Angus Brayshaw

[TRIGON 4,783]

2 hours ago, BigMacjnr said:

Great pick up Lord Travis, I think this nails the issue. 2019 review from the AFL to Melbourne highlighted the requirement of the wing position and the reason why we targeted Langdon and Tomlinson in the trade period. Wingers need to create outside run and spread, overlap, help stop gap in defense but also create forward drives in attack. They are mainly outside players, run all day types. Brayshaw is an mix inside/outside mid who is also very capable on the back and forward flank. Playing him in a position that exposes his weakness in speed, agility and doesn't take advantage of his footy IQ and contest work. 

Goodwin did a great job recognizing mistakes in the team structure:

- Adding a FF in Weid instead of playing a running CHF in TMac in a role that doesn't suit him

- Moving Harmes in a Fwd/Mid role

- Playing OMac which allows May and Lever to be more aggressive which, with Gawn's assistance, has made for a very strong performance from our backline

Either have Brayshaw switching with Salem in the halfback (give Salem some midfield time as well) which Brayshaw has done well in the past or have him rest up forward and switch with the mids from there. Goodwin pushed him forward in a last ditch effort against Geelong where he laid some key tackles and kicked two key goals that nearly got us over the line...Play him in a position that maximises his strengths not his weaknesses.   

Not putting players in positions that don't suit them in the first place would be my definition of a great job.

[Vineytime 847]

3 players underperforming this season thus far: 

Harmes

Brayshaw

Salem

For the MFC to become a good side we need these players to lift on a consistent basis, they have proven they can play to a high level, though 2020 they have disappointed. 

[whatwhat say what 22,779]

Salem underperforming? Not sure I can agree with that

[Lord Travis 10,740]

5 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Salem underperforming? Not sure I can agree with that

Salem’s having a down year. Averaging 7 disposals less than last year. Less kicks. Less tackles. Less rebound 50s. It’s statistically his worst year since 2016. He’s definitely dropped off, but it’s less noticeable compared to say Brayshaw. It’s possible Salem’s another who’s struggling with his role this season. Agree that he, Brayshaw and Harmes are ones we need to get performing well. They’re in the age bracket where they should be peaking. 25 year olds shouldn’t struggle with their role and confidence. 

[titan_uranus 25,020]

Brayshaw is clearly in poor form right now. He had absolutely no influence on last night's game. We may as well have had 21 players rather than 22, to be brutally honest.

I suspect part of the problem is that his skillset is heavily geared towards being a centre mid but with Oliver, Viney and Petracca all in front of him, and shortened quarters, there are just not enough opportunities for him to get in there. So we're asking him to be on a wing, or on a flank, or sitting off the back of a stoppage as a sweeper. IMO, quite frankly, he's just not good at any of those roles.

The TOG stat is interesting. He's playing less time in games than Bennell. That could be fitness-related. Or it could be a symptom of the coaches just not feeling confident in putting him anywhere else on the ground so rotating him off the bench instead. Or both. Who knows.

I am not against dropping him and trying something different in that wing spot. Tomlinson this week is an option. vandenBerg long run another option.

Long term for Brayshaw to fit with our development we need him in the middle more. A return to 20 minute quarters might assist. Otherwise, it will mean a lift from him coupled with Oliver and Petracca rotating through the forward line a bit more, I suspect.

[layzie 33,826]

There is a lot going on with Gus right now and I don't claim to understand fully what the issues are. I'm sure he'd love to be at the coal face but you need to adapt to some degree and he could still be providing more on a wing. The game time thing has me stumped. 

Maybe a straight swap with Salem could be the answer, not totally convinced though. Possibly a tagging role where he can beat an opponent to get the confidence up? I dunno

[Lord Nev 13,512]

Perhaps the game time thing is simpler than we think.

Maybe given the shorter game time currently the 'better' players are playing more of the game and the 'second tier' players aren't needed as much for the amount of rotations? Would explain why Harmes, who had a shocker on Sunday, had less game time and why we've been able to carry low game times for players like vandenBerg and Bennell.

Perhaps the coaching staff identified the better players and those in form should play higher percentages, and those who are struggling for form or don't have peak fitness can fill some lower amounts.

[Tom Dyson 1,633]

Gus isn't going well, but there is an obvious reason why.

quite simply, he is being played out of position. He plays his best footy in the engine room and instead he's floating up and down the wing, and across half-back. 

if you play maxy at full forward he's not going to get many hit outs. If your'e not starting gus in the centre then hes not going to get his hands on the pill as much. If you switched it around and put clarry on the wing/half back then he will underperform as well. 

The argument could be made that he should adapt to his new role, and i would agree that probably yes he should. 

however, don't be so quick to absolutely destroy him because i think it'll take time for him to be damaging in his new role. 

i also think that he could give tracc a chop out in the middle allowing tracc to go forward and hit the scoreboard. 

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,294]

Gee his brother Andrew is turning into a very good footballer. Covers a lot of territory and is improving every match.

[Lucifers Hero 39,907]

20 minutes ago, Tom Dyson said:

Gus isn't going well, but there is an obvious reason why.

quite simply, he is being played out of position. He plays his best footy in the engine room and instead he's floating up and down the wing, and across half-back. 

if you play maxy at full forward he's not going to get many hit outs. If your'e not starting gus in the centre then hes not going to get his hands on the pill as much. If you switched it around and put clarry on the wing/half back then he will underperform as well. 

The argument could be made that he should adapt to his new role, and i would agree that probably yes he should. 

however, don't be so quick to absolutely destroy him because i think it'll take time for him to be damaging in his new role. 

i also think that he could give tracc a chop out in the middle allowing tracc to go forward and hit the scoreboard. 

What isn't very clear is what his new role is.  Sometimes he is on the wing, sometimes in the middle.  If only playing 65% game time and being moved around he has little chance to settle into any role.

I agree about giving Petracca a chop out.  He played 95%, a huge workload all credit to him for lifting the team in the last qtr.

Game time for mids and wings: Jones (81%), Oliver (88%), Langdon (90%) and Viney (82%.

Harmes could have done a shutdown job on any of the midfielders or wingmen.  Both he and Brayshaw could have relieved any of those mids/wings.

Interestingly,  like Brayshaw, Harmes also played 65% (his game time has been trending down for 4-5 weeks).  Given that we have a game in a few days one would think the coaches would have spread the work load a bit more.

Something odd is happening with which players get game time and which don't.  All a bit of a mystery.

Edited July 28, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[old55 23,613]

22 hours ago, A F said:

I like Gus and if Viney or Petracca were injured he'd be straight into my starting midfield mix. 

That said, I was proposing we trade Gus at the end of 2019 when his currency was a bit higher.

I fear that if he continues on this trajectory we'd want to trade him, but wouldn't get enough for him, so may as well keep him as midfield depth. It really does only take one injury and he'd be straight in there though.

Normally you need 4 in the midfield rotation and we have 5: Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Brayshaw, Harmes. 

This year Petracca's ascension and the shorter quarters meaning less rotations have pushed both Brayshaw and Harmes out of their best (and possibly Brayshaw's only) roles.

As you say AF - one injury and Gus is straight back in there doing what he does best.  In Brayshaw's best year 2018, Petracca was a forward and Viney was injured.

Next year with the expected return to 20 minute quarters we'll need the full 4 in rotation.  The question is can we maintain the luxury of 5 first choice starters on the list in case of injury?  Probably only if they can play elsewhere which looks like a struggle for Gus, maybe less so for Harmes because he is a threat up forward.

So maybe there is a trade market for Brayshaw but it would need to be for a required player role, we don't need draft picks.

[Rednblueriseing 824]

19 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Salem’s having a down year. Averaging 7 disposals less than last year. Less kicks. Less tackles. Less rebound 50s. It’s statistically his worst year since 2016. He’s definitely dropped off, but it’s less noticeable compared to say Brayshaw. It’s possible Salem’s another who’s struggling with his role this season. Agree that he, Brayshaw and Harmes are ones we need to get performing well. They’re in the age bracket where they should be peaking. 25 year olds shouldn’t struggle with their role and confidence. 

Salem's having a strong season, you do know that it's only 16 minute quarters now so that equalsless touches across the board including Gus as well 

[Adam The God 30,271]

35 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

Normally you need 4 in the midfield rotation and we have 5: Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Brayshaw, Harmes. 

This year Petracca's ascension and the shorter quarters meaning less rotations have pushed both Brayshaw and Harmes out of their best (and possibly Brayshaw's only) roles.

As you say AF - one injury and Gus is straight back in there doing what he does best.  In Brayshaw's best year 2018, Petracca was a forward and Viney was injured.

Next year with the expected return to 20 minute quarters we'll need the full 4 in rotation.  The question is can we maintain the luxury of 5 first choice starters on the list in case of injury?  Probably only if they can play elsewhere which looks like a struggle for Gus, maybe less so for Harmes because he is a threat up forward.

So maybe there is a trade market for Brayshaw but it would need to be for a required player role, we don't need draft picks.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with the 2021 fixturing. The AFLPA and the AFL would both get what they want if they got a longer season, but in that case, the quarters would probably have to be shorter.

It's only posturing on my behalf, but I'd much prefer shorter game times, but more games and mid-week games like the EPL. 

As for Gus, I'm in complete agreement that if we look to trade Gus it shouldn't be for draft picks, unless that is somehow involved in getting a required player for us over the line in a trade. But I'm still inclined to see how the rest of the season pans out before we rule out Gus.

He's a difficult one, because as I think you rightly point out, Gus is the one that can really only play one position (mid) or at a stretch, half back as well. I'd argue his long, reasonably accurate kicking from stoppage is a weapon that really adds power to our midfield if the midfield consists of Gus, Oliver and either Viney or Petracca.

But to me, he's in a similar position that Brad Sewell was in at Hawthorn near the back end of his career and I guess, similar to Tyson's time at Melbourne as well. Being played out of position because Oliver, Viney and Petracca are stronger mids IMO, but I think the FD are persisting with Gus in a supporting role, because they know what you and I have both said, that one injury is all it takes and Gus is back in. He's also a more than handy midfield rotation.

We may not be able to carry Gus on a wing all year, but we seem intent on trying to at the moment, at the expense of seemingly Tomlinson. He's definitely a better midfield bet than Tomlinson, but Tomlinson would offer us greater running capacity on the outside. It's a very tough balance and I don't envy being in the shoes of the FD on this one.

I also wonder what Gus' internal KPIs are and whether he's meeting them.

Edited July 28, 2020 by A F

[Lucifers Hero 39,907]

35 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

The question is can we maintain the luxury of 5 first choice starters on the list in case of injury? 

This is part of the mystery for me:  

• We renewed Brayshaw's contract in July 2018 for four years to 2022, before our run home, before finals and before the Brownlow.  So he earnt it before the hype.
• We renewed Harmes' contract late last year for 5 years to 2024. 
• We also knew that Peracca was building his midfield time.

Rhetorical question is why would we give them long term contracts then keep them as 'spares' when we had adequate 'spares' in Jordan and Sparrow on the list. 

Both Harmes and Brayshaw have been played all over the shop in 2019 and 2020.  Hardly ideal for finding form or bedding down a role in the team.  Neither looked at all happy on Sunday.

Nothing against Jones but why would select/play him when either Brayshaw or Harmes are sitting on the bench?

Edited July 28, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Ted Lasso 19,519]

for me the shuffle you make is you give Oliver more forward time and give Gus more midfield time and the net positive overall seems better

Oliver has shown he's capable of causing headaches up forward

[Watts the matter 1,235]

59 minutes ago, Hell Bent said:

Gee his brother Andrew is turning into a very good footballer. Covers a lot of territory and is improving every match.

Like Angus is not a very good user of the footy but his speed is much better. His tackling is also good, much like when Angus came into the AFL. 

[old55 23,613]

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

This is part of the mystery for me:  

We renewed Brayshaw's contract in July 2018 for four years to 2022, before our run home, before finals and before the Brownlow.  So he earnt it before the hype.

We renewed Harme's contract for 5 years to 2024 late last year. 

We also knew that Peracca was building his midfield time.

Rhetorical question is why would that and then keep them as 'spares' when we had adequate 'spares' in Jordan and Sparrow on the list. 

Both Harmes and Brayshaw have been played all over the shop in 2019 and 2020.  Hardly ideal for finding form or bedding down a role in the team.  Neither looked at all happy on Sunday.

I think the midfield rotation is the cornerstone of our contested gameplan and it's where we have strength and depth.  I guess we didn't know whether Viney's foot would hold up, we didn't know whether Petracca could transition and there could easily be an injury to one of the 5.

It that's reduced to 4 because we trade one and then we get an injury we'll be actually using Jordon or Sparrow full-time in the rotation when we're trying to win the flag.

I'm fine with Brayshaw and Harmes having contracts - if they are in a trade discussion then we still hold the whip hand.

[Adam The God 30,271]

8 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

This is part of the mystery for me:  

We renewed Brayshaw's contract in July 2018 for four years to 2022, before our run home, before finals and before the Brownlow.  So he earnt it before the hype.

We renewed Harme's contract for 5 years to 2024 late last year. 

We also knew that Peracca was building his midfield time.

Rhetorical question is why would that and then keep them as 'spares' when we had adequate 'spares' in Jordan and Sparrow on the list. 

Both Harmes and Brayshaw have been played all over the shop in 2019 and 2020.  Hardly ideal for finding form or bedding down a role in the team.  Neither looked at all happy on Sunday.

Time with tell on Jordon and Sparrow, but they'll have to be pretty good if they're competing with Gus or Harmes any time soon.

I think in any other era during the last 30 or so years, Gus and Harmes would be auto starters in the Melbourne midfield. I think we're currently blessed with Oliver, Viney and Petracca all growing together at once. As the club always intended.

It's worth thinking about that 2018 season again though, because Petracca was a bit ho hum that year and promised big things, but never delivered. Whereas, Gus had shown a level of improvement through the middle of 2018 and Harmes had also come on leaps and bounds by the end of 2018. Both great signings IMO. 

Petracca's development over the last year and a bit has been brilliant and in some ways it's a good problem to have. 

I still think the forwardline could do with more x factor if we're to become a consistent powerhouse, but our backline and midfield set up is starting to look good and has a nice mixture of experience and youthfulness. We could do something big this year, but I reckon give our age profile, we really enter our prime window next year. 

[old55 23,613]

Or we could re-open the Viney as small forward idea @A F

[Lucifers Hero 39,907]

7 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

I think the midfield rotation is the cornerstone of our contested gameplan and it's where we have strength and depth.  I guess we didn't know whether Viney's foot would hold up, we didn't know whether Petracca could transition and there could easily be an injury to one of the 5.

It that's reduced to 4 because we trade one and then we get an injury we'll be actually using Jordon or Sparrow full-time in the rotation when we're trying to win the flag.

I'm fine with Brayshaw and Harmes having contracts - if they are in a trade discussion then we still hold the whip hand.

 

6 minutes ago, A F said:

Time with tell on Jordon and Sparrow, but they'll have to be pretty good if they're competing with Gus or Harmes any time soon.

I think in any other era during the last 30 or so years, Gus and Harmes would be auto starters in the Melbourne midfield. I think we're currently blessed with Oliver, Viney and Petracca all growing together at once. As the club always intended.

It's worth thinking about that 2018 season again though, because Petracca was a bit ho hum that year and promised big things, but never delivered. Whereas, Gus had shown a level of improvement through the middle of 2018 and Harmes had also come on leaps and bounds by the end of 2018. Both great signings IMO. 

Petracca's development over the last year and a bit has been brilliant and in some ways it's a good problem to have. 

I still think the forwardline could do with more x factor if we're to become a consistent powerhouse, but our backline and midfield set up is starting to look good and has a nice mixture of experience and youthfulness. We could do something big this year, but I reckon give our age profile, we really enter our prime window next year. 

I get all that but a new contract for 2 years would make more sense if we simply wanted to track Viney's and Petracca's improvement.

I was delighted with the 4 and 5 year contracts.

But 4 and 5 year contracts on very good coin are for key players not for players to be treated as 'journeymen' or 'spares'.

Edited July 28, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Adam The God 30,271]

8 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

I get all that but a new contract for 2 years would make more sense if we simply wanted to track Viney's and Petracca's improvement.

I am delighted with the contracts.

But 4 and 5 year contracts on very good coin are for key players not for players to be treated as 'journeymen' or 'spares'.

Do we know they're on very good coin?

And I think sometimes that happens. You'll have players that were front and centre of what you did two years ago, who then become 'spares' as you put it.

I don't have a problem with it.

Edited July 28, 2020 by A F

[chook fowler 19,459]

6 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

Or we could re-open the Viney as small forward idea @A F

No way. He is needed as a beast in the middle.

[Lucifers Hero 39,907]

2 minutes ago, A F said:

Do we know they're on very good coin?

According to the 'Rich List' thread Gus is ranked @ 86th in the AFL on $600,000 - $650,000. 

No indication of Harmes but I would be surprised if it wasn't $500k+ p.a. 

That is very good coin when the AFL average is about $370k.

[Adam The God 30,271]

15 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

Or we could re-open the Viney as small forward idea @A F

It's funny because when you and I agreed on this, I was worried about Jack's ability to still impact on the midfield contest. He's put that fear to bed, so I'm less likely to advocate too much shuffling through our midfield, but maybe that's what we have to do?

Viney, Oliver and Petracca all playing minutes outside of the midfield, with Viney and Oliver playing forward and Gus off half back or on a wing. My feeling is though we should be playing two genuine wingmen.

I'd be sliding Harmes through there too, so that gives us: Oliver, Viney, Petracca, Brayshaw, Harmes and maybe AVB when fit.

[Adam The God 30,271]

8 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

According to the 'Rich List' thread Gus is ranked @ 86th in the AFL on $600,000 - $650,000. 

No indication of Harmes but I would be surprised if it wasn't $500k+ p.a. 

That is very good coin when the AFL average is about $370k.

Fair enough. $600k is $500k in the old (pre inflation world) mind you, but I guess it's a lot. But he's still a guy playing every week.

I think given the fact if one injury was to occur he'd be straight back in and the fact we don't know what his current KPIs are, it's difficult to assess whether he's worth that or not at the moment.