WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - BEN BROWN

[Willmoy1947 3,769]

On 10/12/2020 at 9:52 PM, jako13 said:

KotD by either NP or JL would do just fine thank you very much.

Could go another 56 years without the premiership still smiling ???

I've heard of blokes having a heart attack with a smile on their face

[Binmans PA 25,985]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

You don't remember when we recruited him to do just that and it was a disaster? Doesn't have the heart or desire to play down back. Or really anywhere I feel.

I remember, but the time is now. It's half back or nothing. 

1 hour ago, george_on_the_outer said:

23 tackles in 17 games.  He's no defender!

He often plays defensive roles forward. Tackles aren't the only measure. They're a nice measure, but don't tell the whole story.

[Axis of Bob 10,207]

1 hour ago, george_on_the_outer said:

He was playing HFF during the season.  Bontempelli 88 in 18 games, Dangerfield 50 in 19.  K.Picket 35 in 14 games.

I'm not making a judgement on anything except that using tackle stats is a terrible way to judge whether or not someone should be playing in defence.

Although I will say that using third team midfielder tackle numbers is also a terrible way to judge whether or not a half forward should be played in defence. ?

But half forward and half back are completely different roles. I think it's difficult to use half forward statistics as a predictor of success at half back, one way or another.

[Fat Tony 4,399]

4 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

This year Weideman took 1.31 contested marks a game. Hawkins took 1.68 and Dixon took 2.53 a game.

But if you break it down, before Weideman became the number 1 forward (starting against the Bulldogs in round 13) he took 1.75 per game, whilst after that it was only 0.6 per game. 

His ability to jump at the ball and work one on one make him a very dangerous forward target, but he's not a wrestler at the moment and we suffer for it. Sure, he can do it, but we losing a lot of his ability as a player if you sacrifice him. 

In the end, I think the real elephant in the room is Fritsch, whose 'tallness' as a medium forward means that crafting a forward line with the pieces we have is very difficult. Without him you could play 3 talls (if one of them is Jackson) and let them all share the workload of contesting the long ball as a flexible trio who can all do it. But playing Fritsch forward means that you have to leave one of the 3 tall forwards out (because you can't play 3 talls plus Fritsch) and that means you probably need a single player to do most of the grunt work because they will draw a lot more of the footy against the heart of the defence. A forward line with Weid and Jackson is tall but also very mobile, but you lose that if you're asking for one of them to spend most of their game wrestling with 2 defenders. 

Personally, I'd have three talls (as long as Weid and Jackson were two of them) and three smalls up forward, and play Fritsch at half back. I think he's probably played his best footy at half back, even if he may think of himself as a forward.

This was a really good post until you suggested Fritsch has played his best football in the backline. He was a turnover merchant in defence last year, biting off more than he could chew with his kicking. 

[Fat Tony 4,399]

3 hours ago, Pollyanna said:

Maybe right.

I might prefer 2021 13 for Brown with 2021 40 back and keep 23 this year.  Than 23 for Brown.

FWIW both options are valued at ~800 points

I’m not against trading our future first rounder, but we could easily have a poor season. I would only ever do it if it was valued at the average points of the first round, which is around #5. (The value index is asymptotic.)

[Redleg 37,556]

I just can’t help feeling that there is something wrong with Brown, given the way North are pushing him out. 

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

I just can’t help feeling that there is something wrong with Brown, given the way North are pushing him out. 

Definitely a strange move to trade a bloke of his quality, especially if they aren't demanding a premium in return. 

either there is something very wrong with Brown, or Nm but either way the relationship there is totally broken which is never a good sign. 

[AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey 390]

19 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I just can’t help feeling that there is something wrong with Brown, given the way North are pushing him out. 

Whilst it does seem off, I would reckon the club is doing its due diligence regarding his body and not just jumping at somebody thats just there for the taking. They wouldnt be trying to move so many pieces around if they didnt think they could get him right/thought he would give us the output we'd want out of him. We've got Darren Burgess who managed to get Harley Bennell back to playing AFL which was an absolute miracle so we have that on our side too. I think we need to give the club the benefit of the doubt here and back them in to know what theyre doing.

[titan_uranus 22,284]

7 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

This year Weideman took 1.31 contested marks a game. Hawkins took 1.68 and Dixon took 2.53 a game.

But if you break it down, before Weideman became the number 1 forward (starting against the Bulldogs in round 13) he took 1.75 per game, whilst after that it was only 0.6 per game. 

His ability to jump at the ball and work one on one make him a very dangerous forward target, but he's not a wrestler at the moment and we suffer for it. Sure, he can do it, but we losing a lot of his ability as a player if you sacrifice him. 

In the end, I think the real elephant in the room is Fritsch, whose 'tallness' as a medium forward means that crafting a forward line with the pieces we have is very difficult. Without him you could play 3 talls (if one of them is Jackson) and let them all share the workload of contesting the long ball as a flexible trio who can all do it. But playing Fritsch forward means that you have to leave one of the 3 tall forwards out (because you can't play 3 talls plus Fritsch) and that means you probably need a single player to do most of the grunt work because they will draw a lot more of the footy against the heart of the defence. A forward line with Weid and Jackson is tall but also very mobile, but you lose that if you're asking for one of them to spend most of their game wrestling with 2 defenders. 

Personally, I'd have three talls (as long as Weid and Jackson were two of them) and three smalls up forward, and play Fritsch at half back. I think he's probably played his best footy at half back, even if he may think of himself as a forward.

I like this reasoning until you get to the bit where you say Fritsch played his best footy at half back.

I think that's absolutely not true at all. I think his best footy has been unquestionably as a forward. His work across half back is often too loose and his positioning poor. His kicking never seems to live up to the promise, either (a bit like his goal kicking).

I appreciate the problem you've flagged with having too many talls and Fritsch playing too tall. An alternative solution would be to put the onus on Fritsch to learn to chase/tackle/defend in the forward half more? He's not done developing. If he can take what he's got and add more defensive pressure on transition and when the ball hits the deck, that will improve our balance and IMO is a better net result for the team than moving him to half back.

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

58 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I like this reasoning until you get to the bit where you say Fritsch played his best footy at half back.

I think that's absolutely not true at all. I think his best footy has been unquestionably as a forward. His work across half back is often too loose and his positioning poor. His kicking never seems to live up to the promise, either (a bit like his goal kicking).

I appreciate the problem you've flagged with having too many talls and Fritsch playing too tall. An alternative solution would be to put the onus on Fritsch to learn to chase/tackle/defend in the forward half more? He's not done developing. If he can take what he's got and add more defensive pressure on transition and when the ball hits the deck, that will improve our balance and IMO is a better net result for the team than moving him to half back.

I feel like he has to if he wants to hold his place in the side, if we bring in Brown, you'd think more often than not Brown and Weid will both play, and i'd imagine Jackson is going to be too good to keep out of the side. that makes Fritsch the 4th forward, we will be way too top heavy if he can't chase, tackle, pressure and crumb goals. 

he either needs to improve in that space or he misses or plays a different role.

[DeeSpencer 23,106]

8 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

This year Weideman took 1.31 contested marks a game. Hawkins took 1.68 and Dixon took 2.53 a game.

But if you break it down, before Weideman became the number 1 forward (starting against the Bulldogs in round 13) he took 1.75 per game, whilst after that it was only 0.6 per game. 

His ability to jump at the ball and work one on one make him a very dangerous forward target, but he's not a wrestler at the moment and we suffer for it. Sure, he can do it, but we losing a lot of his ability as a player if you sacrifice him. 

In the end, I think the real elephant in the room is Fritsch, whose 'tallness' as a medium forward means that crafting a forward line with the pieces we have is very difficult. Without him you could play 3 talls (if one of them is Jackson) and let them all share the workload of contesting the long ball as a flexible trio who can all do it. But playing Fritsch forward means that you have to leave one of the 3 tall forwards out (because you can't play 3 talls plus Fritsch) and that means you probably need a single player to do most of the grunt work because they will draw a lot more of the footy against the heart of the defence. A forward line with Weid and Jackson is tall but also very mobile, but you lose that if you're asking for one of them to spend most of their game wrestling with 2 defenders. 

Personally, I'd have three talls (as long as Weid and Jackson were two of them) and three smalls up forward, and play Fritsch at half back. I think he's probably played his best footy at half back, even if he may think of himself as a forward.

Fritsch was good on the wing and I think very good at half back in 2018 (less so in 19). But finding half backs shouldn't be that hard.

Half forwards who get as many shots on goal (even when played deep) as Fritsch are just too valuable - assuming he starts splitting the big sticks.

The longer quarters should see Jackson having to ruck more. So I think we can add a 3rd tall, it just wouldn't be a guy with limited mobile like Ben Brown. I'm thinking Petty, or Mihocek or even a 190cm type from another list or the draft. At the moment it's Melksham, probably swapping with Petracca. Do we chance our arm at Caddy. That's all for another time I guess.

Fritsch can crumb, he can chase, he can get up the ground and run the ball back and he can kick inside 50. He does pretty much everything you'd want in attack of a small. Plus I don't think he causes too many issues with flying for marks, not compared with some of the ways our other players crash in to teach other. It's really just the lack of defensive pressure and intensity. Once he's in defensive mode he can be clever and intercept/cut off leads. He's not so lazy as to just give up. How hard can it be to train him up to get in to defensive mode and lay a few tackles?

He could well end up at half back, but to me that's the kind of cop out that we've allowed of so many of our players. Bayley knows what he needs to do to be a complete forward. The coaches know. Make it happen.

[monoccular 16,042]

2 hours ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

Whilst it does seem off, I would reckon the club is doing its due diligence regarding his body and not just jumping at somebody thats just there for the taking. They wouldnt be trying to move so many pieces around if they didnt think they could get him right/thought he would give us the output we'd want out of him. We've got Darren Burgess who managed to get Harley Bennell back to playing AFL which was an absolute miracle so we have that on our side too. I think we need to give the club the benefit of the doubt here and back them in to know what theyre doing.

Great kudos to Burgess for (helping) get Bennell onto the field, though he never ran full pelt which was a contributor to his being unable to hold a spot and this contributing to his ultimate implosion.  

However I guess rehab and recovery  will always depend on the nature of the injury: whatever was off with Tommy he / they didn’t seem able to get right (at least this year).  Maybe they can next year, if he stays.  His best was great, and don’t forget he was mooted by quite a few as a future captain. 

[Skuit 9,166]

All advocation for Brown is naturally dependent on due diligence as to his body. Otherwise pick 23 seems about right considering the circumstances. Would throw a minor fraction back, to the equivalent of about 18 - but I don't think clubs care all that much about that nowadays. It all evens up in the wash. 

[AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey 390]

8 hours ago, monoccular said:

Great kudos to Burgess for (helping) get Bennell onto the field, though he never ran full pelt which was a contributor to his being unable to hold a spot and this contributing to his ultimate implosion.  

However I guess rehab and recovery  will always depend on the nature of the injury: whatever was off with Tommy he / they didn’t seem able to get right (at least this year).  Maybe they can next year, if he stays.  His best was great, and don’t forget he was mooted by quite a few as a future captain. 

I think the problem with TMAc really stemmed from how much weight he was carrying and maybe the ankle injury never fully getting right, leading to a lack of mobility which has been  a cornerstone of his game, on top of an obvious lack of confidence in himself this year. I dont think he could ever have as bad a year as he had this year, however we're in strife if we're banking on Tmac to be the answer to our problems. 

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

On 10/11/2020 at 6:21 PM, A F said:

I'd be playing Brown and Jackson in the same side and putting Weideman on the trade table.

We generally have similar views on most things, A F but this seems an odd one to me.

Weid's performance as our main target this season was admirable without being a breakout. He showed enough to suggest he could make it but not enough to provide significant value at the trade table.

I see this as high risk, low reward - what's your read on his trade value?

Edited October 14, 2020 by Cheesy D. Pun

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

18 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

A little. He's bitter and only old people like him.

This hurt my feelings.

[BW511 2,241]

The way I look at it, if we bring in the 200cm/6'7" Brown, he instantly requires the biggest defender.

The slightly smaller Weid at 195cm/6'5" then gets number 2 defender.

This has two positives, we know Brown can already kick goals on the best defenders, his 'body of work' is very good.

Weid can then get a better shot at things with a slightly smaller/lesser defender.

I don't care if we have to change our game plan up to accommodate this, because whatever it is it doesn't work anyway.

Worth noting, T-Mac is smaller again at 194cm/6'4"

 

 

[rpfc 27,432]

18 hours ago, Redleg said:

Pity I use tea bags.

Same.

If I am reading tea leaves it’s at the end of a very gritty tea experience.

[Binmans PA 25,985]

1 hour ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

We generally have similar views on most things, A F but this seems an odd one to me.

Weid's performance as our main target this season was admirable without being a breakout. He showed enough to suggest he could make it but not enough to provide significant value at the trade table.

I see this as high risk, low reward - what's your read on his trade value?

I wasn't clear about this, but now that it seems McDonald will move on, I was thinking of things in term of balance and greater trade value.

Happy for Weideman to stay.

[deanox 8,565]

41 minutes ago, BW511 said:

The way I look at it, if we bring in the 200cm/6'7" Brown, he instantly requires the biggest defender.

The slightly smaller Weid at 195cm/6'5" then gets number 2 defender.

This has two positives, we know Brown can already kick goals on the best defenders, his 'body of work' is very good.

Weid can then get a better shot at things with a slightly smaller/lesser defender.

I don't care if we have to change our game plan up to accommodate this, because whatever it is it doesn't work anyway.

Worth noting, T-Mac is smaller again at 194cm/6'4"

 

 

I think this will help too.

One issue I think we had this year was a very congested forward line. I can't remeber Weid being one out very often, and he only found space on leads occassionally. We tended to have packs of players forming.

Ideally, with Brown in the side, he and Weid would split the space so that the key defenders arent at the same contest. The 3rd tall (Jackson) would roam around half forward wing, looking to bring it inside 50 (Weid would also play this role so Jackson can go forward, but I think Brown would tend to stay inside the 50).

This would improve Weids marking chance, and also technically free Fritsch up as a 3rd marking target inside 50 against a much weaker opponent.

We'll really need Melksham, Pickett and Fritsch to step up, they are then our defensive forwards. ANB, Hannan, VDB, Jones, Hunt and Spargo will be putting pressure on those three to perform.

[Rednblueriseing 649]

1 hour ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

We generally have similar views on most things, A F but this seems an odd one to me.

Weid's performance as our main target this season was admirable without being a breakout. He showed enough to suggest he could make it but not enough to provide significant value at the trade table.

I see this as high risk, low reward - what's your read on his trade value?

Id also be adding we will be Hoping Brown will get back to his best, and Weed should only be entering his prime now.... I'd take Brown for a second rounder, but wouldn't move on the Weed just yet. A forward line of Brown, Weed, Fritsch, Melky, Kossi, and spargo or a resting mid would be the way to go with Jackson given time to develop and coming in for anyone not in form.

[Binmans PA 25,985]

1 hour ago, Rednblueriseing said:

Id also be adding we will be Hoping Brown will get back to his best, and Weed should only be entering his prime now.... I'd take Brown for a second rounder, but wouldn't move on the Weed just yet. A forward line of Brown, Weed, Fritsch, Melky, Kossi, and spargo or a resting mid would be the way to go with Jackson given time to develop and coming in for anyone not in form.

Whilst that forwardline could work, I think we need to be far more innovative and go harder at some zippy forwards on the fringe of other teams and we need an x factor match winner in the mix too.

IMV we can't play Fritsch and Melksham in the same forwardline, and I think Goodwin realised this by the end of the year. So they either both need to invent themselves or we can't play both.

I'd be keeping Charlie on the list and trying to play him between midfield and half forward, but we need to get consistency out of our forwardline.

Brown, Weideman and Fritsch is quite a potent three target set up. Kozzie will be better next year, but we need 3 or 4 others that can apply pressure and x factor to the set up. Jackson is apart of that mix too.

[DeeZee 6,731]

Id say we would be waiting on a thorough medical and cap space depending on what TMac does.

I don’t think Brown will come cheap, especially if the Bummers have made an offer bumping up the price.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

2 hours ago, BW511 said:

The way I look at it, if we bring in the 200cm/6'7" Brown, he instantly requires the biggest defender.

The slightly smaller Weid at 195cm/6'5" then gets number 2 defender.

This has two positives, we know Brown can already kick goals on the best defenders, his 'body of work' is very good.

Weid can then get a better shot at things with a slightly smaller/lesser defender.

I don't care if we have to change our game plan up to accommodate this, because whatever it is it doesn't work anyway.

Worth noting, T-Mac is smaller again at 194cm/6'4"

 

 

and 199cm Jackson gets the third

[old55 21,258]

Jackson is going to play - let's get that straight.

The problem as @Axis of Bob points out is that it's difficult to accommodate B.Brown, Weid, Jackson and Fritsch in the same forward line unless Fritsch can seriously up his defensive work and get over the one arm tackles etc.  Weid's agility and ground ball skills are sadly under-rated here but he's not going to lay fwd 50 tackles and neither is Brown on a consistent basis.  I think Jackson is different and is likely to instill every type of nightmare opposition defenders fear.

Then there's Melksham who is very dangerous and can play a negating role on attacking half-backs but doesn't provide general fwd 50 pressure. 

We need 7 in the forward 50 rotations: B.Brown, Weid, Jackson, Fritsch, Melksham, Pickett, Spargo? 

Can all forward 50 pressure be up to Pickett, Spargo and Jackson?

If Brown comes then Petty plays back and I do like that.  It also gives us depth if someone gets injured in game or for an extended period.

It's not easy, I could see an outcome like @DeeSpencer fears that if Brown comes then it's a battle between Weid and Fritsch for a place and we end up playing one at Casey and trading a valuable resource for peanuts at the end of 2021.

Advocates either way need to come up with their full forward line 7 for a complete solution.