Axis of Bob

I think his style of play is often an important difference in our midfield. It's so hard to create scoring opportunities in the modern game that you need players that can beat a tackle to create space where there is none. He's not a great kick, quite one sided, and not a 'finesse' player but they would be nice add ons to his game rather than important to his role. I suppose I'd like Max Gawn to be a better crumber too, but it's not that important to his role. He's not a perfect midfielder but he's an incredibly good one, not just for the times he has the ball but especially for the times he doesn't have the ball. He's a 'glue guy' in the stoppages, that makes all the others play better. If you're only looking at what happens when he gets the ball then you'll never see his value. He is often willing to take a risk to score, which is important because scoring is so difficult. Here are some interesting stats for Viney this year (AFL wide rankings) that bear this out (footywire.com): I've marked the most interesting bits: Clearances. Turnovers. Inside 50s. Scores. Excellent at winning contested footy and clearances. Ordinary ball user. The way he plays results in us scoring goals. He's a player who will annoy those who focus on shortcomings because he makes mistakes and humans, being loss averse, notice bad stuff more than they notice good stuff. But his mistakes are outweighed by his unique abilities, including winning one on one contests in stoppages, defense in stoppages (and contests) and his ability to beat an opposition defender and therefor punch a hole the opposition's team defence. Compare that to the other players that could play that role (AVB, Melksham, Sparrow ....) and he becomes even more important.

So your biggest issue with this whole thing is that the specific footage that I used for a joke on an internet forum during the offseason was from 2019 instead of 2020? OK, you got me. I concede.

I will say that Viney's abilities inmaking the stoppages function is only something that I've recently developed an appreciation for. I had a vague idea of what Viney was doing and also though that his play may have been cannibalising the play of the other midfielders, but his high B&F placing made me do a double take and question why the coaches rated him so much more highly than me/us (comfortably ahead of Oliver). It was only then that I went back to have a good look at the stoppages to see what exactly the players were doing (which is what the coaches would do) and how well each of them performed their role in each stoppage. It became pretty obvious that Viney was the best at his role and had a greater variety of roles depending who was in the stoppage with him, plus he was able to recover the fastest once the play broke down to defend.

This is closest I could find:

OK. Viney does multiple roles, and it varied depending on who is in the centre with him. Here is one against St Kilda, without Oliver. It's Viney, Brayshaw and Petracca. This is set up for Petracca to have the who far side open to him. Viney blocks out Steele, Brayshaw gets inside Jones to block and Petracca beats Ross and gets to the far side with space. This is shown below: Unfortunately the play breaks down because Brayshaw can't get inside Jones to block him out, so Jones gets the ball before it gets to Petracca. Viney, on the other hand, gets Steele out of position and is therefor a non-factor in the stoppage. This is shown below. I show this as an example of how important these roles are in stoppages. Here is another, with the play designed for Oliver. Oliver is to beat Shiel to the tap to the far side, with Viney blocking out Merrett to create space and Melksham playing purely defensively on Stringer (near side). Essentially: Merrett give Viney the slip early, which puts the play in jeopardy. But Viney is able to recover to win body position to push Merrett into the contest, which keeps the play alive. Oliver gets a little hold from Shiel, but because Viney has done his job so well on Merrett he's now clear and able to recover the ball to win the clearance. Around the ground, Viney does the same on good players. Here the tap is for Oliver, with Crouch defending him. Brayshaw blocks the inside exit and AVB the defensive exit (we're kicking left). Viney is trusted one on one with their best player, Rory Laird. Viney beats Laird for position and, when there's no effective tap from either Gawn or O'Reilly, Viney is able to win the clearance off the back of his good defensive body work. Now he's one with Petracca on Laird and Brayshaw on Crouch. It's a weird one because the play breaks down with a dodgy bounce. The tap ends up going forwards to no-man's land. But the important thing is the defence at the stoppage. Crouch edges Brayshaw off the ball and Petracca is lost with the clever Laird, but Viney recovers really quickly from the odd tap and gets himself between the ball and Keays, who isn't able to have any influence on the play. The first possession is won by Crouch and the clearance by Laird. It's a comfortable clearance in the end and Laird wanders through untouched. Keays is shut out quickly by Viney. Brayshaw and Petracca are non-entities once beaten, but Viney is able to do his role so consistently. This happens over and over again. Viney is able to kill opposition clearances and also win his own off the back of this. He doesn't have the play designed for him as often as the attacking mids, but he can do it well if there is another defensive midfielder in the stoppage. For example, this stoppage involves Vandenberg. Viney is on Shiel (left) whilst AVB is blocking Merrett and Oliver is being defended. Shiel is the opposition's best midfielder, but Viney is so good at winning the body battle in stoppages that the play can confidently predict he wins body position for the surprise attack. Oliver's man only has eyes for him, so Oliver just has to stay out of the way of Viney, whilst AVB just blocks Merrett away. The tap goes to the far side, which is easy to do when the opposition has Stewart in the ruck. It's an easy clearance in the end because of a terrible setup by Essendon. But the whole play depends on Viney winning body position, which he does. Usually he does it defensively for other players, but he can do it himself so reliably that sometimes they design plays for it. He has the quality to play both attacking and defensive. The defensive midfielder is under-appreciated. Brayshaw has been given this responsibility at times, but he just doesn't do it to the level of Viney. You can see that, since Brayshaw went down late in the year, Melksham has been sent into the middle to play defensively. Oliver can do it at times, but he's a target man more often than not whilst Viney creates the space he can use. When Petracca is in there the ball is almost always going to him. Oliver is a rounded midfield but he doesn't play as a defensively minded stoppage midfielder like Viney. Viney is so important because he's so much better than the next best player in his role (Brayshaw, AVB and Melksham), and one of the best at it in the league. Plus, on top of that, he can be used offensively when required. There's a reason why a range of coaches love him every single year, but his style means that it doesn't always get its way on to the stats sheet.

When I get a chance later on I'll put some screenshots up to show what I mean.

No, that's the role he plays, especially in stoppages. He plays as the defensive midfielder, and he's pretty much the only one who does in our team. He is really good at taking out opposition midfielders in stoppages and creating space for the others to win the ball in. As a result, he's probably the most important player in our midfield. We have many ball winners, like Oliver, Petracca and Brayshaw, so if one of them misses then they are replaced by another. But if Viney misses then the defensive midfielder replacements are far inferior, like Vandenberg or Melksham, although Sparrow did some in the middle of the year. Viney currently is a defensive midfielder, and an exceptionally good one. That's why he does so well in best and fairests because his role, whilst not well understood, is extremely important and he's extremely good at it.

But that's the same role that he plays now!

The difference here from many of the other ruck trades is that Preuss has 2 years of contract remaining. This means that we have full control, unlike say Nankervis or similar. We have leverage here because it's not like we are desperate to get rid of him and he's contracted. We could easily have him on the list for another year and do it next year. We hold the whip hand and it wouldn't surprise me if we got a pretty decent deal for him. He play 2 games in the ruck this year. One where he was very competitive with Grundy and the other where he smashed English. He's an AFL quality ruck who we have in contract. A team that needs a first ruck would need to tempt us into trading him.

Then the problem is likely to mostly yours. This year, Viney conceded 15 free kicks in 16 games. Let's say, for simplicity (even though it overstates it), that half of these were for holding the ball. That means that he was conceding a holding the ball free kick fewer than once every two matches. If it's even a problem then the impact of that is so extremely small that it's barely worth talking about. Like I said, the problem is likely to be one of perception.

Fair enough. That misreading of the list (how?!?!) was clearly a mistake. As it relates to Polec, the misreading of the list doesn't make me less concerned. I think he's worth speaking to but I'd be really concerned about his time at north this year. In a game that's now so heavily built on team defence, I'd be worried about bringing in a kick chaser. I think you'd need to be really clear on what the issues were and whether you could fix/manage them. 4 clubs in 11 years across 3 states .....

They delisted 11 players before they even got a chance to get to the trade table ..... I think it's clear that they've been pretty set on a rebuild. Also they were aiming for finals last year. 2019 was a bit of a 'last chance saloon' for them, and when it became clear that they couldn't do it Brad Scott left. The fact the Shaw got a short term bump wouldn't have altered their view .... you don't change coaches mid-season to make finals that year!! Because Jed Anderson isn't going to perform a skill better because he tries harder to do it but Jared Polec can play more defensively if he tries harder to do it. One's a skill and the other is a behaviour. It's like a talented batsman who throws his wicket away (Polec) going for a slog, rather than a tail ended (Anderson) trying to defend but just not being good enough. You can't change the skill much, but you might open with the slogger for a few games (even if it isn't his best role) with the simple instruction of 'I don't care how many runs you score, just be there after 20 overs' because you get a long term benefit. That's what Shaw is doing.

So he plays team first footy. He's always been a battering ram .... it isn't his choice, it's how he plays. It's a blessing and a curse. If you said he may not complement our midfield, that's one thing, but saying he doesn't play team first footy because he doesn't have Oliver's in close hands and vision is rubbish.

He finished 3rd in the B&F over Oliver and Gawn. I'm willing to say that this 'not team first' stuff is complete rubbish.

If we get him he won't kick 60 goals a year, but he will be dangerous under the long ball because he's 200cm tall and reasonably strong. That makes our whole forward line work better and requires the opposition play their best defender on him. You can build a forward line around that.

Clearly he's setting standards to his players as he tries to instill a defensive 'team first' culture, just like Roos did with us and multiple other coaches have done as well. Roos brought in Vince and Cross to alter the culture of the side, and clearly Rhyce is trying to do the same thing. He's been given a clear remit to rebuild the team after a decade of topping up under Scott. They're bottoming out and that involves building the team around the values the coach wants. The second part of your question about 'doesn't have the ability to teach skills and ball movement' is complete rubbish and just trying to shoehorn an excuse for Polec. Wins are irrelevant to North this year, just as they were to us in 2014. You're looking at the move from a single game perspective, which is not how Shaw or North would be looking at it. They're in rebuild mode, where the results aren't as important as the system and habits. If Polec won't follow instructions and his young team mates see that it doesn't make any difference, then why should they? And it may result in an extra win or two now this year, but you're building a team on foundations of sand. North know, more than most, that being a 'near enough' team sucks and they'll do the rebuild properly this time.

Yeah, I think most of this thread has got it around the wrong way. The point about the clearance differential is the most important, as we are actually a good clearance team overall (as per the stats). You can say we should amke tweaks, change the balance etc. but, even so, clearances are still a strength of ours. But we play a low stoppage game, which is strange because we are very strong here. Why? I think because we aren't a strong team at locking the ball inside 50. We don't get repeat stoppages inside our forward line, but instead we win the ball back deeper than most due to our strong defence. Interestingly some of our best wins have been when conceding more inside 50s and winning through transition. The information is incomplete because the real information we need is scores from stoppages differential. If we score strongly from stoppages whilst restricting the opposition, then overall clearance numbers are largely irrelevant. The real answer is that we simply don't have enough information to know exactly how effective we are. Or, more to the point, the answer to the original question is "I'm not sure that this is even a problem".

Trade rumours rarely age well, but this one aged badly so quickly that it actually went back in time to before Zac Williams came out and said that he was exploring free agency to a Melbourne based club! That was about 5 minutes before you posted.

Ummm ..... the answer to our key forward requirements is 6 foot 1 wingman, Harry Perryman?!?!?

A medium marking option is so far from our most pressing need. Gunston is a good player, but why waste resources (draft picks and money) on him when the incremental improvement is so small? It would be much smarter to use those on a player who fills an important, pressing need .... like a crumbing small forward or a running half back.

He's a very good and long kick .... but I'm just not sure we can accumulate enough down the field free kicks to make him effective.

We paid a future first, 26 and pick 50 (which is effectively zero since we weren't using it anyway) for pick 10 (Pickett), 28 (Rivers) and a future fourth rounder. In reality, we traded 26 for 28 (Rivers) and a future fourth rounder, and our future first round for pick 10 (Pickett). It makes perfect sense. If we had a first rounder in 2020 still, we'd be screaming out to draft Pickett.

Nah, he's pointing at his direct opponent, who is less than 2 metres away, demonstrating that he's legally allowed where he is.

I really like some of the comments here about how we were able to beat a top 8 team without winning the inside midfield battle. We won a structural battle with St Kilda, as we won despite giving them the stoppage and territorial advantage that we usually use to win games. We mostly didn't allow them to get in behind us and forced them to win contests against our excellent defenders in order to kick goals, and they weren't able to. We were really good at forcing them to go through our zone, rather than around it like the Dogs did and they simply could score because of it. They kicked a few goal because of rank turnovers but those , unfortunately, will happen in almost any game of football. It's a good sign that we can stay in games (and win games) when we aren't playing our best. It's a big tick for the plan and the scrappy, blue collar team we played with.

You're misunderstanding it. This is how teams defend because they can cover more space this way because the ball takes time to travel through the air. If you're kicking to a stationary player only 50 metres away, the ball would take up to 3.5 seconds to travel from the kicker's boot to the target. If you add the time it takes the player to kick the ball then that's over 4 seconds to get the ball to a team mate 50 metres away. If the ball is being kicked to a stationary target inside a zone 50 metres away, how far away do the defenders need to be if that player can mark the ball uncontested? 30 metres away Otherwise you're just send hospital kicks. If the ball got there faster then they would have to stand closer to the 'free' player. A shorter kick (say 30m) will have about 2.5 seconds from hand to target, so a defender only need to be 10 or 15 metres away from the target to effect a spoil. That's why a zone works.