deanox

But all that is based on either VFL and average AFL form from over 2 years ago in the worst AFL team in history. JKH has better VFL form and similar statistical AFL performance. I'm not saying that VDB won't perform better but he needs time and needs to demand someones spot first. He isn't a walk up start or necessarily an improvement on existing 22.

I don't understand the love for Vanders here. Although I appreciated his effort and attack on the ball in 2015 there is nothing about him that makes him an auto in. When playing he averaged 15 disposals, 4 tackles and half a goal per game. Nothing special, nothing better than JKH or Hannan. He is no more experienced than JKH or Hannan, all with around 30 games. He has never played under Goodwin and hardly trained with them, meaning he won't know our system/ structure/ game plan He may have limited endurance due to his time out of the game. Although we're live him for nostalgia reasons - he tried hard for us when we were horrible - he isn't asuperstar or walk up 22 player, so given he is underdone rushing him in makes no sense.

I thought that about the Nev one until I saw the replay. He was chasing a player who was also not watching the ball. Just because the player chose to turn and prop doesn't mean Nev has to stop running. It is different from when a player is standing or leading towards the ball and you run front on into them to stop the mark.

JKH for Hannan is the only change I expect. JKH has had his second chance and didn't do enough. Maybe I'm being harsh because he missed that shot, but he doesn't get enough of it at AFL level to miss opportunities. Any other changes will be done for structural reasons (ie decide we want that extra tall etc). If Hibberd is fit he comes in for Vince or Smith. IMO it is Bernie because he played Hibberds role, while Smith is playing Levers role. I don't understand the Smith hate tonight I thought he did well. Bernie is playing attacking off HBF. Lots of meters gained, inside 50s and score involvements etc. Smith led the team for intercept posessions, and equal 2nd in contested possessions.

Also Tyson 13 disposals (4th for us) and 3 clearances (= 1st for us), but third least TOG.

Time on ground stats are interesting. Our talls have been constantly on leaving a couple of key mids on the bench a lot compared to Geelongs mids. May give us some extra run towards the end of game.

We have the best ruck in the competition who loves to ruck all day. We have two gun KPFs. We have a young third KPF whom we're grooming as a back up ruck but we're can't fit him in. We've shown a reluctance to play a second ruck and have even preferred to pinch hit smalls. Which AFL ready ruck is stupid enough to come and play at Casey in the hope that we get 4 injured talls? Anyone who fits that description will be looking to move to aclub where they get more game time, not less.

This weekends results have really helped us with respect to the other teams' runs home.

I'm not sure anyone is talking about retiring him but we do need to start thinking about it. He is nearly 31 and will slow down soon, if he isn't already slowing down. So it is prudent to prepare for replacing him. Our headache at the moment is that we have another inside mid on the list (Tyson) who would take his spot if he left this year. But as he will stay another year or two we'll probably lose Tyson as he seeks opportunity. That'll be a real issue if Viney also continues on/off foot injuries. We're can't afford to play without all three of them. Also if next year happens to be his last, then we are looking at replacing all the of Jones, Lewis and Vince in the space of 2 seasons, and we don't currently have replacements for all of them.

In 2015 he was 28. I agree that was probably when his public recognition peaked and when he was aconsistent stand out for Melbourne but most players hit their prime earlier, around 25. What do you think his trade value would have been at 25 or 28? What is a 25 year old midfielder who averages 25 disposals and 4.5 tackles worth? I love his effort and he'll go down as a demon legend, and as someone who stuck through with us in the darkest times, but I'm not sure he was ever AFL top line. But that's hard to say given the lack of quality on the list at the time!

No one at Casey is really demanding a spot on form. Of our players who are considered fringe, all probably did enough: Frost- struggled by foot but defensively and areially was very good. Hannan - little impact but kicked 1.2, and generating/taking opportunities is his job Garlett- less impact than liked but kicked 2.0 and just provided a constant threat over the back which needed to be defended. Spargo - added abit of spark and intensity and kicked 2 goals JKH - struggled abit but worked his way into the game and laid 9 tackles We seem to mostly have the balance right in terms of player types, however definitely added amedium forward for an inside mid this week. And given geelongs engine room, my predicted changes: Tyson for Hannan.

On replacing aging senior players: Interesting that only 9 of 22 were above 25 years of age today, and only 6 over 27. Vince and Lewis are nearly done and Jones probably isn't far (another 2 seasons?), but Garlett, Hibbard and Jetta are 28 so should have 3-4 years left, especially given all have had breaks. The main problem is that 4 of those players are in our back 6. We really need Hunt to come on (and keep him), plus unearth another couple for back there.

Great analysis. A couple of thoughts: At half time we were already leading the marks, and were pretty much even in contested possessions, so I don't think this was a big change in the second half. I feel the difference in the contrsted work was our numbers at the ball, and positioning ie we were inside our opponents at the contest early. Collingwood did exactly the same thing to us. The meters gained stat is particularly interesting given they had more inside 50s. Id like to see an analysis of that but they'd never give us that data! You are right that we didn't switch us much, but I was also pleased to note our "fat side" players defensive side at all times, unlike against St Kilda. On the score involvements, it's worth looking at them as "per score" instead of total: MFC 4.48 per score vs WB 3.84 per score. Although it it's probably reflective of performance, it doesn't look like quite as large a gap in this format and also may be skewed by us giving up some early goals through turnovers in defence plus us having a few long chain "coast to coast" goals once we got on top.

To me the game was won on the outside. The first half they won the uncontested ball by a big margin indicating they were able to find space for low pressure possessions, setting up ball movement. We won it in the second half as we were able to find space. Imo this was about positioning at stoppages. We won the centre clearances all day when the was less congestion and we could get the ball outside. They won the stoppage clearances convincingly by putting extra numbers in, getting in our way, pressuring our first reciever and stopping us getting the ball out.

Omac- Strong and Dependable Punched well, bodied well, I thought he played well. Frost - Disposal lets down Used his pace well and strong in the air but very sloppy by foot. Hope he improves in this area because I'm a fan.

So you're suggesting his improvement lifted the team? He was leading the tackles at half time. 1st game this year, and only 7th in 3 seasons at AFL level. He deserves a chance to work his way into the speed of the game, the same way we would for a senior player returning.

Win next week and we can start talking about whether we can get to the 15 games needed for top 4 instead of whether we can scrape the 13 for finals. The worst part is there would still be a chance we'd not scrape the 13!

Well obviously. But from player 15-30 is generally depth. You need those to be readily replaceable on form or in injury and be able to perform. If they are much better you won't be able to give them game time or $ and they'll leave, worse and you lose. We don't want players 23-30 to be kids, we're wanting competitors who can play a role without leaving us a man short. Can he become that for us for the next 2-3 years? Perhaps. He's shown alot of improvement at VFL, shown ability to find the ball and competitiveness and tackling. We still have a number out of contract who aren't performing to that level. So it'll come down to JKH or a very low pick. Today was a pass, let's see how he goes the next few weeks.

Currently leading our tackles...

That's not in the back.

Yep. Without getting into a discussion of that, the difference here is that we are doing it at stoppages, which is causing our problems.

Right now the symptoms are we're losing the clearances, and getting smashed in uncontested possessions. I think the main problem is we are all going for the hardball instead of trusting our team mates and staying outside to recieve and defend. We are not able to get clean first possession because we are congested and then have no one else to give it too outside. Then if they get it, we're are all caught inside allowing them to get low pressure uncontested possessions as they make space. On top of that we're aren't making position when transitioning from defence unless it's a fast break. The poor kicks have largely been the result of poor options.

That's why frost wasn't getting games.

Tyson plays inside mid. JKH plays HFF/Wing/mid etc.. Nothing to do with pecking order and all to do with suitable positions.

JKH is an interesting inclusion in that he could look amazing compared to earlier games, but that could be due to both his improvement and the teams improvement. Our ability to win clearances will mean he doesn't have to win his own all day. He can use his tank to get in good positions and also add defensive cover for us, a bit like a better skilled ANB. As long as he gets to positions all day and doesn't let his opponent run off him, he could complement the current team well.