The Chazz

1 minute ago, Docs Demons said:

No because Jones at least has a heart and most times disposes the ball correctly not like Hunt. This crap about pace is getting to me. Pace does not win games. It is what you do with the ball when you have it. You move the ball with precision and the whole team looks fast Hunt can run fast but just can't play. 

Unfortunately AT PRESENT we have 20-25 players on our list that are barely VFL standard so make what ever changes you want and it will make no difference. I would love to drop Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw due to their inability to drive forward. How many times do these guys win the ball and in lieu of moving forward lowering eyes to a leading player go back into congestion and in the end cough the pill up. I would hate being a forward in this team.

So you would hate being a forward in this team, but want Hunt dropped? How many times today was he asked to play deep forward because of the [censored] up game plan this clown has tried to implement?

We are coached by a nong who is ruining careers by the minute.

16 minutes ago, jumbo returns said:

No Brown - please

Hunt will make way for Jones methinks

Because we are blessed with pace?

30 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

So anyway.....

He’s officially a dud? 

Genuinely curious here, because I really didn’t  pay attention to many of his previous games. 

My Rivers vs Smith comparison probably isn't as good as this one, Tom Stewart (Geelong) vs Smith.  Stewart played a lot of footy at a lower level.  He understands the game, can play on smalls, talls.  He has a footy brain, so as soon as he got in to the elite environment, developed better habits, built a tank, he was able to grow his game significantly in a very short amount of time.  Even now, I think Stewart is vulnerable (see my views in any lead up to a Geelong game), but he's very well supported but the rest of the backline, and when he gets on top of his opponent, then he uses his strengths to have an impact.

I feel Smith is being asked to play a similar role.  Even when our backline unit play more footy together, if Smith gets on top of his opponent, I can't see what his strengths are that will make him have that same sort of impact as what Stewart does.

13 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

So anyway.....

He’s officially a dud? 

Genuinely curious here, because I really didn’t  pay attention to many of his previous games. 

I don't think he's a dud per se, he's on the list of an AFL club, so it's a bloody lot higher than I have ever played.

My problem with him is that I think his shortcomings far outweigh his strengths.

I look at someone like Rivers.  You can just tell that Riv has "it", that's one of his strengths.  He's a footballer, first and foremost, and that's the perfect starting point.  He already understands the game, and will only continue to improve as he gets bigger/stronger/fitter.  What level will he get too?  Who knows.

I don't feel that Smith understands the game, and because of this, the role he is given is at a reduced capacity.  You only need to see how he panicked in the 3rd quarter last Sunday to know that his football awareness is just not there.  While the more he plays, the more he will learn, but he's so far off where Rivers' knowledge of the game is, that he (Smith) needs to learn a lot, just to get him to what I'd consider a minimum standard.

The problem with AFL sides these days is that their defence is so structured and smart.  Smith is fine from a structure point of view, but he would have no idea how to adjust if the structure breaks down, or if he needs to take the game on, he'd be lost.

I'll be interested to see if he plays this week, and if he does, what match-up they give him.  If I was Hardwick, I'd be licking my lips if Smith goes back again.

The above is only my opinion, so not really worth much in the scheme of things, but that's how I see it.

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Joel Smith deserved to retain his spot. Can’t remember how he went in the second half Vs Geelong but his first half was really good. His athleticism and pace to go with his opponent was evident. A massive step up from rd 2.

Infact our defence of May, Lever, Smith and Hibberd functioned very well for most of the game.

All things going well, Smith could potentially be a productive and versatile staple in our defence going forward. 

C'mon, BBP.  Smith is not AFL standard and is being gifted games because the coach likes his "athleticism and pace", too.  He has had 11 games, and I'm yet to see the required skill and brain to have a reasonable career at this level.

I don't want our team selections to be like a revolving door, but we can't just keep picking players who consistently play below a particular standard.

2 minutes ago, Win4theAges said:

What year were these players shown the door?

2-3 years ago from memory.

9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

vandenBerg last week 7 disposals and 0 goals. Must be Brownlow incoming then?

I'm rapt our list strategy revolves around Bali holidays.

 

To be fair, I'm not a huge AvB fan. But at the time, I was all for moving Kent on, and still don't have one bit of regret.

He will have a good game here and there, we probably won't win a flag without him, and most likely wouldn't have won one with him.

Just now, Lord Nev said:

Can't wait champ. Nothing says "I understand footy" like judging the ability of a player one a game by game basis.

 

Here he goes, using personal shots when it suits the poster.

Nothing says "I understand footy" like having Casboult 2nd on your KPF shopping list. ?‍♂️

And nothing says "I'll just use published stats for my argument" like leaving out Levi's on the full count of your "he literally isn't missed" justification.

Now, go and annoy someone else. I'm done.

36 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Cool mate, I look forward to your Levi watch reports after every quarter the Blues play this year. Can't wait.

Just now, Lord Nev said:

Ah gotcha, the official "Always injured but he's a good bloke" list limit quota is 1. Makes sense.

 

Trying to develop a culture. Perhaps do a bit of a search from a few years ago about a small group of Melbourne players being in Bali when there was an alleged "incident". Of the 4 players that were there, 3 of them are no longer on our list...

And for tonight, Kent had 11 possessions and kicked 1 goal. Wow, 3 votes D Kent.

4 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

We got rid of Kent in the same offseason we signed vandenBerg to a 3 year contract.

At best it's inconsistent.

AvB is seen as a leader at the club, and to be fair, had produced an injury free finals series.

Possibly got to the stage that we could only carry one injury-riddled player, so they went with the one that is better to have around the club.

To be fair, we couldn't get Kent on the park. At some stage you cut those blokes off and move on. I'm sure we will do the same with KK at the end of this year.

Reality is, most clubs will turnover 6-8 players each year. He was a logical choice. And good luck to him now that he seems to be getting a clear run at it.

On 6/29/2020 at 10:29 PM, Lord Nev said:

Yeah, my hope would be Levi could bridge the 'Weid/Jackson gap' where he covers us for a couple of years while one (or hopefully both) of those guys really come on. He almost left the Blues last time he was out of contract but then some weird contract clause kicked in from memory and they signed him up again. Having a genuine big unit who will lead hard and never drop the ball would be a godsend for us, plus the bloke literally hasn't missed this year; 8 goals straight.

I'm on Levi watch tonight, LN. He has been terrible, 3/4 time, 5 disposals, 2 marks (none contested), 1 shot on goal for an on the full.

Interesting sidenote, BT made the comment that while he has kicked 8 goals, 0 behinds, he has kicked a number out on the full.

Perhaps instead of just looking at stats, we may need to watch the player closely during game time to paint a better picture of his worth...

11 minutes ago, tiers said:

Weed and Tmac for me. Start with them and leave them to work it out. It's obvious the coaches can't.

I'm with you Tiers.  If Goodwin thinks it's acceptable to sit Smith in the backline while they wait for him to develop, then get Weid back into the team, get him and TMc working together, and start building our forward entries around the strengths of these two blokes.

His refusal to do so is Neeld-like.  Neeld implemented a game plan that very few of our players were able to play.

34 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

.

Weak AF champ.  You misquoted me, I caught you out, then you deleted your post saying that you didn't want to get sucked in to a rubbish slanging match?

Poor form.

6 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

What's embarrassing is you genuinely thinking Brown is a better player than Casboult.

I'm comparing the two players and am really finding bugger all between the two.  Casboult is without doubt a better contested mark, but that's not to say that Brown is a muppet in the air.  Brown is better when the ball hits the ground.  Casboult is a better back up ruck option.  Brown gets the ball more and is far more efficient.

Put it this way, I'm not finding enough in Casboult's favour for me to be having him 2nd on my shopping list of Key Forward targets for 2021.  What I would do is actually look at the strengths of our key forwards that we have on our list and get the rest of the team to play to them.

Other than that, please feel free to re-post where I have said "Brown is a better player than Casboult".

20 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

It's your own logic you're criticizing.

I'm not, and you are starting to embarrass yourself.

Here, I'll help you.  If you want a more accurate comparison, how about this;  Aaron vandenBerg vs the 2020 Nathan Jones.

41 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Because Casboult is better than both of them currently and his strengths are the ones we lack.

Neither Weid or Brown are good on the lead and neither look like any danger of taking a contested mark.

It's a bit like saying 'why did we draft Pickett when we already have ANB as a small forward?'.

Now you're being silly.

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Mate, the only thing we are disagreeing on is who is better out of Casboult and Brown.

I completely agree with you that Brown should be playing right now, have said that a few times now.

Yeah, see, that's not my disagreement at all.  I'm asking why we would need to bring in someone like Casboult, when we have two key forwards playing suburban football that are more than capable of playing that same role.

I keep shaking my head that Casboult is even forming part of an argument.

21 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I'm not against Brown at all, I would 100% have him in the team at the moment and have put him in my 'ins' the last few weeks in the changes threads. I just think Casboult's leading and marking would fill a much needed space in our forward line, and in those regards he's miles ahead of Brown.

And yes, you are correct in that I will highlight that this season so far Casboult is averaging 7 marks, including 3 contested, 2 marks inside 50, 2 goals & 8 hitouts.

Reckon 2019 is not a 100% true indicator of Brown as he was a target far more often given Daniher played 4 games. Carlton had more options forward.

Your stats are flawed.  If you don't want to look at Brown's 2019 because he was the main target (although it could be argued that they looked for Stringer more than Brown), then you can't look at Casboult's game against Essendon (which was undoubtedly his best game for the year, also where he was their main target).

And again, I will talk about the logic of our FD.  Look at Levi's game against us in Round 2 - he was terrible, and arguably as poor as Brown in Round 1 (Brown arguably up against a far superior backline).  Difference?  Casboult kept his spot, played a much better game the next week against Geelong (see my comments last week about the benefit of playing as the 2nd and 3rd tall vs Geelong's backline), and was very good against Essendon.  Brown?  Got dropped after 1 game for a kid.

I'm parking the discussion here.  Reality is, Casboult isn't on our list, and is 4 games in to a (compromised) season where he turned 30 before the first game.  I'll reassess his performance at the end of the season and get back to you.

5 minutes ago, old dee said:

Do you get the feeling the FD is wishing and hoping?

An interesting question, Old.  I think there is a fair bit of both.  I also get the feeling that individual players have different expectations/standards put on them by the FD, and that will never make a team gel.

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I wanted Casboult 2 years ago when he was on the scrap heap and was up for trade. Got howled down for it. As you say, best hands in the comp and would have taken an extra big body to relive McDonald and Weideman at the time. He won't win you game, but he's a hard working competitor. 

And this is my point, Dazzle.  If that's all you are after, play Brown.  Was he poor Round 1?  Yep.  But I'd argue that a rocket from Goody and a 2nd chance would've been far more productive than getting dropped for a teenager that was nowhere near ready to play senior footy.  Far more productive for the player, and far more productive for the team.

Just now, Lord Nev said:

I agree we should already have one of Weid or Brown in the team at the moment, but IMO neither of them are anywhere near Casboult as a player currently. Not even close.

Brown kicked 21 goals from 16 games in 2019, Casboult kicked 15 from 20.

Brown had a reasonably solid preseason, then got the [censored] after our Round 1 game.  Has kicked bulk goals in every scratch match since.

You will predictably show me their stats for 2020, and it will somewhat give your argument a great deal more substance than mine, but it's why I also questioned the logic of the Football Department.  Their selections this year are absolutely disgraceful, so much so that you are able to use stats that would support why Casboult should be someone we target.

46 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

No. And trying to over simplify things in this way doesn't do anyone any favours.

We need a key forward who can lead and mark, that's pretty obvious. It's a role to fill, not a 'saviour'.

We don't have anything in ways of trade currency, so we need to look at free agents.

As far as free agents go Jeremy Cameron is without doubt the best option. Should we not get him we need to look at the other options.

One of those is Casboult. One of the best pairs of hands in the league, consistently leads and has not missed a shot on goal this year.

If you'd prefer to throw around some of the unrealistic ideas that always pop up then go for it, I'm sure we can trade the Wagners, Niteschke, Dunkley and Chandler in a package deal for Ben Brown.

This is where both your logic and the Football Department's logic just don't make sense to me.  You're asking for a role player, not a saviour, which is not an unrealistic request.  You have then offered the name of Casboult as a possible target (your 2nd choice).

If that's all we are asking (ie role-player, not saviour), then I can't see why we wouldn't be playing Weid or Brown.  They are both as capable, if not more so, than Levi, and are both presently on our list.

The logic of the FD that I don't understand is that we clearly need a 2nd tall forward, yet they have two of them running around in a scratch match that can do it but refuse to pick them.

21 hours ago, waynewussell said:

Quite a few 'experts' here tipped an easy Cats victory. It went down to the line. WE were close to winning. Are those experts prepared to acknowledge that they underestimated our team?

I was one of the 'experts' that tipped an easy win for Geelong.  I predicted Hawkins would kick 5, he kicked 1.3.  Was adamant that we needed a 2nd tall (I was calling for that to be Brown) to force them to play Taylor (meaning they would've gone in with one less half back runner, which is where we they slaughtered us with uncontested marks).

I knew we would match-up well against them, and that if we could play 4 quarters, we'd beat them.

17 hours ago, Buzzy said:

Played one game in 18 months and got absolutely crucified by the plebs on here last week.  Unbelievable.

Solid today. ?

Smith provided one of the 3 moments that I think "officially" cost us the game.  When he didn't take that ball over the boundary, deep in their pocket, it showed a complete lack of understanding of playing defence, which they ended up kicking a goal directly from that decision.  He's not a kid, I can't see how we can continue to let him develop in the seniors when he is clearly not AFL standard.

For the record, the other two moments were Fritsch dropping that chest mark, and the free kick paid against May, think it was a marking infringement, in the 3rd quarter (was around 80m out from our goals), which they also kicked a goal directly from that.  It wasn't a free kick.

The Tom Mc non-free was the right decision, just a strong marking contest.