3 hours ago, ProDee said:

Two questions:

1. Do you know how their game-plan differs from ours ?

2. Do you think Preuss has the athletic attributes of Vardy ?

If I'm right and Preuss is used sparingly why do you think it'll be ?

He wouldn't come to the club to be played sparingly. He will play a lot more than you think. 2 ruckman are back in vogue forget about Richmond.

38 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

To me, what I have seen from the limited match time of Pruess as a MFC player is that he's perhaps a slightly better, more skillful version of Jake Spencer.  A bit of a lumberer who has a presence, but not as mobile or sublime wit his ruck tap work as Max - yet.  Hopefully his tap work is something which improves further with mentoring from Max/Greg and more time around our onballers to improve their connection.

I'm not making the comparison with Jake in a bad way either, as I actually think he was pretty close to being a good second string ruckman for us and loved his hardness and attack on the contest/man.

Also shows how good Max is - the guy is a freak ...but he's not superman and I think having big Preuss around to share the load and help Max sustain his output over the whole season and ready to fire at the times we need him most makes Preuss an important asset to our side. 

I also agree with what Garry Pert was saying during the webcast match comentary that Tommy and Weid are too valuable for us to use in the ruck for the most part, although it might not hurt for either of them to end up there for the odd centre bounce to help throw the opposition backline around a bit at times.

Nailed it. Thats exactly the point some here seem to be missing RBG. Its not so much what Pruess can do as in ability, but the fact that he has now freed up the other talls, Oscar included, to concentrate on their jobs and not have to run around checking if max is ok for the next ruck contest. Josh Mahoney said the same thing. Its a huge plus. Max is the key.

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by Wadda We Sing

2 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

He wouldn't come to the club to be played sparingly. He will play a lot more than you think. 2 ruckman are back in vogue forget about Richmond.

We'll soon find out, won't we.  If Preuss plays ten games in 2019 I'll be shocked - with the caveat being there are no injuries to the three other talls.

But if you're right you're right.  I don't care what happens as long as it's working.

Btw, Richmond didn't and doesn't enter my thinking whatsoever.  It must enter yours.

Two ruckman will be essential this year. With the new rule where you can grab it out of the ruck and not be pinged for holding the ball you can’t play a Jack Watts or similar as backup like we were 2 seasons ago. The full time ruckman will just grab the ball and take possession.

5 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

Two ruckman will be essential this year. With the new rule where you can grab it out of the ruck and not be pinged for holding the ball you can’t play a Jack Watts or similar as backup like we were 2 seasons ago. The full time ruckman will just grab the ball and take possession.

you may be right and if so that is why the rule will probably change again at years end.

It will lead to more congestion.

The only way that congestion will be avoided is if the ruckman takes a relatively uncontrolled kick after gaining possession. In this day and age such a tactic is fraught with danger and therefore I can only see it being used when a side is in an attacking position.

Just don't see this rule working for the overall benefit of the game.

18 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

Two ruckman will be essential this year. With the new rule where you can grab it out of the ruck and not be pinged for holding the ball you can’t play a Jack Watts or similar as backup like we were 2 seasons ago. The full time ruckman will just grab the ball and take possession.

It happened once in the entire game, albeit for a good result.

There seems to be a lot of love for Preuss here.  He looked OK to me, but maybe only Jake Spencer plus plus. I understand that 2 ruckman may make a lot of sense this year. 

But.....  I keep wondering why North were happy to let him go.  I apologise that this has probably been raised and answered elsewhere.

6 minutes ago, sue said:

There seems to be a lot of love for Preuss here.  He looked OK to me, but maybe only Jake Spencer plus plus. I understand that 2 ruckman may make a lot of sense this year. 

But.....  I keep wondering why North were happy to let him go.  I apologise that this has probably been raised and answered elsewhere.

snap... I just posted some similar thoughts on the Round 1 team thread

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

We'll soon find out, won't we.  If Preuss plays ten games in 2019 I'll be shocked - with the caveat being there are no injuries to the three other talls.

But if you're right you're right.  I don't care what happens as long as it's working.

Btw, Richmond didn't and doesn't enter my thinking whatsoever.  It must enter yours.

That's probably 9 or 10 games more than he played at Nth last year.

I honestly don't care how many games Preuss plays or not, but if he helps us win a premiership then ...

Re why would Nth let him go?  Neither Jolly or Martin were not considered crack ruckman by their respective club at the time, but both seemed to have worked out ok.  Maybe we get a bit of karma back with Preuss?

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

25 minutes ago, sue said:

There seems to be a lot of love for Preuss here.  He looked OK to me, but maybe only Jake Spencer plus plus. I understand that 2 ruckman may make a lot of sense this year. 

But.....  I keep wondering why North were happy to let him go.  I apologise that this has probably been raised and answered elsewhere.

Goldstein, Xerri, Brown and Daw. With caps on list numbers a team can't hold on to too many "talls". Whether Preuss was the right one to let go, though, is a good question.

18 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Goldstein, Xerri, Brown and Daw. With caps on list numbers a team can't hold on to too many "talls". Whether Preuss was the right one to let go, though, is a good question.

Daw wont play this year, Xerri is still raw and Brown is just too good of a forward to throw in the ruck.

They have just recruited Tom Campbell from the WB. So at least he is a handy back up if Goldy goes down.

31 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

That's probably 9 or 10 games more than he played at Nth last year.

I honestly don't care how many games Preuss plays or not, but if he helps us win a premiership then ...

Re why would Nth let him go?  Neither Jolly or Martin were not considered crack ruckman by their respective club at the time, but both seemed to have worked out ok.  Maybe we get a bit of karma back with Preuss?

I don't see any correlation with Preuss and the Melbourne duo you refer to. 

Melbourne knew both could play, but neither could be the main ruck at the time.  Both had shown far more than Preuss.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I don't see any correlation with Preuss and the Melbourne duo you refer to. 

Melbourne knew both could play, but neither could be the main ruck at the time.  Both had shown far more than Preuss.

I see complete correlation.  Both given indications that they had what it took to be a main ruckman and to succeed the incumbent, yet were left to rot on the vine playing reserves footy and given away for peanuts in the context of their future output.  I think Preuss has shown the signs of being a pretty decent ruckman, but has been crowded our by Goldstein who played a couple of dominant seasons prior to becoming an slightly above average ruckman.  Sounds pretty similar to the White/Jolly,  Jamar/Martin story to me.

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

For those questioning 2 rucks, are you happy with a single ruck, and just one tall in the forward 6?  If not and you want a ruck and 2 talls, for how much of the game?

Some stats from the prelim last year based on time on ground.  West Coasts grand final figures are probably similar.

West Coast had a ruck and 2 tall forwards for 98% of the game, and a ruck and 1 tall forward for 2% if the game.

Melbourne had a ruck and 1 tall forward for 60% of the game, and a ruck and 2 tall forwards for 40%.  For most of the game, with our bomb it long tendency, one tall forward does not cut it.

Yesterday was a scratch match with shortened quarters and trying things.  I hope Preuss ends up spending limited minutes forward, but rucks for decent spells.  Max still needs less minutes in 2019.  I personally think we shoot ourselves in the foot in periods of dominance when we have 1 tall target.

46 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

I see complete correlation.  Both given indications that they had what it took to be a main ruckman and to succeed the incumbent, yet were left to rot on the vine playing reserves footy and given away for peanuts in the context of their future output.  I think Preuss has shown the signs of being a pretty decent ruckman, but has been crowded our by Goldstein who played a couple of dominant seasons prior to becoming an slightly above average ruckman.  Sounds pretty similar to the White/Jolly,  Jamar/Martin story to me.

Preuss played 8 games for North.  Jolly played 48 games for Melbourne.  Martin played 57 games for Melbourne.

We received pick 15 for Jolly, which we used to draft Dunn.  Melbourne and more importantly Sydney both knew Jolly could play, which is why we received such a good pick for him.  Jolly didn't like being the understudy to Jeff White, as he wanted to be the no.1 ruckman.  Jolly cracked it and asked for a trade.  Sydney offered very good compensation for a known commodity (unlike Preuss).

Martin's best position at Melbourne was also the ruck.  But he was behind Jamar, so we'd play him forward and as the back up ruck.  He sort greener pastures, but we knew when given no.1 rucking duties he excelled.

Both players had a lot more exposed form than Preuss, who never threatened to be the main ruck at North and unlike Jolly and Martin hasn't come to Melbourne to be the main ruck either.

I'm sure you'll have your say, but I'm not interested in a tennis match.

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by ProDee

11 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Preuss played 8 games for North.  Jolly played 48 games for Melbourne.  Martin played 57 games for Melbourne.

We received pick 15 for Jolly, which we used to draft Dunn.  Melbourne and more importantly Sydney both knew Jolly could play, which is why we received such a good pick for him.  Jolly didn't like being the understudy to Jamar, as he wanted to be the no.1 ruckman.  Jolly cracked it and asked for a trade.  Sydney offered very good compensation for a known commodity (unlike Preuss).

Martin's best position at Melbourne was also the ruck.  But he too was behind Jamar, so we'd play him forward and as the back up ruck.  He sort greener pastures, but we knew when given no.1 rucking duties he excelled.

Both players had a lot more exposed form than Preuss, who never threatened to be the main ruck at North and unlike Jolly and Martin hasn't come to Melbourne to be the main ruck either.

I'm sure you'll have your say, but I'm not interested in a tennis match.

Completely agree: I don't like tennis either.

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by dieter

I think people might be getting a bit carried away on Preuss being a walk up start just on the back of one practice match, against a team playing a couple of inexperienced ruckmen and without a decent choice of tall defenders in their backline.

plenty of water to go under the bridge yet. I want to see Preuss play well against a close to full strength line up before I can say it will be worth us playing 2 ruckman most weeks. it will be interesting to see how Richmond and the Lions line up in regards to their rucks and defenders in the JLT matches, and whether our 2 ruckmen plan gets a decent test before the year starts.

 

On 2/22/2019 at 5:29 PM, ProDee said:

Bit of a scrappy match.

Best thing: no injuries.

My other small takeaways - Brayshaw will take another step forward this year.  I thought he was great.  Harmes will continue his new found midfield role and do it well.  vandenBerg will have his best year.  And Sparrow has a very mature physique already.

Oh and I thought Oscar looked really good.  He's just going to keep getting better.

Both teams a bit rusty.  

How was Hunt? I just think he adds that extra dimension when he is on his game.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

How was Hunt? I just think he adds that extra dimension when he is on his game.

I really liked his game.  Did every kick hit a target ?  No, but many did and he was back to his running and aggressive self.

If they can get him to exploit his attributes with a little more composure I think he'll play a lot of games.

2 hours ago, sue said:

There seems to be a lot of love for Preuss here.  He looked OK to me, but maybe only Jake Spencer plus plus. I understand that 2 ruckman may make a lot of sense this year. 

But.....  I keep wondering why North were happy to let him go.  I apologise that this has probably been raised and answered elsewhere.

Don’t worry about the Roos letting him go, that is a sign of the times. The Bombers let Jake and Hibberd go and The Suns let May go for example, not that Preuss is in their league.  

Edited February 23, 20196 yr by Redleg

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

I really liked his game.  Did every kick hit a target ?  No, but many did and he was back to his running and aggressive self.

If they can get him to exploit his attributes with a little more composure I think he'll play a lot of games.

Thanks and good to hear.

17 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Preuss played 8 games for North.  Jolly played 48 games for Melbourne.  Martin played 57 games for Melbourne.

We received pick 15 for Jolly, which we used to draft Dunn.  Melbourne and more importantly Sydney both knew Jolly could play, which is why we received such a good pick for him.  Jolly didn't like being the understudy to Jamar, as he wanted to be the no.1 ruckman.  Jolly cracked it and asked for a trade.  Sydney offered very good compensation for a known commodity (unlike Preuss).

Martin's best position at Melbourne was also the ruck.  But he too was behind Jamar, so we'd play him forward and as the back up ruck.  He sort greener pastures, but we knew when given no.1 rucking duties he excelled.

Both players had a lot more exposed form than Preuss, who never threatened to be the main ruck at North and unlike Jolly and Martin hasn't come to Melbourne to be the main ruck either.

I'm sure you'll have your say, but I'm not interested in a tennis match.

Agree with you on Jolly. Although he wasn't understudy to Jamar he was understudy to White, a role he was competing with Jamar for back when the 2nd ruck played 10 minutes a quarter off the bench. We couldn't keep both Jolly and Jamar so we traded one for a fair price (even if draft picks had different values back then). There was certainly no doubt Jolly would make a very good ruck. I had doubts on the Russian but he came through.

Martin was a different case. He was a tall guy with good athleticism but not really a fixed position. He was pretty soft and there wasn't a lot of evidence he could convincingly hold down the ruck even if Jamar was injured. Neeld and co pretty much swapped him out for Pedersen who was a better forward-ruck player. Brisbane took him on as a forward/ruck type and he was injured for a season and half. It was only because Leuenberger and Trent West were both injured that he even got a chance as first ruck. 

Here's Leppa pretty much saying they'll pick Martin because they have to but he thinks the young kid Archie Smith has a better future. 
https://www.lions.com.au/news/2014-05-31/leppa-martin-logical-choice

Obviously there were some Stef Martin fans and if you were one of them then congratulations but the mainstream opinion at the time was that he was a tall bloke with some athleticism who was worth a try but that's about it. Hence why Brisbane got him for some late picks. He'd played 50 games because we were rubbish and we could try him back, forward and in the ruck (or all 3 at once). 

Anyway, back to the topic that matters, Josh Mahoney said a thousand times in trade week that Preuss was here for coaching and to train and learn from Gawn and stressed he wasn't an automatic inclusion in the side. How are people forgetting that?

 

Just now, DeeSpencer said:

Agree with you on Jolly. Although he wasn't understudy to Jamar he was understudy to White, a role he was competing with Jamar for back when the 2nd ruck played 10 minutes a quarter off the bench. We couldn't keep both Jolly and Jamar so we traded one for a fair price (even if draft picks had different values back then). There was certainly no doubt Jolly would make a very good ruck. I had doubts on the Russian but he came through.

Martin was a different case. He was a tall guy with good athleticism but not really a fixed position. He was pretty soft and there wasn't a lot of evidence he could convincingly hold down the ruck even if Jamar was injured. Neeld and co pretty much swapped him out for Pedersen who was a better forward-ruck player. Brisbane took him on as a forward/ruck type and he was injured for a season and half. It was only because Leuenberger and Trent West were both injured that he even got a chance as first ruck. 

Here's Leppa pretty much saying they'll pick Martin because they have to but he thinks the young kid Archie Smith has a better future. 
https://www.lions.com.au/news/2014-05-31/leppa-martin-logical-choice

Obviously there were some Stef Martin fans and if you were one of them then congratulations but the mainstream opinion at the time was that he was a tall bloke with some athleticism who was worth a try but that's about it. Hence why Brisbane got him for some late picks. He'd played 50 games because we were rubbish and we could try him back, forward and in the ruck (or all 3 at once). 

Anyway, back to the topic that matters, Josh Mahoney said a thousand times in trade week that Preuss was here for coaching and to train and learn from Gawn and stressed he wasn't an automatic inclusion in the side. How are people forgetting that?

 

I know.

I edited 10 minutes ago.

25 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Preuss played 8 games for North.  Jolly played 48 games for Melbourne.  Martin played 57 games for Melbourne.

We received pick 15 for Jolly, which we used to draft Dunn.  Melbourne and more importantly Sydney both knew Jolly could play, which is why we received such a good pick for him.  Jolly didn't like being the understudy to Jamar, as he wanted to be the no.1 ruckman.  Jolly cracked it and asked for a trade.  Sydney offered very good compensation for a known commodity (unlike Preuss).

Martin's best position at Melbourne was also the ruck.  But he too was behind Jamar, so we'd play him forward and as the back up ruck.  He sort greener pastures, but we knew when given no.1 rucking duties he excelled.

Both players had a lot more exposed form than Preuss, who never threatened to be the main ruck at North and unlike Jolly and Martin hasn't come to Melbourne to be the main ruck either.

I'm sure you'll have your say, but I'm not interested in a tennis match.

@dieter took the wordS out of my mouth - I hate tennis too (maybe we are bonding??).

The point I'm making is that Melbourne significantly underrated the aforementioned ruckman we let go of.  Jolly was a dual premiership ruckman.  Carlton gave up a first pick for a ruckman who hasn't every looked like being half the player Jolly was when we let go of him.

Martin had played one great season and we gave him up as a lost cause.

It's a fairly common phenomenon that ruckman a) take a long time to develop and b) with a few exceptions, tend only to flourish when given the license of being the No.1 man.  That's the commonality I see with Preuss, thay he has shown some potential, but has been locked out of showing his worth.  I'm hoping we are the beneficiary this time.

To some extent, I think it's the nature of the position that limits the number of good ruck players on any one list.  The main club I can think of having made two ruckman work is West Coast with Cox/Nick-Nat and Nick-Nat/Lycett and I think that worked out ok for them both times.

For what it's worth, I'm not 100% sold on Preuss as being an out and out champion just yet either, but I think he has shown some ready made potential to fulfill a desperate need we have for a Gawn backup/load sharer that adds value to our overall compeditiveness.

Hunt was the biggest positive after no listed injuries, for me anyway.

While it was good to get a look at the unknown, Preuss, Sparrow, C Wagner to name a few, it was great getting back to what we know about Hunt. Really enjoyed his game, first half especially. Seemed confident again with a bit of dash, broke a couple of tackles, lowered the eyes a few times and managed to hit his targets more often than not.

If he keeps this kind of showing up he will definitely deserve a spot in what’s a tough back 6 to crack into. 

On Lewis, I’m sure we’ll have a few conversations about his place in the team during the year for one reason or another,  but watching from the same level as the players, even though he’s prone to a few lazy passes, his kicking really is sublime.