Goodwin's selection strategies

[Cranky Franky 2,065]

I cannot fathom Simon Goodwin’s selections strategies so far.   He seems to be picking players because he has decided that they have what it takes and ignoring previous form and Casey form.

 

I reckon it has cost us 1 or maybe 2 games this year.

Pedersen is proven at AFL level.  He has been very effective in the past AND he is killing it at Casey. He is great as a back up ruck forward or defender plus it allows Watts to play forward full time as the 2nd marking option.

 

Pedersen is a mile ahead of Tim Smith ATM.  In any case why bring in Smith, drop him for a week & re select him ?

 

For whatever reason he also kept Weideman  & Hannan in 2 weeks too long despite Blind Freddy seeing that they were struggling.

 

It doesn’t make any sense to drop Bugg & Kent as I thought they were far from our worst last week.  For example Tyson sucked & Melksham looks like a protected species.

 

JKH has done SFA in all in the pre season games & not much for Casey last week – Ben Kennedy has been the in form small forward down there.

 

Bring back then Selection Panel with an Independent Chairman  who can overrule the coach when he makes dumb decisions.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Fair enough view, and make some good point.

IMO, round 1 he made sensational calls. He looked at how we were beaten last year by the Saints, and picked defensive forwards to put pressure on the ball going out. Aggressive selection, and brave given others with more class probably earned spots. And it worked. I'm in the play Pedo over Smith camp as well, love the guy. And he frees up Watts from the ruck. But isn't it a case of when we win he's clever and when we lose he made a mistake?

He's surprised me most weeks this year with selection. Personally I love JKH, and what he brings to the table. I saw a new found ability to chase and defend in the JLT, particularly against the Dogs. I think when it comes to selection he's picking specific to the opposition on the day. I reckon he sees their mosquito fleet and wants some pace to help the slower in and unders like Tyson and Viney. And he picked Smith because Weed's confidence is shot, but he still wants a heavy, fast-leading clunker, not a pack mark flier like Pedo. I kind of get that given they have Rance and a bunch of NQR KPD.

[JV7 2,351]

I am a little disappointed in Goodwins selections so far.. It's a change from what Roos was, he would usually give players a decent run at it & wouldn't make multiple changes & chop & change the side from week to week. All we can do is trust that Goodwin is trying to find the right balance & dynamic. 

Having said that I think these changes this week are (on paper) are woeful. I hope I'm wrong. But

1- Why Pedersen was not bought in after 32 touches 10 marks as a forward/2nd ruck is a joke. Yes smith played a good game in the 2s last week but you dropped him the week before & in a big game I think Pedersen would provide more. 

2- Melksham is getting a free run & is clearly his lovechild. He's played 2 average & 1 deplorable game & Bugg plays 1 reasonable game & is out ? 

3- JKH ? Seriously.... I keep hearing his JLT for was good before getting injured & from reports his been mediocre at Casey since his return. I'd like to know in what world 11 touches & 3 tackles (JLT 1) &  11 touches 1 goal & 2 tackles (JLT 2) is good form ?  We don't know what Kent has done wrong internally to go against team rules but 2 tackles in 2 weeks probably spells it out.. But whys he not given a chance to make amends like Melksham ? 

I'm less confident going into tomorrow now then I was before the side was announced... If we lose this game & the output from JKH, Melksham & Smith is below par then Goodwin has a lot to answer for

Edited April 23, 2017 by JV7

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

Why this needs its own thread and isn't in the team selection thread is my first point.

Second point is. Basing form on vfl stats is risky. We've seen this with ANB, Michie, Trenners etc etc and others who perform well in thr vfl but it doesn't necessarily translate to afl.

I dont think it's wrong to question selection but the reality is unless u know how the team is structured and how thos players fit it's pure speculation.

My personal opinion is you gotta let Goody and co make their choices as they live and die by them. So i think you're way off the mark over the committee. Times hve changed.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Unleash Hell
Phone typing sorry

[Wiseblood 24,637]

I'm not fussed in the slightest at the minute.  That may be because Goodwin has coached us for only 4 games, but he isn't that far off the mark.  Take out our bad kicking against the Cats and a brain fart in the third term last week and we are 4-0.  He can't be getting too much wrong at the minute.

The stuff with Melksham makes me laugh, though.  People keep knocking the block but then bringing up replacements who don't even play in the same position.  Melksham, who I readily agree had a shocker last weekend, still beats out many others who we could play down back.  It has allowed Salem to flourish in midfield, Hunt is released to use his pace more often and we have greater flexbility.  I'll back Jake to turn things around.

Other than that?  It's fine.  You guys panic too much.

[What 18,810]

Would take Buggy in the team any day ahead of Melk, and I bet he could play the same role much better.

If Melksham has another poor game and isnt dropped, serious questions will have to be asked.  We will see tomorrow night.

 

 

[deeflog 679]

43 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

I cannot fathom Simon Goodwin’s selections strategies so far.   He seems to be picking players because he has decided that they have what it takes and ignoring previous form and Casey form.

 

I reckon it has cost us 1 or maybe 2 games this year.

Pedersen is proven at AFL level.  He has been very effective in the past AND he is killing it at Casey. He is great as a back up ruck forward or defender plus it allows Watts to play forward full time as the 2nd marking option.

 

Pedersen is a mile ahead of Tim Smith ATM.  In any case why bring in Smith, drop him for a week & re select him ?

 

For whatever reason he also kept Weideman  & Hannan in 2 weeks too long despite Blind Freddy seeing that they were struggling.

 

It doesn’t make any sense to drop Bugg & Kent as I thought they were far from our worst last week.  For example Tyson sucked & Melksham looks like a protected species.

 

JKH has done SFA in all in the pre season games & not much for Casey last week – Ben Kennedy has been the in form small forward down there.

 

Bring back then Selection Panel with an Independent Chairman  who can overrule the coach when he makes dumb decisions.

I agree with all of this

[Copuchas 763]

10 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I'm not fussed in the slightest at the minute.  That may be because Goodwin has coached us for only 4 games, but he isn't that far off the mark.  Take out our bad kicking against the Cats and a brain fart in the third term last week and we are 4-0.  He can't be getting too much wrong at the minute.

The stuff with Melksham makes me laugh, though.  People keep knocking the block but then bringing up replacements who don't even play in the same position.  Melksham, who I readily agree had a shocker last weekend, still beats out many others who we could play down back.  It has allowed Salem to flourish in midfield, Hunt is released to use his pace more often and we have greater flexbility.  I'll back Jake to turn things around.

Other than that?  It's fine.  You guys panic too much.

Calm, considered thoughts as usual Wiseblood.  I'd also add that the palpable frustration being experienced by Cranky Franky and others assumes the apparent lack of transparency (from a supporter perspective) around the selection decisions is repeated with the playing group.  I'm in no doubt whatsoever this wouldn't be the case.    Clearly there are metrics other than the headline numbers we as supporters focus on that are driving whether you get in to the team and whether you stay there.  You have to assume the playing group have been fully apprised of what's required.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Copuchas
grammar

[Deestroy All 14,266]

20 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I'm not fussed in the slightest at the minute.  That may be because Goodwin has coached us for only 4 games, but he isn't that far off the mark.  Take out our bad kicking against the Cats and a brain fart in the third term last week and we are 4-0.  He can't be getting too much wrong at the minute.

The stuff with Melksham makes me laugh, though.  People keep knocking the block but then bringing up replacements who don't even play in the same position.  Melksham, who I readily agree had a shocker last weekend, still beats out many others who we could play down back.  It has allowed Salem to flourish in midfield, Hunt is released to use his pace more often and we have greater flexbility.  I'll back Jake to turn things around.

Other than that?  It's fine.  You guys panic too much.

Vince isn't a defenders bootlace, yet he's wasted a season and a bit down there. No reason why Bugg can't be put in Melksham's position to do it just as rubbish or better. 

 

By the way, you're having a go at old mate Satyricon (which I usually love), but your last few posts have sounded a lot like him. Footy department is king blah blah. 

[Damo 3,362]

I think The same rules do not apply to all players. This may be Metrics? dunno.

Some are given multiple weeks to get them up to speed before being given a rest if they dont fire - Weid, OMac, Melksham and Gus.

Other players are moved in and out faster - T Smith and Bugg. Harmes maybe. Pedo could soon be in this maelstrom.

It may not look fair but that does not upset me.

 

 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

9 minutes ago, Deestroy All said:

Vince isn't a defenders bootlace, yet he's wasted a season and a bit down there. No reason why Bugg can't be put in Melksham's position to do it just as rubbish or better. 

 

By the way, you're having a go at old mate Satyricon (which I usually love), but your last few posts have sounded a lot like him. Footy department is king blah blah. 

Really?  That's slightly below the belt.

All I'm saying is that we're 4 games in.  I like Dean Kent, I like Tommy Bugg... but they aren't in the side for a reason.  Of course I would much rather have Kent running around in the ones (and his second half against Geelong was sublime), but what else can we say?  I can get annoyed and make a whole thread about it, or give the bloke a little time.  If this was his third year then I'd be really, really worried.  He's 4 games in so I feel as though we have no reason to panic yet.

[Deestroy All 14,266]

4 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Really?  That's slightly below the belt.

It was, I apologise. 

[Nasher 33,616]

42 minutes ago, Deestroy All said:

Vince isn't a defenders bootlace, yet he's wasted a season and a bit down there. No reason why Bugg can't be put in Melksham's position to do it just as rubbish or better. 

 

By the way, you're having a go at old mate Satyricon (which I usually love), but your last few posts have sounded a lot like him. Footy department is king blah blah. 

While I hate it when old mate refuses to accept any criticism of the club at all, I can understand why people will often shrug their shoulders and defer when it comes to matters of selection and the like.  

The OP in this thread might as well have said "Goodwin is an idiot for not selecting Pedersen", when it's obvious from the outside that we cannot and will not ever have as deep an understanding of the inner machinations of the team as Goodwin will.  People don't understand that from our position in the stands or on the couch, we don't know what we don't know.  I get that it's a discussion forum, but it irritates me when posters carry on as if they're the expert.  

[daisycutter 29,622]

well in the case of neeld it ultimately did turn out that we were the experts - lol

[Guest]

JKH did well in the JLT games that he played.

He's obviously highly rated and part of our plans.  Not surprised to see him included.

[Gator 17,383]

It's hard to critique selections when we're not privy to the exact role expected of each player.  

A player might kick 3 goals and have 30 touches, but still not perform key aspects of their role.

In reality, we're pissing in the wind. 

[FlashInThePan 1,893]

I agree with PD, WB, etc. We really don't know what the KPIs are that they are looking at. They are clearly looking at something very different to the basic stats we tend to pay attention to. 

What i really enjoy is reading the club press statements and interviews and working out from the way they talk about a player, what sort of run they are gong to get. I could tell early in the pre season that JKH was back in favour. Also that no matter what Trenners does he is on the outer. The news around ANB was also very positive in the preseason. You could tell he was going to get a clear run at it. 

If you go back in the website news pages you can read statements about players that give you a pretty good idea what sort of leniency they could expect if their form was down. 

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

Its strange that people are making out like Goody is a moron for his selections... They arnt that out there. Id rather Kent out there than JKH but they can play the same role. Pedo is there as a backup he knows it, we all know it I dont know why there is so much confusion. Smith is 26 or something, at that age they drafted him to play, not to develop in Casey another 2 years. Melksham, well we all knew he was a shoe-in to play and he will probably also play next week. After that if he continues to under perform then he might be in trouble. 

But I mean come on I don't agree with all the selections but with our current list none of us are ever going to agree. But given the reaction of some you would think he had dropped Gawn for Filipovic

Edited April 23, 2017 by ArtificialWisdom
spelling

[buck_nekkid 5,880]

The problem with 8 and 9 day breaks?  All of this bleating about how the coach and selectors have no idea.  Good to have some argy bargy about selections, but do we really need a thread on this? FFS!  Are we done yet?

Melksham blah blah rant rant etc etc.  Pedo rant rant blah blah.

we lost by 2 points last week.  The coach said we didn't play anything like we want to.  Suggest all players know what this is, and how it applies to their positions.  Suggest he is making changes to drive this, rather than reward VFL possessions.  I also suspect that system rates higher than errors (If you rate them the other way, the JM arguments could be valid)

pressure should be on all players, not just the targets of these conversations, to play the plan.  No player should be bigger than that.  No player should get a free pass, either (there is zero evidence of this).  

Bring on the game. Please!

[Biffen 12,944]

Agree that Goodwin should have free reign.

His job ,his team and duty to get the four points each week.

[Adam The God 30,286]

3 hours ago, JV7 said:

I am a little disappointed in Goodwins selections so far.. It's a change from what Roos was, he would usually give players a decent run at it & wouldn't make multiple changes & chop & change the side from week to week. All we can do is trust that Goodwin is trying to find the right balance & dynamic. 

Having said that I think these changes this week are (on paper) are woeful. I hope I'm wrong. But

1- Why Pedersen was not bought in after 32 touches 10 marks as a forward/2nd ruck is a joke. Yes smith played a good game in the 2s last week but you dropped him the week before & in a big game I think Pedersen would provide more. 

2- Melksham is getting a free run & is clearly his lovechild. He's played 2 average & 1 deplorable game & Bugg plays 1 reasonable game & is out ? 

3- JKH ? Seriously.... I keep hearing his JLT for was good before getting injured & from reports his been mediocre at Casey since his return. I'd like to know in what world 11 touches & 3 tackles (JLT 1) &  11 touches 1 goal & 2 tackles (JLT 2) is good form ?  We don't know what Kent has done wrong internally to go against team rules but 2 tackles in 2 weeks probably spells it out.. But whys he not given a chance to make amends like Melksham ? 

I'm less confident going into tomorrow now then I was before the side was announced... If we lose this game & the output from JKH, Melksham & Smith is below par then Goodwin has a lot to answer for

The biggest problem with a lot of the criticism directed at Round 5's changes are that, like this above post, they fail to understand the positional requirements of 1) modern day footy and 2) the 'system' Goody is trying to build.

Lamenting that Melksham gets a chance after an ordinary game to rectify his poor form, but Kent doesn't, completely misses the point. Kent is a half forward and if people actually understood the importance of half forwards to the modern game and our game style, they wouldn't be discussing Melksham and Kent in the same sentence.

Does Melksham play forward? No. His KPIs are completely different to Kent's. Melksham offers run and in our game style, we expect some turn overs. We'd like to minimise them, of course, but without Lewis to select from or GWS' Josh Kelly, Melksham is the best option for a speedy half back flanker at the moment.

Kent's chance to meet one of his chief KPIs was last week, and he failed abysmally. If Melksham has another frankly pathetic game, they may look at trying someone like Harmes off half back. Until then, Melksham will aim to play his role. That is, shut down an opponent, provide run off half back and use his pace to work within our defensive zone.

Round 5 is about JKH (who I don't particularly rate) and Smith bringing the forward half pressure that Kent and Hannan were unable to. If they both manage this, they'll keep Kent and Hannan out. 

Understand the difference between these roles and the basic KPIs, before labelling them 'woeful'.

Edited April 23, 2017 by A F

[poita 3,902]

Our balance was pretty good in the first game, even though Smith was injured early. We replaced Smith with a smaller player, then Hogan with another small. It cost us big time against Geelong when Gawn went down and we had nobody to spell Watts in the ruck. Another tall would have been handy against Freo as well. Now we have gone taller again this week, so the balance looks better.

The number of changes made each week suggests that we are still not getting selection right, or the players are not capable of following the coaches instructions. I would prefer a more settled side, rather than dropping blokes and selecting again the following week for no apparent reason. And why Melksham is still in the team is beyond me - there are ten better options at Casey.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

2 hours ago, Deestroy All said:

By the way, you're having a go at old mate Satyricon (which I usually love), but your last few posts have sounded a lot like him. Footy department is king blah blah. 

I was thinking the exact same thing.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

It's hard to critique selections when we're not privy to the exact role expected of each player. 

Thanks, Saty.

[Adam The God 30,286]

3 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Would take Buggy in the team any day ahead of Melk, and I bet he could play the same role much better.

If Melksham has another poor game and isnt dropped, serious questions will have to be asked.  We will see tomorrow night.

Do you actually watch the game, mate? Bugg is slow. Different player. So no, he couldn't play the same role much better. What are you even basing this on?

Edited April 23, 2017 by A F