timeline ..somewhat.

[Rogue 585]

I agree with your 'general rule' on rucks; I've advocated for picking rucks as rookies/late picks (and trading for them if needed). I think I created a thread or post with a list of all the AFL rucks and their path to their team's list; the majority were late picks and rookie draft picks. In addition to the time it takes to develop these young talls, the chance to have a failure drafting a ruck is also higher than, say, a mid.

Mods: Sorry for the bump, if you could put Old Poll in the title so people don't vote, that would be super.

Done.

Here's another general rule I'm a fan of; old threads shouldn't be resurrected. If you want to refer to an old post, quote or link to it in a new thread.

[CBDees 3,162]

Disagree. Because ruckman take longer does not mean you shouldn't take one when available. I agree you have to be cautious with early picks but I bet Grundy for Collingwood goes up and down over the next few years but will likely be good value long term.

I'm all for drafting young rucks even if they sit on the list for years without doing much because you've got 44 spots and you've got time to give them AFL development. Sandilands and Cox might have taken a while in the system to get good but they were still in the system. There's no guarantee that if they were playing local footy or WAFL reserves that they ever would've got their skills and body up to standard.

And Gawn was our best ruck for a fair stretch of this year it was just Clark's injury and Fitzpatrick's ruck skills not being developed meant we couldn't over stretch big Max. So he might not have commanded a best 22 spot but he's still been contributing.

I hope we rookie a ruck this year with the lack of talent of smaller players apparent in this draft I think it's worth taking a speculative big boy and giving him a year to see what we get from it. Whether that ruck is aged 18 or 24 doesn't fuss me too much.

People on this site keep reminding others that Nat was an instant success (and maintain that we should of drafted him instead of Watts, which I disagree)! As Grundy, Kreutzer etc also highlight, you don't always have to wait years to get some return!

[Dees2014 2,377]

I think from memory Gawn was about pick 36 and Fitz pick 53. Both have huge potential and have been playing (as opposed to on our list) for only 2-3 years. Both have had serious injury/illness problems.

If we climb rapidly up the ladder as I am very confident we will do this year our ruck strength ((Gawn/Fitz) and our forward brilliance (Fitzy in part) will have a lot to do with it.

I think it is worth picking developing rucks as late draft picks (Fitz/Gawn) or rookie (jamar/jolley) and we would have picked Hanath as a rookie if Freo hadn't have "stolen" him.

Rucks are important. If we want a quality fully developed one we will be using a first round pick. I'd rather take them cheaply and develop them our way.

[Demoneyes 562]

People on this site keep reminding others that Nat was an instant success (and maintain that we should of drafted him instead of Watts, which I disagree)! As Grundy, Kreutzer etc also highlight, you don't always have to wait years to get some return!

Krue(t)zer? Not in the same league as Grundy for instant success. Agree with rpfc though. Ruckman do take time, why waste that time when you can draft once they have developed?