12 minutes ago, stuie said:

But that's a different point to talking about what's best for his development.

Couple of tangents going on and starting to overlap when they probably shouldn't.

 

stop it immediately Stuie... youre making sense

Just now, stevethemanjordan said:

Or it's simply that we lack so much backline depth and quality that we have no alternative?

Look at what we know: Dunn isn't rated by the coaches for reasons we can guess. Your lover-boy Garland is incapable of playing the way a bloke of his experience should. T-Mac has been incredibly up and down this year. We've had two debutants become mainstay flankers in Hunt and Wagner. We've had Oscar playing games because the coaches refuse to play Dunn. 

We lack depth and quality. 

Just as we did with our midfield not long ago. 

Simple.

That may well be the case as well, Steve.  We have to work with what we have and, at the moment, it seems this is the best we have to offer.

I don't know that we lack quality as such, but depth is a bit of an issue at present.

I would have Oscar in before Garland at this point, Garlo has been extremely underwhelming this year.

Dunn i think is the best option but he's now injured and probably wouldn't be picked anyway.

So it's persist with oscar and Tmac or give someone like Dawes or Pederson a run in defense.

There's probably 3 or 4 separate issues about all of this ...all need to be looked at on their own merits really. Not a one size fits all situation.

Whether good bad or indifference, right or wrong  Oscar is there presently by default

Well let's hope he learns something by it and doesn't cost us much in play by doing so.

19 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Hes going to be a fine player. He will be better than Tom I reckon, for starters he can kick and has shown already he can make good decisions with the footy.

Not his fault hes been thrown to the wolves, and I reckon hes handled it well. The hysteria on here is ludicrous.

18 minutes ago, Abe said:

I would have Oscar in before Garland at this point, Garlo has been extremely underwhelming this year.

Dunn i think is the best option but he's now injured and probably wouldn't be picked anyway.

So it's persist with oscar and Tmac or give someone like Dawes or Pederson a run in defense.

I think the Dunn omission is the one giving us supporters the most angst. The vibe is that he hasn't bought in to the new game plan but he can play on the bigger bodied guys. Lumumba will hopefully be back soon and I agree with you - I would prefer him or OMac to Garland.

If you look at our team selection for the backline this year we have had a lot of changes and that can't be good.... 

4 hours ago, stuie said:

Wow, that's a rubbish team. Shows why you can't judge things based on stats.

 

While it is not perfect by any means, i do believe it is the best statistical analysis going around, it is much better than the fantasy leagues which are purely based on numbers. The player ratings use things to see how each thing benifts the team. If your kick results in a player being in open space you get more points than if you kick to a contest. And if you launch a scoring attack you get more. Its good from that sense but it is impossible to get it 100% right. 

That aside people are kidding themselves if they think OMac didnt play well on saturday. He was not a "star" but he was solid and played his role. Unfortunate part of being young and inconsistant is people here are just looking for what he does wrong to support their arguments. Look at his possitives as well from the weekend. Reality is that against first class opponents he was good. Time to stop calling for his head and look forward to him playing again on the weekend

On 6/7/2016 at 1:33 PM, jnrmac said:

I think the Dunn omission is the one giving us supporters the most angst. The vibe is that he hasn't bought in to the new game plan but he can play on the bigger bodied guys. Lumumba will hopefully be back soon and I agree with you - I would prefer him or OMac to Garland.

If you look at our team selection for the backline this year we have had a lot of changes and that can't be good.... 

Absolutely! the changes are a real concern considering we're playing a new style, i'd have expected Roosy to be really keen to pick a group and persist for a few weeks.

I do quite like Frost as a defender and i think eventually he will settle in down back.

Our defense is just going to be significantly weaker until the players get used to the new plan, it's exposed to easily when we make bad turnovers and the players can't get back and set up in time.

55 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

While it is not perfect by any means, i do believe it is the best statistical analysis going around, it is much better than the fantasy leagues which are purely based on numbers. The player ratings use things to see how each thing benifts the team. If your kick results in a player being in open space you get more points than if you kick to a contest. And if you launch a scoring attack you get more. Its good from that sense but it is impossible to get it 100% right. 

That aside people are kidding themselves if they think OMac didnt play well on saturday. He was not a "star" but he was solid and played his role. Unfortunate part of being young and inconsistant is people here are just looking for what he does wrong to support their arguments. Look at his possitives as well from the weekend. Reality is that against first class opponents he was good. Time to stop calling for his head and look forward to him playing again on the weekend

Respectfully disagree. Any analysis that puts Oscar and Gawn in their "team of the week" but doesn't have Vince or Tyson after Saturday has no credibility.

This is my whole point, he played "just a game" on Saturday, yet some posters are hanging their hats on this farcical "team of the week" and also claiming it was his "career best game", and that is as much an overreaction as those wanting him dropped and not brought back.

 

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

Respectfully disagree. Any analysis that puts Oscar and Gawn in their "team of the week" but doesn't have Vince or Tyson after Saturday has no credibility.

This is my whole point, he played "just a game" on Saturday, yet some posters are hanging their hats on this farcical "team of the week" and also claiming it was his "career best game", and that is as much an overreaction as those wanting him dropped and not brought back.

 

I tend to agree with you stuie. That phrase above could mean he was the worst player in the team.

Got a feeling they would have meant Oscar & Tom's distant cousin LUKE McDonald.

Just now, stuie said:

Respectfully disagree. Any analysis that puts Oscar and Gawn in their "team of the week" but doesn't have Vince or Tyson after Saturday has no credibility.

This is my whole point, he played "just a game" on Saturday, yet some posters are hanging their hats on this farcical "team of the week" and also claiming it was his "career best game", and that is as much an overreaction as those wanting him dropped and not brought back.

 

I agree with the top part Stuie.  That 'team of the week' doesn't hold much weight really.

With the bottom part - right now O Mac just needs to play his role and play 'just a game' so to speak.  If he's winning or breaking even in most one on one contests and only making an error or two each game then we'll take it.  He will continue to improve.  And on the weekend it WAS his career best game - he has only played a handful of games and Saturday was the best one in that small bunch.  It doesn't mean that he was awesome or sensational, it's just the best game of his career to date.

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Respectfully disagree. Any analysis that puts Oscar and Gawn in their "team of the week" but doesn't have Vince or Tyson after Saturday has no credibility.

This is my whole point, he played "just a game" on Saturday, yet some posters are hanging their hats on this farcical "team of the week" and also claiming it was his "career best game", and that is as much an overreaction as those wanting him dropped and not brought back.

Puts oscar and gawn in best of their positions not of our team. Tyson was team high score but wasnt high enough to fit in the leauge wide midfield. Either way i get what your saying and i dont think its perfect but it I just think it does a better job of any other ratings in the past...

Career best to date? Of his very limited sample size that was his best so far. I would like to think he will make that his average game over the coming years. I just dont think he deserves to be copping such critisim especially after saturday

8 minutes ago, old dee said:

I tend to agree with you stuie. That phrase above could mean he was the worst player in the team.

Yes it's a nonsense really 

3 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I agree with the top part Stuie.  That 'team of the week' doesn't hold much weight really.

With the bottom part - right now O Mac just needs to play his role and play 'just a game' so to speak.  If he's winning or breaking even in most one on one contests and only making an error or two each game then we'll take it.  He will continue to improve.  And on the weekend it WAS his career best game - he has only played a handful of games and Saturday was the best one in that small bunch.  It doesn't mean that he was awesome or sensational, it's just the best game of his career to date.

 

1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Puts oscar and gawn in best of their positions not of our team. Tyson was team high score but wasnt high enough to fit in the leauge wide midfield. Either way i get what your saying and i dont think its perfect but it I just think it does a better job of any other ratings in the past...

Career best to date? Of his very limited sample size that was his best so far. I would like to think he will make that his average game over the coming years. I just dont think he deserves to be copping such critisim especially after saturday

Yeah I get that point about "career best game" but it's just being used by some to overblow the game he played. It's a bit like bragging about being in the 8 after round 1.

He's copped some unfair criticism, but I'd also say he's worn some unfair praise. I just don't think it has to always be black or white, spud or star, like Demonland tends to make things. (I know you guys aren't claiming he's a star btw)

To look into it more, I think Oscar is just the most likely candidate for some to project their backline worries onto. It's gone from our biggest strength to our biggest weakness in only 2 years. I'm a big fan of Hunt and Wagner, the McDonalds concern me but I think they'll get there, Jetta is a bloody superhero and Melksham the forgotten one will be handy too, but my concern stems from there not being enough experience in there on a weekly basis for those guys to learn from. Jetta (who just turned 26) is the only one out of that whole group who's over 24.

 

 

Who are you and what did you do with Stuie

Quite well summarised

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

Yeah I get that point about "career best game" but it's just being used by some to overblow the game he played. It's a bit like bragging about being in the 8 after round 1.

He's copped some unfair criticism, but I'd also say he's worn some unfair praise. I just don't think it has to always be black or white, spud or star, like Demonland tends to make things. (I know you guys aren't claiming he's a star btw)

To look into it more, I think Oscar is just the most likely candidate for some to project their backline worries onto. It's gone from our biggest strength to our biggest weakness in only 2 years. I'm a big fan of Hunt and Wagner, the McDonalds concern me but I think they'll get there, Jetta is a bloody superhero and Melksham the forgotten one will be handy too, but my concern stems from there not being enough experience in there on a weekly basis for those guys to learn from. Jetta (who just turned 26) is the only one out of that whole group who's over 24.

 

 

Is that the druggie guy stuie?

I had forgotten about him.

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Is that the druggie guy stuie?

I had forgotten about him.

Let's not start all that again OD... Let's just think of him as an extremely handy addition to our young skinny backline next year.

 

4 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Who are you and what did you do with Stuie

Quite well summarised

I was always here, let's just say I've "blocked" out a few distractions....

 

1 minute ago, stuie said:

Let's not start all that again OD... Let's just think of him as an extremely handy addition to our young skinny backline next year.

 

Just a small joke stuie glad you saw it that way.

On a serious note I had forgotten him.

3 minutes ago, old dee said:

Just a small joke stuie glad you saw it that way.

On a serious note I had forgotten him.

I think a lot of us have. If we can get a quality big defender then a lot changes. TMac becomes the secondary defender and gets back to his form when Chip was still around, Melksham comes into HB meaning Vince can go back to the middle more, OMac can go back and forth between VFL and AFL more as needed to keep his development on track and we can address the habit of key forwards kicking goals against us. There's a few dominoes stacked up for us, we just need that first one to fall.

 

1 minute ago, stuie said:

I think a lot of us have. If we can get a quality big defender then a lot changes. TMac becomes the secondary defender and gets back to his form when Chip was still around, Melksham comes into HB meaning Vince can go back to the middle more, OMac can go back and forth between VFL and AFL more as needed to keep his development on track and we can address the habit of key forwards kicking goals against us. There's a few dominoes stacked up for us, we just need that first one to fall.

 

Right now that seems like a life time away.

I will just have to concentrate on the mystifying player  selections of 2016

5 hours ago, jnrmac said:

But when combined with Hunt, Wagner and a brother that is making a lot of ordinary decisions and has generally poor disposal we have a very inexperienced defence that is leaking goals. Jetta and Hunt have a manic attack on the ball or player with the ball but Wagner is sloppy, Oscar is outbodied too easily (and has little urgency) and TMac has fundamental flaws in his game. Collectively this is a problem. OMac cant be learning his craft in the seniors with all of the newbies around him. It makes us too vulnerable.

Jetta is our most reliable defender by a mile but we don't have a big bodied defender that's reliable. Hence we get cleaned up by Reiwoldt, Cloke, Membery, Lobbe etc etc

Nail on head.

43 minutes ago, old dee said:

Right now that seems like a life time away.

I will just have to concentrate on the mystifying player  selections of 2016

Not alone 

Be interesting as how we select in 2017 

5 hours ago, stuie said:

Yeah look, I do think that is our future backline and that Hunt, Wagner and McDonald are going to become a good unit together, but my point is just we often take things for granted in that argument and forget that they actually have to develop properly to get to that stage.

It's like people saying don't play senior player X because he won't be part of our premiership side, while ignoring the fact that player X is needed to provide leadership and experience and be a mature body that can put up with the rigors of AFL while the young kids (especially the KPPs) build their strength and endurance.

I just think we've taken development for granted in the past and it backfired badly. Remember when we were going to be the "next superpower"?

 

Look, I for one get what you're saying. The thing is, omac is going to not only learn quicker, but become more comfortable and better suited where he is. Playing him in the vfl for any extended period just slows that down. There's going to be short term pain, as you've alluded to we have leaked goals at times.

But the more these 5 or 6 play together, the more cohesive they get. The more they understand each other's style and reading of the play. Oscar goes back to the vfl and for the next few weeks he plays on respectable vfl key forwards.. let's say he shows some signs of improvement. The thing is he then has to come back to afl level, with different team mates and better opposition, and improve all over again. 

In a round about way, I'm trying to say,wouldn't it be better that he showed that improvement and gained that confidence in the ones, playing cohesive with the other long term senior defenders? You know yourself that if he lines up on Cox, Cloke or white this week, and he manages to play another game better than the last (IMO has slightly improved each week) and defends well, rebounds well, then his short term confidence will grow quicker. Dropping him now after 3 weeks where he has started to adjust would just sap an confidence he has gained.

I only look at it that he is obviously earmarked to be a long term key back for us, why not continue to back him in and learn from his mistakes, knowing that he will get better with continuity and confidence. If he played every game from now til the end of 2017 he will be around the 40 game mark, which is when you'll really start to see more of a complete player.*

*yes I understand the variables associated with that comment, and I imply it that while he positively contributes he is earning games, not being "gifted"