Round 1 Team

[Adam The God 30,644]

1 hour ago, Goodvibes said:

This is almost identical to my team with one exception. I'd leave out Frost and play the extra runner. In this case, against a speedy opponent I'd give Matt Jones a run. Will be really interesting to see if we select Pedersen, Frost, Watts and Hogan all in the same team. Most here, seem to think we will.

I see the thinking, but Frost is incredibly quick and although I didn't have him in my side, I'd consider playing him as a defensive forward and a lead up forward.

[Gator 18,014]

I think Goodwin/Roos like what Frost brings, i.e. speed, pressure, structure.

He was OK yesterday.  He kicked the ball inside 50 to Pedersen (goal), kicked the ball inside 50 to Bugg (hanger/goal) and did the knock on to Watts, who side handballed to Garlett (goal).

But yes, it's close.  What a great problem to have.  

I reckon Kennedy and Bugg play,  And I'm the first to admit I didn't see that happening a month ago.  I see Harmes missing if Lumumba plays.  Frost or Oliver won't play if Matt Jones does.  And what happens when Petracca is ready, as he's a certainty, and Trengove rediscovers the talent we all saw those years ago ? 

Oliver is a must for me.  Forget this "hold him back" BS.  He makes us better.

[DeeSpencer 26,484]

Whilst I think it's important to pick your best team I think you have to consider the opposition as well.

If Shaw (back), Shiel (mid) and Devon Smith (fwd) are the crucial players (and that's simplifying but they are important) then we need to consider that somewhat when picking a team.

Who's our best defensive forward to shut down Heath Shaw? Is it's Matt Jones? Or anyone specifically out of Harmes/Kent/Kennedy? 

Similarly if we have to move Bugg on to the ball to tag Shiel then he can't play half back so much. If that happens then we need an extra half back, which is important as there's probably no point tying Vince and Salem up with minding Stevie J or Smith. Hence where Lumumba might come in.

Just food for thought. 

[DeeSpencer 26,484]

The other thing to consider is the MCG factor and how that changes things. It's got to be a positive for Lumumba. 

Our game plan, which resembled the Dogs of last years, held up very well at Etihad, but on a bigger ground the spaces for the zone defending are bigger and the amount of pressure on the forwards probably isn't as consistent. 

That means we need more speed and endurance across half back to make it work. Plus there will be more one on ones between the arcs. Lumumba might struggle with disposal, deep defending and seemingly his willingness to run. But I still expect he covers the ground as well as anyone we have and can win one on ones. 

[Adam The God 30,644]

12 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Whilst I think it's important to pick your best team I think you have to consider the opposition as well.

If Shaw (back), Shiel (mid) and Devon Smith (fwd) are the crucial players (and that's simplifying but they are important) then we need to consider that somewhat when picking a team.

Who's our best defensive forward to shut down Heath Shaw? Is it's Matt Jones? Or anyone specifically out of Harmes/Kent/Kennedy? 

Similarly if we have to move Bugg on to the ball to tag Shiel then he can't play half back so much. If that happens then we need an extra half back, which is important as there's probably no point tying Vince and Salem up with minding Stevie J or Smith. Hence where Lumumba might come in.

Just food for thought. 

Why couldn't Frost play on Shaw? He'd certainly have the pace for it. He'd have Shaw in the air and in fact would make Shaw accountable.

[spirit of norm smith 16,652]

jetta  dunn  garland

vince  t.mcd  salem

harmes viney bugg

watts pedersen kennedy

gartlett hogan kent

gawn tyson n.jones

Vdberger brayshaw frost oliver

emerg. lamumba grimes michie

inj. Dawes M.Jones Spencer

fitness Trengove Petraccccccccca

casey (14) Jkh  Wagner Terlich Mitch.king max.king o.mcd  ANB stretch hulett Weideman white wagner hunt newton 

[Gator 18,014]

4 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Why couldn't Frost play on Shaw? He'd certainly have the pace for it. He'd have Shaw in the air and in fact would make Shaw accountable.

Interesting.

Harmes did the job very well last year. 

[DeeSpencer 26,484]

Just now, AdamFarr said:

Why couldn't Frost play on Shaw? He'd certainly have the pace for it. He'd have Shaw in the air and in fact would make Shaw accountable.

He could. But he also might lack the fitness and smarts. And GWS might not respect the match up anyway and swap it. 

Really though if Pedo, Vanders, Brayshaw, Kent and Kennedy are all part of the forward line mix I can't see a spot for Frost.

[Adam The God 30,644]

6 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Interesting.

Harmes did the job very well last year. 

Well, I guess we have a couple of options. I'd also like to think Kent could play on him, but I'm not Kent's biggest fan. He does have the attributes to be able to play on Shaw though and is a good overhead mark. 

7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

He could. But he also might lack the fitness and smarts. And GWS might not respect the match up anyway and swap it. 

Really though if Pedo, Vanders, Brayshaw, Kent and Kennedy are all part of the forward line mix I can't see a spot for Frost.

My real concern with Pedersen is how the GWS backs run off him. When they've beaten us recently they've killed us off half back and run off our forwards.

[Ted Lasso 19,567]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

Interesting.

Harmes did the job very well last year. 

i'd go Watts, he's in great nick, Make Shaw accountable because Watts looks a match winner if given the chance

[rjay 25,347]

8 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

He could. But he also might lack the fitness and smarts. And GWS might not respect the match up anyway and swap it. 

Really though if Pedo, Vanders, Brayshaw, Kent and Kennedy are all part of the forward line mix I can't see a spot for Frost.

I think Pedders could be the one to miss...

GWS will miss Cameron and maybe Patton, they will go in shorter than is normally the case. Their game plan seems to be built a lot on run from defence. I would have Harmes in with Kennedy, Bugg and Frost to provide the the defensive pressure. Pedders doesn't bring this to the table.

[CHF 2,817]

On 3/7/2016 at 3:47 PM, CBDees said:

 

Have no idea why that quote is in my reply box and I cannot get rid of it.

The team i would have for R1 at the moment is:

Jetta  Dunn Garland

Vince  Tmac  Salem

Harmes Viney Bugg

Watts Pedersen Kennedy

Gartlett Hogan Kent

Gawn Tyson N.Jones

VDB Brayshaw Oliver Grimes

I am not convinced about Frost at the moment and would get him to run in Casey a few times to see more. Pedersen to relieve Gawn in the ruck with a lot of run on the bench. Dunn, Garland, Tmac, Pedersen, Watts, Hogan and Gawn all 90%+ time on the ground with the interchanges to go mainly into the midfield.

[MadAsHell 4,217]

10 hours ago, mo64 said:

You've got Grimes ahead of Harmes, Kennedy and M. Jones. Based on what?

 

10 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Possibly, although Lumumba gets a look in due to playing across half back where guys like Wagner and Hunt haven't established themselves.  Harmes is fighting for a crowded spot in the forward line.  Different cases.

I'll use Wiseblood's answer to another question to answer yours.

You need a balanced team.  Grimes can play across half back if need be and his form has been at the least equal to that of M. Jones.  Harmes & Kennedy can't play across half back.  They're both very stiff though.

[FarNorthernD 5,861]

Whoever makes the Rnd 1 team there will be some unlucky footballers running around at Casey. With Petracca and Trengove also coming back over the next few weeks the pressure will be on to perform in the firsts. At this stage we have got some actual depth in most spots aside from ruck and key position. 

[Roger Mellie 4,179]

4 hours ago, CHF said:

Have no idea why that quote is in my reply box and I cannot get rid of it.

The team i would have for R1 at the moment is:

Jetta  Dunn Garland

Vince  Tmac  Salem

Harmes Viney Bugg

Watts Pedersen Kennedy

Gartlett Hogan Kent

Gawn Tyson N.Jones

VDB Brayshaw Oliver Grimes

I am not convinced about Frost at the moment and would get him to run in Casey a few times to see more. Pedersen to relieve Gawn in the ruck with a lot of run on the bench. Dunn, Garland, Tmac, Pedersen, Watts, Hogan and Gawn all 90%+ time on the ground with the interchanges to go mainly into the midfield.

I've changed my mind and agree. Given the lower minutes played by Frost last week and no ruck time, I think he'll come out. I'd have this team minus Grimes and plus Prince, and Garlett with just the two t's.

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

On March 13, 2016 at 0:12 PM, chook fowler said:

Sad to say but I don't think Grimes has done himself any favours with his NAB form. Seems to lack intensity and urgency. He now is probably only a depth player. 

I think we saw him in the red and blue jumper for the last time on sunday

[Damo 3,445]

I think we will see Jack Grimes a lot this season, as he is adaptable to a few positions. He may be not in top 22 right now but its a long season.

[Fat Tony 5,322]

I will wait until Casey play before I list my 22. But I will have only one of Frost or Pedersen in my side. (I am probably leaning towards Frost.) I think Vandenberg is able to provide a forward target to support Hogan, Watts and Frost/Pedersen and players like Harmes, Oliver, Kennedy and Matt Jones all deserve a spot more.

Further, while I still think a fit and in form Lumumba is in our best side, I think he needs to play a BOG type performance in the VFL to earn his spot. Likewise, Brayshaw needs a good showing this week to get into the side for Round 1.

[mo64 5,886]

6 minutes ago, Franky_31 said:

I think we will see Jack Grimes a lot this season, as he is adaptable to a few positions. He may be not in top 22 right now but its a long season.

It's one thing to be adaptable, but it's another to be playing at an AFL standard. Whatever role you see Grimes playing can be covered by players who are currently playing at a higher level.

I like Grimes and would love to see him succeed, but for over 2 years he's been an average to poor AFL player, and what he showed in the NAB Cup was no exception.

[DeeSpencer 26,484]

8 hours ago, rjay said:

I think Pedders could be the one to miss...

GWS will miss Cameron and maybe Patton, they will go in shorter than is normally the case. Their game plan seems to be built a lot on run from defence. I would have Harmes in with Kennedy, Bugg and Frost to provide the the defensive pressure. Pedders doesn't bring this to the table.

But I trust Pedersen over Frost in the ruck, and given the way he was used on the weekend the coaches might as well. If Mumford starts getting hold of Gawn then Pedersen could be very useful to come in and physically attack Mumford for a while. Probably won't be successful but could slow him down a bit. Frost will just be spat out by big Mummy.

If we had any kind of half decent 2nd ruck I'd pick them this week over both of them. 

I see both sides of the Pedersen/Frost argument, but I don't see the need for both. Wish we could combine Pedersen's skills and footy smarts with Frost's athleticism.

[rjay 25,347]

9 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

But I trust Pedersen over Frost in the ruck, and given the way he was used on the weekend the coaches might as well. If Mumford starts getting hold of Gawn then Pedersen could be very useful to come in and physically attack Mumford for a while. Probably won't be successful but could slow him down a bit. Frost will just be spat out by big Mummy.

If we had any kind of half decent 2nd ruck I'd pick them this week over both of them. 

I see both sides of the Pedersen/Frost argument, but I don't see the need for both. Wish we could combine Pedersen's skills and footy smarts with Frost's athleticism.

I think it might come down to forward pressure 'Dee', GWS are a quick running team and Pedersen may be a liability. 

Frost's speed could get him the nod.

Agree we are light on for choice at the moment. We need some of the tall kids to step up...

[drdrake 3,203]

7 hours ago, CHF said:

Have no idea why that quote is in my reply box and I cannot get rid of it.

The team i would have for R1 at the moment is:

Jetta  Dunn Garland

Vince  Tmac  Salem

Harmes Viney Bugg

Watts Pedersen Kennedy

Gartlett Hogan Kent

Gawn Tyson N.Jones

VDB Brayshaw Oliver Grimes

I am not convinced about Frost at the moment and would get him to run in Casey a few times to see more. Pedersen to relieve Gawn in the ruck with a lot of run on the bench. Dunn, Garland, Tmac, Pedersen, Watts, Hogan and Gawn all 90%+ time on the ground with the interchanges to go mainly into the midfield.

I reckon this is pretty much spot on.  That means our 2nds look like

Hunt O MacDonald White

H Frost  Terlich

M Jones ANB Stretch

Petracca Dawes Trengove

JKH Weiderman Max King

Spencer Newton Michie

Mitch king, Smith, Hullett, Max King Wagner

[jnrmac 20,305]

8 hours ago, CHF said:

Have no idea why that quote is in my reply box and I cannot get rid of it.

The team i would have for R1 at the moment is:

Jetta  Dunn Garland

Vince  Tmac  Salem

Harmes Viney Bugg

Watts Pedersen Kennedy

Gartlett Hogan Kent

Gawn Tyson N.Jones

VDB Brayshaw Oliver Grimes

I am not convinced about Frost at the moment and would get him to run in Casey a few times to see more. Pedersen to relieve Gawn in the ruck with a lot of run on the bench. Dunn, Garland, Tmac, Pedersen, Watts, Hogan and Gawn all 90%+ time on the ground with the interchanges to go mainly into the midfield.

Who is Gartlett? Is he related to Jack Trengrove?

 

[Skuit 10,031]

1 hour ago, Munga said:

On 3/13/2016 at 9:42 PM, chook fowler said:

Sad to say but I don't think Grimes has done himself any favours with his NAB form. Seems to lack intensity and urgency. He now is probably only a depth player. 

 

This. Mental scars. For all the back and forth on the relative merits of Grimes and Garland there's something about the pair that just doesn't seem to fit our current model. They may contribute but they lack aggression in demanding the ball and moving it quickly with intent. Somewhere toward the end of the third term Garland did well to find some space and mark just forward of center from a short pass. The forward line is flooded but Garland just seemed indecisive and slow to react. (Players running past on both sides?). Then kicked it laterally out of bounds in the direction of Grimes who was leading away from the ball. That was our old game plan. Probably overstating it but the whole passage at the time felt indicative of the pair not really adjusting to what we're trying to put in place.

[Farmer 902]

2 hours ago, Munga said:

I think we saw him in the red and blue jumper for the last time on sunday

What bloody rubbish!

Didnt get it as much as he usually does, but u run the tape and watch dispassionately and you will see that he didn't miss a target and many were incredibly good including a precise left foot kick to a running forward 40m away.

i didn't see the first half originally but was interested to see a suggestion that he had squibbed it in the second quarter. When I saw the replay it was plain that this was nonsense--it was a poor kick to him and was behind him as he tried to mark it. He never lacks courage. And as others have said, he can play wing or HBF .The poisonous quality of his critics was demonstrated 18 months ago. We played PA in Adelaide and nearly beat them. He buggered up one kick near the end, and it is true that it was at a critical time. But he had played all day on M White who was outstanding for PA that year and who was benched 5 minutes into the last quarter having had 3 disposals! By far his worst game, yet on this site Grimes is only remembered for the errant kick. His disposal is a darned sight better than Viney's