Axis of Bob

Yep, the issue of Hale and the issue of ruck depth for Jamar/Spencer are separate. I'd be looking at Hale as a Koschitzke style forward. I like the idea of getting a mature ruckman as a cheap rookie entirely as a back up for Jamar and Spencer - effectively taking the place of Paul Johnson. Given that he is contracted to North, I'd assume that we'd be looking at paying our pick 31 at least. I don't know if there's a player swap that they would be keen on.

Agreed, Nasher. We are looking for someone who is able to play as a full time forward but can also give relief in the ruck for short periods. If we wanted a specialist ruckman to play as our second ruck then we would just play Spencer, who is a very capable tap ruckman. But we're looking for something different. It's not about having a ruckman to tide us over, it's about having a forward that can create a contest when the play builds up very slowly (rather than just beating teams on the counterattack like we currently do). The fact that they can provide ruck relief for short periods is a bonus. Darren Jolly was interviewed last night on One Week at a Time and was asked how much time he would usually ruck. He said that it was generally 75-80%. So we are looking for someone to hold their spot as a key forward first and foremost, since we have a gap there and they would only be used for rucking for about 20-25% of the game. Hale is a competent ruckman, but he would be a structurally significant forward that we currently don't have. Newton was playing this role late in the year. Fitzpatrick will hopefully play this role in 5 years time, but he has a lot of development to go. Also, E25, Warnock's pace is not a problem. It's actually a strength of his and was one of the main reasons that he was even drafted as a mature player in the first place.

It's been said before, but there are two different types of players in the ruck. There's the typical first ruckman, like Jamar, who does the majority of the rucking. Then there is the forward/ruck. An example is Leigh Brown. Now Brown isn't much of a ruckman, but he is able to hold his spot in the side as a forward/utility, but just happens to be able to ruck for 30 minutes a game. We would be looking at Hale as a forward who is able to offer 30 minutes of ruck relief a game to Jamar. We currently only have Fitzpatrick (still some time off) and maybe Juice Newton who can play the role Hale would, which is as a key marking forward to sit under the slow, high ball who is able to provide ruck relief for small periods of the game. It seems that everyone is too worried about what Hale could bring as a ruckman, rather than what he could bring as a key forward. The reason he is a different prospect to what we have is that he is a tall, strong forward to compete for the high, slow ball. We have a lot of running tall players (Jurrah, Watts, Green, Petterd, Dunn etc) who find space well and have great speed and skills. When the game is open and we are on the counter attack then we are supremely dangerous. But when the play slows down and the opposition gets numbers back then we don't have anyone except Jamar to be able to kick the ball to in order to make a contest and give our forwards an opportunity to score. He will be a low possession player, but he will provide something we don't have and improve our forward flexibility to play against different styles of opponent.

Goals per game: 1.2 to 0.4 Tackles per game: 4.5 to 1.4 Marks per game: 4.6 to 1.6 Johnson actually is a much better ruckman than Brown (although I don't think PJ is much of a ruckman), but the problem is that the role is different. PJ is caught in between, because he doesn't do enough when he's not in the ruck for him to play as a second ruckman, but he isn't good enough in the ruck to be a bonafide number 1 ruckman. His passable rucking is fine if he was actually holding his place as a key forward. Unfortunately he is just playing as a passable ruckman who doesn't offer anything up forward. Brown can hold his place as a forward or backman .... he just happens to also play somewhat competitively in the ruck for periods to give Jolly a rest. Brown is a forward who can play in the ruck for short periods, whereas Johnson is a ruckman.

For those of you who are bit confused about the link between Damon Hill and his sons Stephen and Josh Hill, it may help you to know their mother was Lauryn Hill (who obviously took Damon's name when they were married in a delightful little ceremony on Cottlesloe Beach. They have a very talented family too. It may interest people that their sister is none other than Faith Hill who, strangely, is actually 8 years older than her mother Lauryn!

Maybe they are just step brothers, as I'm pretty sure that their father is Damon. It's actually pretty obvious when you look at them, as they have their father's eyes.

Really? They're brothers, are they? Are you sure about that?

I wouldn't spend too much on Davey, but he performs exactly the type of role that we need. He doesn't get big numbers in goals or possessions, but he does average 7 tackles a game as a small forward which is exactly what we're after. Bennell played that role for large parts this year but I'm sure they'd like to get him up the ground and start developing him as a midfielder/half back. Aussie is our main player in this role but Bailey has shown that he's prepared to two small pressure forwards this year and Davey would probably be the first one selected in that specific role.

I don't think we'll use pick 12 on a KPP even if we keep it. In fact, I'd be very surprised if we did. If we go for one it'll likely be later in the draft. Mundy is a quality player. Big body, wins contested footy, carries the ball and a penetrating kick. I'm happy we're going after him because, aside from is obvious quality, he complements our current midfield very well. But we'll wait and see what happens.

I thought that Jones improved this year. He seems like he works very hard on his deficiencies which is a great credit to him, because they are things that take some dedication to fix. He came to the club as a really strong outside runner with a great engine, and has had to work on converting himself into a more inside ball winner. He has improved on this area a great deal, which is good. He also had a habit of just kicking the ball forward when he got possession and tried to break tackles in order to get the space to kick it. This year I thought he made very good progress in giving the first option more often and he wasn't caught trying to break too many tackles as often. I think he's a much better run with player now than he was, which is also a credit to him. What I really rate with Jones, that doesn't get mentioned enough, is his great durability. I think that this is an under-rated trait for footballers, as premierships are usually won by teams with very few injuries. His attitude, endurance and durability make him a valuable player to have on the list. He has failings in that he isn't a naturally classy player with his ball use, which is important to the style of game we are looking to play, and he's a natural ball watcher. I think Jordie McKenzie is the player that we hope Jones could be, if he used the ball as cleanly in traffic, but Jordie is already at that level and improving. I would prefer to keep him, as he offers good long term depth as someone who would play 15 games every year and is rarely injured, but it would be understandable if he chose to move on for his own career. With Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, McKenzie all starting to progress past him into the 'inside midfielder' role, Jones might be better off to seek more opportunity. He'd be great to keep at the club, but if he leaves then I would harbour no ill feeling towards him.

Well what they all have in common is that they are all exceptionally quick (aside from Russian, who is a ruckman).

Agreed. Great post, old.

That's exactly right, dandeeman. Effectively he needs to be so good that he gets a tag each week because his lack of size and athleticism means that he cannot fulfill other roles around the ground, nor does he have the ability to compete defensively with the opposition. Mitchell took a while to make it to AFL level and he still hs a role because he's so good that the opposition needs to play defensively on him. He cannot do the same thing to them, though. Valenti is a good player and wins a lot of the ball, but he does not damage the opposition enough for them to warrant putting a stopper on him. In the VFL he is easily good enough for the opposition to tag him first.

It worked well for Ryan Pagan ..... he got a game!

Good post and thread, Bhima. I had to have a good sit down and think about this before I posted because, while I'd rather have our list, I was looking at North's list and didn't really see any glaring weaknesses. It made me re-evaluate what I had in my mind. If you look at their list, they have decent key forwards, decent small forwards, a spread of talented midfielders (young and old), some decent key defenders and a good ruck division. There wasn't anything glaring there that made you say "well they aren't as good". However, I was looking at the problem the wrong way. It wasn't about their lack of weaknesses, it was their lack of strengths. The Dees have Scully, Trengove, Watts, Jurrah and Frawley. Then you look at North and think "Who is their Tom Scully?" "Who is their Jack Watts?" "Who is their Liam Jurrah?" "Who is their James Frawley?" I see a lot of solid players, but I don't see the out and out star that can take them the extra step. That matches up with my gut reaction to the question. North are a team that's going to be pretty good - good enough to be consistently good, but unlikely to win a flag. Their lack of weaknesses helps them beat the teams below them but the better teams will beat them. We are inconsistent, but our top end ability is higher. Our ceiling is higher. Brad Scott plays a heavy zone and their evenness means that there aren't many weak links to be exposed. But eventually they will need someone to break the game open for them. At the moment it is Brent Harvey, but which of their kids is going to be able to do that in the future?

Johnson has played 8 games, averaging about 9 possessions a game and 10.5 hitouts. His season bests are 12 possessions and 14 hitouts. On Sunday, Newton had 16 possessions and 9 hitouts.

Awesome!!

Why would it be hypocrisy? hypocrisy [hɪˈpɒkrəsɪ] n pl -sies 1. the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc., contrary to one's real character or actual behaviour, esp the pretence of virtue and piety

Zaharakis can't kick. How many player have we picked, since Bailey has been in charge, that can't kick?

Was it an issue when he was a junior? I haven't seen him fly for a mark often enough to know whether or not it's an issue at senior level. How often has it happened?

Just because he's played football for many years doesn't mean that he dopesn't play like a basketballer. He plays with the characteristics of someone with a strong basketball background. If you were to compare his style of movement with any current day player it would be Scott Pendlebury. I don't think it's any coincidence. Especially since both were high level guards.

We know that Johnson isn't going to be a good enough ruckman to lead the side. Jamar could always ruck, but struggled to get around the ground well enough, but improved that recently. With the game moving as quickly as it is now, I think a ruckman's ability around the ground is actually less important. A ruckman getting the ball in open space now doesn't have as much time and is probably just going to slow the play down - a killer in the modern game. Look at the ruckmen that are currently dominating the game: Sandilands, Jamar, Hudson. These guys are not quick, mobile ruckmen but rather are the man mountain types. What makes them so valuable is their ability to affect contests and stoppages. That's a place where it is so important to be able to control because they can bring about scoring opportunities. Unfortunately Johnson plays like an outside midfielder and doesn't affect contests. He's poor in the rucking area, despite being reasonably competent at getting into space. Spencer is tall, gangly and looks like a bit of a spaz. But I think that really does cloud a lot of views about his effectiveness and his potential for the future. I did a post after the St Kilda game, so I'll take some info from that post about Spencer. "Spencer works hard around the stoppages and is actually very good in ruck contests, which is unusual this early in a project ruckman's career. Look at Darren Jolly, the poster boy for aggressive tap ruckmen, in his first games and see how effective he was in the ruck. He played 22 games in his first 2 years, averaging 5.2 hitouts per game. Jake is younger than Jolly at that point is his career and is averaging 11.4 hitouts per game, include games of 16, 20 and 17 (this weekend) hitouts, all of which were better that any of Jolly's first 22 games. As for disposals, it wasn't until 2008 that Jolly averaged more than 10 disposals a game. Spencer averages 6.9 at the moment, which isn't too bad for a player of his style at this stage of his career and his age." Interestingly, in that St Kilda game he had 17 hitouts while Gardiner and McEvoy had 15 and 14 respectively. Jamar had 28. The most that Johnson has had in any game this year is 14. Spencer has spent 3 years on the rookie list and, if we want to keep him, we have to promote him at season's end. I have no doubt we'll promote him.

I don't think Watts is necessarily soft. I've seen a lot of ex-basketballers play footy and they tend to have similar characteristics. Playing the round ball with your hands is easy and there is no reason to bodyline the ball because all you'll do is foul. The other thing is that when you get the ball under pressure in basketball your first instinct is to stand still - otherwise you have to dribble the ball and it can be stolen. In footy if you get the ball under pressure then you must be moving, and quickly, otherwise you will be tackled and dispossessed. These habits are generally broken as they play more and more footy. Look at Pendlebury, who was a basketballer and now an inside midfielder - he still keeps a lot of those basketball skills like decision making and finding space in close. The result is that they look soft because they play a lot with their hands and they can be stationary around contests. They also tend to jump vertically for the ball, like a rebound, rather than launch themselves at a pack because they don't raise their knees. Jack will get better at these things and is clearly still learning about what it is he's supposed to do on the footy field. He's a smart kid and he clearly thinks a lot about the game, but he's still learning what it is he's supposed to be doing on the field. Basketball is pretty tactical and people have their roles to play, and Jack is just learning his. As he plays more and more then his role being come to him more naturally. One thing that I worried about with Jack early on was his work rate. He didn't cover much ground and looked to just hang around hoping someone would kick him the ball, and I was worried whether he had poor endurance or was just a bit lazy. But his work rate has improved incredibly and he covers so much ground. It shows that he really does have a great attitude to improving his game. I have very little doubt that he will be a star. Will he be J Brown? Probably not because they aren't the same type of player. Brown couldn't be Watts either, because he doesn't have the same skill set. Watts has everything you need to be a star. The question is, in a few years time who would you play on him? A gorilla can't run with him and a small will be dominated. And if you just try to stop him kicking goals then he's going to run around half forward and rip teams apart. He doesn't need to kick goals to dominate, because he uses the ball so well and so cleverly that he can just orchestrate goals like a puppet master from outside 50.

No, you're a towel!