Changes vs Pies (Queens Birthday)

[bing181 8,169]

O Mac won't be dropped.

Fanciful.

[Demon Dynasty 15,550]

The Pies' zone has been minced up on the G by two pretty quick, reasonably small, hard spreading (middle of the rung or lower) teams this season in the Saints and Port. With many 'out the back' goals as a result. Port even used 2 smalls at various stages, one of them Krakouer, to guard and run off Cloke for short stints.

Ben offers the extra run, is able to run/slice/and spread for another option through the Pies dodgy zone. Problem is who do you replace him with apart from Harmes who also offers similar run/speed but did have a shocker on the weekend....replacing like with like? (albeit Ben Ken is 10cm smaller...but probably more slippery!). Being young Harmes might also be 'on' this week, and have a decent one.

On balance i would say no change. Let the team settle and lets see what they can deliver, giving Harmes (and Jeffy) one extra shot at it this week. Maybe Jeffy through the mid for a few short stints also to try and get some touch and set the cat amongst the Magpies pretty slow (across the ground) mid field.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Rusty Nails

[Moonshadow 16,234]

2 hours ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

I wonder if Dunny is any chance this week to pick up Cloke or Cox?

Are you on a 24 hour delay? Keep up man!

[Generation dee 1,336]

5 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

did he play when we beat them earlier in the year?  Cant recall

2 goals from 15 disposals. Dunn played back and frost forward. 

Not sure why all the doom and gloom here. Collingwood had 53 inside 50 entries and kicked 7 goals at the weekend. Hawthorn had 58 and kicked 11. We defended much better as a team in our back half at the weekend, and if it wasn't for some very lazy forward half pressure and an inability to keep the ball in our forward half, we probably go closer to winning the game. Port showed last week that when we let teams walk out of our forward 50 unopposed we are easy to score against. Our problem, as it has been for a few weeks, is our inability to trap the ball high in our forward half for longer periods of the game. If we let sidebottom, pendlebury and trealor get the ball in hand with space in the centre square, it won't matter if it's frost, McDonald's or whoever defending. 

The biggest kpi's this year on our wins have been tackles and pressure acts inside our forward half, and our ability to keep the ball forward for longer periods of time. It's just crazy to think that defenders can consistently get blamed here, even with their individual failings, when our half forward line and midfielders don't put enough pressure on, don't stick their tackles and don't close down space well enough to allow the opposition to just wake it out of our forward half. 

Anyone who has even a remote idea of playing football knows that if the midfielder has open space in front of him, the majority of the time he will hit a eating forward and there is little a defender can do. Get the ball in your front half, then put enough frontal and midfield pressure on to keep it there and inevitably you win more games of footy than you lose. 

[Generation dee 1,336]

29 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

The Pies' zone has been minced up on the G by two pretty quick, reasonably small, hard spreading (middle of the rung or lower) teams this season in the Saints and Port. With many 'out the back' goals as a result. Port even used 2 smalls at various stages, one of them Krakouer, to guard and run off Cloke for short stints.

Ben offers the extra run, is able to run/slice/and spread for another option through the Pies dodgy zone. Problem is who do you replace him with apart from Harmes who also offers similar run/speed but did have a shocker on the weekend....replacing like with like? (albeit Ben Ken is 10cm smaller...but probably more slippery!). Being young Harmes might also be 'on' this week, and have a decent one.

On balance i would say no change. Let the team settle and lets see what they can deliver, giving Harmes (and Jeffy) one extra shot at it this week. Maybe Jeffy through the mid for a few short stints also to try and get some touch and set the cat amongst the Magpies pretty slow (across the ground) mid field.

Ben Ken in for Vanders would have been mine. Just didn't look ready yet and might need another 1 or 2 in the 2's

[Wiseblood 24,636]

Just now, Generation dee said:

Ben Ken in for Vanders would have been mine. Just didn't look ready yet and might need another 1 or 2 in the 2's

Ben Ken for Harmes would work better IMO.  To me, Vanders is classier and has more footy IQ than Harmes at the minute.  He might have been quiet on the weekend, but I always feel as though Vanders can have an impact at any given moment.  Deserves at least another week.

[Generation dee 1,336]

Just now, Wiseblood said:

Ben Ken for Harmes would work better IMO.  To me, Vanders is classier and has more footy IQ than Harmes at the minute.  He might have been quiet on the weekend, but I always feel as though Vanders can have an impact at any given moment.  Deserves at least another week.

He had some good moments, most notably his 3rd and 4th efforts to get the ball back for us right on the stroke of half time. But other than that he didn't have a lot of impact. Harmes has had 2 quiet weeks, as has Kent. I agree Vanders is likely to have an impact, I just think he needs 1 or 2 full matches under his belt. Having said that, I was surprised to see he spent more time on the ground than many other players. Whoever plays of Kennedy, Kent, harmes or Vanders, doesn't particularly matter in a sense. They are all ikely to score a couple of goals and set up 1 or 2, but the pressure when we don't have the ball needs to dramatically increase from last week's output.

[chook fowler 18,277]

1 hour ago, Rusty Nails said:

Don't mind it but who for?

By rights it should be Garlett but it won't. He hasn't put in for the past fortnight. Small forwards seem to be a protected species.

[dtrinh 71]

I thought perhaps Ben Ken for Dean Kent. I like what Kent brings to the table with his speed and defensive pressure inside 50 but at this stage he is too inconsistent. Last week even though he kicked two goals, one of them a gimme, he didn't seem to do enough inside 50. Harmes at least plays forward/ wing/ mid so has a bit more flexibility. 

[goodwindees 2,119]

Harmes doesn't get it enough and when he does, he's like a rabbit in the headlights.  Has no tricks and no smarts. 

Kent is just an enormous tease. 

Harmes & Kent - Out

Grimes & Alex NB - In

[DubDee 20,715]

Kennedy in for harmes

garlett gets a week to make up for dodging the contest. He is a big game player. I expect 4 goals and plenty of tackles for Garlett 

[Binmans PA 26,213]

3 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-06-06/dees-hit-queens-birthday-as-favourites-for-first-time-in-a-decade

 

MELBOURNE will head into the Queen's Birthday clash against Collingwood as clear favourite for the first time in more than a decade. 

The Demons haven't been the bookies' clear pick for the marquee game since 2005, when Melbourne was second and Collingwood in 13th spot.

Time to bloody bury our soft underbelly on the big stage.

[Binmans PA 26,213]

3 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Ben Ken for Harmes would work better IMO.  To me, Vanders is classier and has more footy IQ than Harmes at the minute.  He might have been quiet on the weekend, but I always feel as though Vanders can have an impact at any given moment.  Deserves at least another week.

I don't mind Vanders, but he's vastly overrated on these boards. He's a big body whose game is based around physicality. I know he's still young in a games experience sense, but I'd never say he's classy or that he has a particularly strong footy IQ.

I'd be replacing Vanders with Kennedy, who is more suited to our new game style than Vanders, who lacks pace and polish.

Edited June 6, 2016 by AdamFarr

[Wrecker45 3,378]

5 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

I don't mind Vanders, but he's vastly overrated on these boards. He's a big body whose game is based around physicality. I know he's still young in a games experience sense, but I'd never say he's classy or that he has a particularly strong footy IQ.

I'd be replacing Vanders with Kennedy, who is more suited to our new game style than Vanders, who lacks pace and polish.

Vanders is one of the fastest at the club. He does not lack pace.

[dazzledavey36 48,844]

1 hour ago, Wrecker45 said:

Vanders is one of the fastest at the club. He does not lack pace.

Well then he needs to learn to use it on Gameday because i am yet to see it.

My biggest frustration with Vandenberg is that we recruited on the back off averaging 33 disposals in the NEAFL yet we continue to play him as a full time forward.. With Viney out we need his grunt and physicality in the midfield right now. Collingwood would be perfect to really rough up Pendlebury and treloar.

[Nasher 33,068]

9 hours ago, Generation dee said:

He had some good moments, most notably his 3rd and 4th efforts to get the ball back for us right on the stroke of half time. But other than that he didn't have a lot of impact. Harmes has had 2 quiet weeks, as has Kent. I agree Vanders is likely to have an impact, I just think he needs 1 or 2 full matches under his belt. Having said that, I was surprised to see he spent more time on the ground than many other players. Whoever plays of Kennedy, Kent, harmes or Vanders, doesn't particularly matter in a sense. They are all ikely to score a couple of goals and set up 1 or 2, but the pressure when we don't have the ball needs to dramatically increase from last week's output.

I agree that it doesn't matter really. All of them are capable of the required pressure to play the role. The difficulty comes in predicting which ones are going to be on this week; the results suggest Kennedy should have played, but how do you predict that in advance? 

3 out of our 4 half forwards will play (vB/Kent/Harmes/Kennedy). I'd be leaning towards leaving out Harmes as he has had consecutive poor weeks now and selecting Kennedy. It feels like a very low percentage change though.

[Nasher 33,068]

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Well then he needs to learn to use it on Gameday because i am yet to see it.

My biggest frustration with Vandenberg is that we recruited on the back off averaging 33 disposals in the NEAFL yet we continue to play him as a full time forward.. With Viney out we need his grunt and physicality in the midfield right now. Collingwood would be perfect to really rough up Pendlebury and treloar.

I know rpfc laments this too, but the obvious reality is that there aren't unlimited midfield spots. Even without Viney you'd think Jones, Vince, Tyson and Oliver are going to eat up the majority of the midfield minutes. It'd be good to see him starting in the middle on occasion but I can't see him spending heaps of time in there. 

[Dwight Schrute 16,802]

On 6/7/2016 at 7:37 AM, dazzledavey36 said:

Well then he needs to learn to use it on Gameday because i am yet to see it.

My biggest frustration with Vandenberg is that we recruited on the back off averaging 33 disposals in the NEAFL yet we continue to play him as a full time forward.. With Viney out we need his grunt and physicality in the midfield right now. Collingwood would be perfect to really rough up Pendlebury and treloar.

The other one is Trengove, while he looks a lot better than he did to me, i'm still not sure he has the leg speed to play as anything other than an inside mid or hard running wingman in the modern game, his aeorobic ability showed on the weekend, despite limited game time he still got to more contests than most of the 100% game time players.

[Wiseblood 24,636]

Just now, AdamFarr said:

I don't mind Vanders, but he's vastly overrated on these boards. He's a big body whose game is based around physicality. I know he's still young in a games experience sense, but I'd never say he's classy or that he has a particularly strong footy IQ.

I'd be replacing Vanders with Kennedy, who is more suited to our new game style than Vanders, who lacks pace and polish.

I disagree totally.  I feel like we're watching two different teams at the moment, mate.  That's life I guess.  

Just now, Nasher said:

I know rpfc laments this too, but the obvious reality is that there aren't unlimited midfield spots. Even without Viney you'd think Jones, Vince, Tyson and Oliver are going to eat up the majority of the midfield minutes. It'd be good to see him starting in the middle on occasion but I can't see him spending heaps of time in there. 

It also needs to be said that for the second half of last year and for most of this season, he has been injured and hasn't had the opportunity to fully build his tank.  We know what a damaging player he can be around the packs but, outside of the first half of last season, he hasn't had the chance to show it.

[Webber 10,100]

Vanders is a classic tease player at the mo. He hasn't had enough of an injury free run at it this or last year to consolidate, but shows signs of being exactly the type of player every club loves. Big, fast, hard, a good mark and with footy nous. But he just doesn't get enough of it. He's young, but looks late twenties, so I think we expect a lot of him. He's another that will become immeasurably better when he gets to 50 games. I think the club love him for that upside, and I think he did enough on the weekend to stay in. 

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

Same side, will be fresh and hungry.

[Vagg 2,422]

For me, Kennedy is a MUST in.  Redeemed himself in the VFL, and will be desperate for another chance to show the Pies they made a big mistake in ditching him.  Would also like to see Grimes come in.

The outs?  No idea.  Leave it to the coaching & conditioning staff to decide who most needs a rest/refresher in the VFL.

 

[old55 21,356]

Want BenKen in, Harmes out.

[ArtificialWisdom 3,869]

39 minutes ago, Webber said:

Vanders is a classic tease player at the mo. He hasn't had enough of an injury free run at it this or last year to consolidate, but shows signs of being exactly the type of player every club loves. Big, fast, hard, a good mark and with footy nous. But he just doesn't get enough of it. He's young, but looks late twenties, so I think we expect a lot of him. He's another that will become immeasurably better when he gets to 50 games. I think the club love him for that upside, and I think he did enough on the weekend to stay in. 

The only think he lacks right now is finishing. He is our worst kick for goal, particularly on the run. He just needs to finish better and he will be well on his way to being an A grader. I dont see him as much of a tease because his flaws are consistant as are his strengths, I'd say gram for gram he is the best overhead mark in the side. Kent on the other hand plays a flawless game followed by an insipid one. To me that makes him the bigger tease. Flowing with talent just cant get it right.

 

10 hours ago, goodwindees said:

Harmes doesn't get it enough and when he does, he's like a rabbit in the headlights.  Has no tricks and no smarts. 

I dissagree on your assesment of harmes. I think he has plenty of smarts, talent and class but right now he is just inconsistant. He is capable of huge pressure acts and can find a way to sneak a goal or 2 often even when he has played poorly. That kind of player is invaluble in close games, someone who can kick a goal late after having a dirty day (yes i know he missed one this week but he usually takes those chances sitting at 11.4 this year). That being said, he might deserve a game or 2 back at casey to remind him what is required but i have no doubt he has the tricks and smarts to make it with time.

IN: Kennedy (he just got the same reminder harmes should get)
OUT: Harmes 

[old dee 22,924]

In Kennedy and Grimes.

Out Garlett ,  Harmes and or Kent.