Gator

I don't agree with your recollections of history.

I know. I edited 10 minutes ago.

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.

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.

I'll answer my own question to @don't make me angry from another thread here, because this is the appropriate thread and because I'm virtually certain they won't answer my question. West Coast play a possession game centred around kicking and marking. It's why they took almost 400 more marks than Melbourne from the same amount of games and had over 400 more kicks. This game-style and structure is more conducive to playing a second ruck if they're athletic like Vardy, if you have other quick mobile tall leading forwards like Darling and Kennedy, and if you're more of a tempo/controlled team moving the ball forward. Melbourne play a high pressure and more chaotic game that is based around the territory game and the production of inside 50s. Melbourne was no.1 for inside 50s in 2018. Melbourne's goal is to either retain the ball inside 50 through pressure, have repeat entries, and obviously score. My concern with Preuss is that if he's not taking marks and hitting the scoreboard he becomes a liability. We lose a pressure player with Preuss in the team. Melbourne had the highest metres gained differential last year (460) with Richmond second (403) and Collingwood third (281). All three teams finished top four, so it's a handy metric. West Coast were eighth (138), but still in positive territory, through their different, yet effective means. My point ? What works for West Coast, and potentially other teams, i.e. two rucks, won't necessarily work for Melbourne. I'm sure they'll try it and occasionally use it, but I very much doubt it will become the norm. But if it does and it works fantastic.

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.

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

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 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 ?

I would have thought Preuss and Gawn playing together might happen 5 or 6 times. I just can't see the structure working weekly if all talls are available. If I'm wrong I'm wrong.

Sparrow didn't get much of it, but he also didn't look out of place. No.32. He looked similar to vandenBerg. Kicked a nice goal from the south west flank.

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.

Way too much being made of stills.

Nine games in a row at AFL level is more than enough, especially if one is familiar with his development years. And especially as he performed on the biggest stage in front of 90,000 people - finals. As I said though, you can please yourself.

Rjay is too polite to say your point is silly. I'm not. Although, naturally, you're welcome to it. Averaging 25 disposals per match for his last 9 games and kicking 7 goals while nullifying some of the best players in the game is enough of a sample size to say Harmes is the real deal as long as injury doesn't raise its head, or his application drops. I don't see the latter happening. Clearly, the club was also happy with his output, as a top 3 placing in the B&F for a prelim team attests. He's fast, aggressive, and he's strong bodied. He's also improved his foot-skills.

But of course. I knew Hogan only played 20 games and that game was round 21. The dastardly bye.

Having just had another look I think Hogan was 0 from 5, not 6, as he missed the Sydney game.

In his last 5 games in 2018, including 3 finals, Weideman took 13 contested marks at an average of 2.6 per game. Across the season as a whole that average would have placed him equal second with Jack Darling on 2.6 and just behind the best contested mark for 2018 Jeremy McGovern. What you envisage as a weakness is one of the biggest strengths in the competition.

By the end of the H&A season we'd played the final top 8 sides eight times, not 11. So I'm guessing you looked back and noted who the top eight sides were at the time we played them.

I think I was pretty underwhelmed when we recruited him. I might have to bump that thread for some self-flagellation.

Goodwin said to Mark Robinson that May could probably play JLT1, but will be ready for JLT2, which is two weeks before round one. Unless he has a setback I don't see why he won't play. When one looks at who could potentially miss only Lever and Melksham would be in our best 18 players.

It's one thing to note that some players have had interrupted preseasons and another to be overly concerned by it. Firstly, best 22 is a fluid concept that changes due to matchups, form, injuries, etc. Players (not a complete list) who may not (or won't) make it to round one: Lever - Hore or Frost the replacements As much as I want Lever back we can cover him early on. Jones - Stretch, Sparrow or others I squeeze Jones onto my bench, but he's no longer a pivotal player. Hannan He's around my 22-24 ranked player. Handy player, but well covered and is touch and go for the best 22 anyway. Kolodjashnij I'm really looking forward to him playing and think he'll add to the team, but if he's missing the first few weeks I doubt we'll notice. Melksham He's the only player that I expect to miss (other than Lever) that weakens the side. Joel Smith, who's a different type, may play instead of him. Or they'll rejig in some other fashion. I expect Viney, May, vandenBerg, Petracca, Oliver, and others to be right to go. So while it's not ideal, as you say, most have got miles into their legs and players who may miss are relatively easily replaced.

Of course it's been shorter, which can have its benefits and problems. I should have just posted this: Goodwin: "It's been a challenge to have so many guys have post-season surgery," Goodwin said. You know, as there have been many players with "'interrupted'' preseasons. It's sort of irrefutable, despite some trying to argue otherwise some months ago.

Yes, of course he is, which is my point. Many players have had interrupted preseasons.

Shirley you can't be serious. He even mentions all of the post-season surgery in the same utterances. No need to respond.