A bit of a discussion on the midfield.

 

At this point in time we have many midfielders which are at least reliable enough to compete and/or do a job:

Stretch, Grimes, Bugg, Harmes, Petracca, Melksham, Kennedy, MJones, NJones, Viney, Trengove, Tyson, Oliver, Vince, Michie, Neal-Bullen, Brayshaw, Newton and vandenBerg.

That is 19 guys that can run through the mids, essentially half our team. Yes, a few guys will be played forward or back to fit into the team, but reality is they are midfielders and have played midfield at some point. We have successfully bolstered our midfield which was the plan a few years ago.

 

But, do we have too many that some will have to moved on at the end of the year and is it hurting our other lines? Who will get the chop? Who is trade bait? If we trade, what will it be for?

No.

Just now, Ethan Tremblay said:

No.

Thank you for your extensive and thorough reply.

We don't have enough quality mids to give any up as trade bait.

Michie, Grimes, M.Jones and Newton may be moved on (some will be kept as depth) but we won't get anything for them.

We might get a late pick for someone like ANB if he want's to move on for more opportunity...

So...no trade bait here.

We will need to go to Free Agency.

I think the way the game is going and with talk of limiting interchanges even more it's a case of having more mids. And it also creates competition for spots, something we haven't had in a long time.

You can never have too many midfielders in the modern game.  

out of the 22 each week, maybe 5 defenders and 3 actual forwards? Hoges, Garlett, watts

the rest are 'midfielders'.  thats 14 for one game

we ceratinly need more quality mids. more Isaac smith types

14 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You can never have too many midfielders in the modern game.  

Exactly - in the modern game you need roughly 2 key forwards, 2 key defenders a ruck and 17 midfielders in any starting 22 - maybe one other "utility" kind of players who can swing forward/back or pinch hit in the ruck.

The issue with getting even more mids is they aren't going to all get game time and play every week. Players aren't going to want to stick around if they aren't going to get games.

38 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You can never have too many midfielders in the modern game.  

Yes and always room for an upgrade

Just now, FireOath said:

The issue with getting even more mids is they aren't going to all get game time and play every week. Players aren't going to want to stick around if they aren't going to get games.

That's true, but then you aren't going to have a full side every week either.  It's also up to the club to move those disgruntled players on and replace them with similar types as well.  That's what list turnover and regeneration is about.  It won't always work out that way, but most times it will. 

18 minutes ago, FireOath said:

The issue with getting even more mids is they aren't going to all get game time and play every week. Players aren't going to want to stick around if they aren't going to get games.

I see your point but look at players like Tom Mitchel. took years for him to get his chance but players stick by successfull clubs. If we keep improving they will stick around for the chance to play in that midfield.

56 minutes ago, FireOath said:

Stretch, Grimes, Bugg, Harmes, Petracca, Melksham, Kennedy, MJones, NJones, Viney, Trengove, Tyson, Oliver, Vince, Michie, Neal-Bullen, Brayshaw, Newton and vandenBerg.

Looking at your list of players I see 1 you can argue is A+ in Viney (even then might be jumping the gun), then 2 A graders in N Jones and Bernie, Then you are left with either B+/B graders, Role players, or 'Potential' players. While i think Tracc, Brayshaw, Tyson, Oliver, Stretch and Trenners have the potential to be A graders we just cant know for sure. Therefore we must keep recruiting for them, if the that means we lose the likes of ANB, Michie or Newton who leave for oppertunity so be it. Players like Prestia who are young and right on the cusp of being A/A+ should still be high priority even with our added depth. 

1 hour ago, rjay said:

We don't have enough quality mids to give any up as trade bait.

Michie, Grimes, M.Jones and Newton may be moved on (some will be kept as depth) but we won't get anything for them.

We might get a late pick for someone like ANB if he want's to move on for more opportunity...

So...no trade bait here.

We will need to go to Free Agency.

This is more like it. Midfields win premierships. It's a cliche for a reason. We need to continue strengthening our midfield with A graders. That's not to say we neglect other areas though.

Just now, AdamFarr said:

This is more like it. Midfields win premierships. It's a cliche for a reason. We need to continue strengthening our midfield with A graders. That's not to say we neglect other areas though.

What rjay said didn't need to have a line put through it.  Everything he wrote is correct.  Yes, we still need to either gain more A grade mids or develop them from within, but what others need to realise is that our fringe players won't get anything for us than fringe players or picks in return.  Throwing ANB in with a 2nd rounder is not enough to land an A grade midfielder.

9 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

What rjay said didn't need to have a line put through it.  Everything he wrote is correct.  Yes, we still need to either gain more A grade mids or develop them from within, but what others need to realise is that our fringe players won't get anything for us than fringe players or picks in return.  Throwing ANB in with a 2nd rounder is not enough to land an A grade midfielder.

I'm not disagreeing with rjay, I'm just saying simply, we don't have enough quality mids.

A lot of those mids will filter out. I don't mind the idea of a lot of mids. It becomes a survival of the fittest (a results based system). To retain a position in the midfield, give us some good results. Those unable to achieve that get to work on their game at Casey. No doubt they'll get a few opportunities throughout the year. The midfield system we have is merit based. I wouldn't want to be at that bottom rung come the end of the year though.

1 hour ago, FireOath said:

The issue with getting even more mids is they aren't going to all get game time and play every week. Players aren't going to want to stick around if they aren't going to get games.

Those who are dam good midfielders will be kept

the rest moved on...

1 hour ago, FireOath said:

The issue with getting even more mids is they aren't going to all get game time and play every week. Players aren't going to want to stick around if they aren't going to get games.

That may be true, but if our midfield is so strong that good players aren't getting a game, then we'll be in a very good position. Not only that, but our strong midfield will help entice opposition players to the club that are better than the mids we've got or players that will help fill voids in other areas of the ground.

We have too many mids that should not be part of our future or are yet to be proven

Arguably Grimes, Harmes, Kennedy, MJones, Michie, Neal-Bullen and Newton.

2 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

We have too many mids that should not be part of our future or are yet to be proven

Arguably Grimes, Harmes, Kennedy, MJones, Michie, Neal-Bullen and Newton.

Kennedy has shown a bit.

.

4 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

We have too many mids that should not be part of our future or are yet to be proven

Arguably Grimes, Harmes, Kennedy, MJones, Michie, Neal-Bullen and Newton.

I think both of these can be very solid B+ players, they are not going to be superstars but will be important cogs. The Last 2 are role players at best, they'll pop in and out as required. The rest might as well be gone.

Team structure:

 

B: small defender - key defender - third tall / mid

HB: mid - key defender - mid

C: mid - mid - mid

HF: mid - key forward - mid

F: mid - key forward - small forward

Foll: ruck - mid - mid

I/c: mid - mid - mid - third tall / mid

 

You can never have enough mids!

We don't have too many midfielders, not by a long shot. We have too many utility / flanker types such as Kent, Harmes, Kennedy, Michie, Newton, M.Jones who are not capable of being genuine midfielders. What we need is midfielders who can play forward or back at times (eg Hodge, Martin, Dalhaus), not flankers who aren't good enough.

Geeze, ANB has been binned pretty quickly. Bizarre. Wasn't he SA's best player or close to in the TAC Cup? A second year player who destroys it in the VFL is worth persevering with. He just hasn't been offered the same opportunities as the likes of Harmes and Hunt. 

Let him slide elsewhere and he is more than capable of burning us. 

23 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

.

I think both of these can be very solid B+ players, they are not going to be superstars but will be important cogs. The Last 2 are role players at best, they'll pop in and out as required. The rest might as well be gone.

Harmes could develop into an A grader if he cleans up his disposal & can continue to grow his tank. He is pretty hard at it, can take a mark over head & kick a goal, win his own ball & run to receive on the outside, these are all pretty damaging attributes from a match up perspective. If he can get himself to a level where he runs through the midfield more & is more precise with his disposal he would be a pretty good player. At the moment he kicks his fair share of goals but I think in one or two more years time he could be up there as A grade. All personal opinion of course, hope he does get there.