-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
The Lack of Talls on Our List (Merged)
- Thread starter the claw
- Start date
Djevv said:
They could well do, I don't know enough about either to comment. Certainly the success that Mitch Clarke has had playing as a ruckman indicates that very tall running players can succeed as around-the-ground ruckmen. I don't really know much about whether this is an option for those two, but they are cerainly tall enough. It won't be next year, though.
Bill James said:
Bill your comparing who Thompson would pick between the likes of Corey & Johnson Vs Blake, Mooney & Hawkins.
Johnson kicked 46 from just 18 games & had 358 quality touches. Compare that to fulltime forwards in Mooney 46 goals from 24 & Hawkins just 34 from 24.
Or would you choose those 3 above the 5th highest possession winner in the league (Corey).
Sure you need tall timber, but the Fact is in Geelongs case those 3 could be replaced by any number of talls from around the league. Heck even Patto could have filled Blakes spot in that team. Unlike yourself leysy believes they dont have much of an impact but they fill a need. The one's mentioned now are also easily replaced ILO.
Classy strong skilled ball winners. Thats what Geelong accumulated & is built around. Make no mistake.
"manifestly inadequate with almost no chance" hmmmmIanG said:
Ian this is simply an opinion. Whether that opinion is shared by two or twenty, it is still an opinion.
I knew that Sam Mitchell had been passed over in the draft and recruited by the Hawks from Box Hill. As a matter of interest I went looking at others recruited from junior clubs after failing to be drafted. Hard to tell but the records of where players were drafted from after a junior career gives a clue.
Nick Maxwell recruited from North Ballarat (seniors?), James McDonald recruited from Old Xavs, Brett Kirk from Nth Albury after failing on his first attempt. Hmmmm four AFL captains overlooked at first sighting.
Not to mention others like Foley, Harry Taylor, Egan, Cameron Bruce. Anyone care to supply more names of players that ALL the professional recruiting experts passed on, that later proved them wrong.
Leysy Days said:
Interesting about face. You need talls, any will do.
Bill James said:
Perfect post Bill, even when Leysy agrees with you, he then says that he disagrees. Weird this other reality at Richmond draft time.
if you guys think that geelongs talls are not important you are so frigging delirious its not funny
scarlet - the best fullback in the modern game
taylor - destroyed the best CHF riewoldt in the GF and arguably the best CHB in the league
ottens - the best floating ruck/fwd big man
mooney - doesnt kick a lot of goals but boy e presents, hits hard and makes life easier for the smalls
hawkings - big strong and killed em in the GF
these avge talls as you call them are the reason why their smalls are allowed to dominate, yes they have good smalls but they would not have anywhere near the impact withou these tall and big bodies around them
take a look at the saints and see what got them to where they are, do i need to name thier spine?
its no coincidence that the 2 best and biggest spines in the game are far superior than any other side in the comp and i challenge anyone to dispute that fact
scarlet - the best fullback in the modern game
taylor - destroyed the best CHF riewoldt in the GF and arguably the best CHB in the league
ottens - the best floating ruck/fwd big man
mooney - doesnt kick a lot of goals but boy e presents, hits hard and makes life easier for the smalls
hawkings - big strong and killed em in the GF
these avge talls as you call them are the reason why their smalls are allowed to dominate, yes they have good smalls but they would not have anywhere near the impact withou these tall and big bodies around them
take a look at the saints and see what got them to where they are, do i need to name thier spine?
its no coincidence that the 2 best and biggest spines in the game are far superior than any other side in the comp and i challenge anyone to dispute that fact
Disco08 said:
Disco, rate your posting but that is outrageous.
I think this whole mids v talls arguement is stupid. You need both. The great modern sides, the Hawks & the Lions, have had super midfields and super spines. Ess circa 1999-2001 and the current Geelong sides are the other super modern sides that have/had terrific all round talent.
You can argue a team can get away without gun talls in the forward line (West Coast did it and Geelong are doing it) but have a look at the defences of those sides. Likely a better backline has been put on the park than the ones Geelong regularly front with. IMO removing Scarlett would have a bigger impact than removing any of Ablett/Selwood/Bartel etc. West Coast had a super backline, anchored by another fantastic FB/CHB combo.
Having the FB/CHB positions covered allows players of the ilk of Milburn/Mackie/Harley/Enright/Rooke to play damaging supporting roles. All are better than our KB and arguably would do the role better.
I think many undersestimate the importance of the key backs. And this is where we are incredibly poorly served.
Big Cat Lover said:
I've been reading this thread with interest. However BCL I think you have finally hit the nail on the head. True Key Defenders are worth their weight in gold and it is easy to see why quality KPD are rarely traded and are so valued at draft time (I don't count Polak as a KPD, even Tredrea on one knee pantsed him in Richo's 250th).
Even going back further the Hawthorn super sides of the '80's were anchored with arguably two of the best key defenders in the game at the time - Chris Mew (one of the most underrated players ever IMHO) and Chris Langford. The beauty of this setup was if Kernahan got the best of Langford (always a great duel to watch) simply shift Chris Mew on to him. They rarely both had a bad day.
For decades we have had to put up with sub standard key defenders and wonder why we play opposition forwards back into form. What really hurt us in 1995 was Wigney going down. Until then he had been holding down CHB with Scotty Turner at Full Back and we finally had a competent defence.
Anyone who questions the value of a gun CHB should watch Paul Roos in his prime, and a tape of Harry Taylor in last year's Grand Final.
Tango said:
No-ones said any different. As leysy mentioned before Scarlett & in the second half of this year Taylor are crucial elements of that team.
However Ottens rarely plays, Mooney is OK & Hawkins has a long way to go.
Disco08 said:
Agree with that. When games were are as close as they were between those top 3 were it can come to a bit of old fashioned luck or more clinical finishing or even the bounce of a ball.
If Giansiracusa nails a shot in the dieing seconds from 30m he should have swallowed they would have been in the GF. Likewise the Saints could well have won if they took the plethora of chances that Milne, McQualter & Schneider burnt. Getting your team into those situations deep into the season certainly isnt luck though.
Big Cat Lover said:
Good work Big Cat.
They certainly are important. Agree on the importance of Scarlett as well. A true great.
Hawthorn were somewhat the opposite, having a an inform mid topped off by a couple of key forwards that contributed 188 goals. The key defence was then & still is a weaker part of there team.
West Coast had Glass & the smaller Hunter, but from that team only Judd & Cousins were gone two years later. The arse completely fell out of that team without those two. Other players just weren't able to step up into there shoes in the middle & it was bye bye.
Leysy believes of all the great teams through the past decade some had strong key backs, some were strong in the key forward dept. But all have had elite midfields containing a multitude of strong, skilled, ballwinning runners. Probably only Brisbane contained elite strength right the way through the spine to go with there undoubted strength & class in the middle.
i just want to chime in.
Yes i agree the backline is of most importance, but still leaves room for this circular argument of tall versus small. i for one do not think that height is an overall indicator of the worth of a defender. the mighty sides of recent years haven't had overly tall defenders. all around the 190cm mark.
I'm still confused why there is call for these 193+ defenders. Once the players start getting to these heights they're played more as roaming rucks or forwards. At that height they lose the agility necessary to be a top defender.
And just to throw in i think the height break downs written in other threads are aren't accurate, i would break them down as such
<179 Out and out small
180-183 average midfielder height or pocket player.
184-188 flankers and taller midfielders, also players that can play tall
189-192 tall running player, flanker and has enough height to play a key post.
193-195 Key position player, generally, without the stamina and running speed
196+ Big power forward or backman that switch to play ruck, or out and out ruck.
That is how i would break the heights down
Yes i agree the backline is of most importance, but still leaves room for this circular argument of tall versus small. i for one do not think that height is an overall indicator of the worth of a defender. the mighty sides of recent years haven't had overly tall defenders. all around the 190cm mark.
I'm still confused why there is call for these 193+ defenders. Once the players start getting to these heights they're played more as roaming rucks or forwards. At that height they lose the agility necessary to be a top defender.
And just to throw in i think the height break downs written in other threads are aren't accurate, i would break them down as such
<179 Out and out small
180-183 average midfielder height or pocket player.
184-188 flankers and taller midfielders, also players that can play tall
189-192 tall running player, flanker and has enough height to play a key post.
193-195 Key position player, generally, without the stamina and running speed
196+ Big power forward or backman that switch to play ruck, or out and out ruck.
That is how i would break the heights down
shamekha said:
Yeah, that’s right. The only influential Premiership Defender who was super-tall in the last decade or so is Dustin Fletcher, who measure in at around 198cm.
The great Brisbane team had Leppitsch and Michael, both of whom were closer to 190cm. The rest of their taller defensive roles were filled by players like the Scott brothers, Martin Pike and Daryl White, all of whom were closer to tall midfielders. If I remember correctly, White was the tallest and he was around 192.
Port Adelaide had a Wakelin (192cm) at full back and I seem to recall that in their Premiership year, Chad Cornes was the CHB. Bishop at around 196 cm or so was the third tall. The WC and Sydney premiership teams both had smaller key defenders such as Barry (184cm) Bolton (190), Glass (192) Hunter (190). Roberts-Thompson was the only uber-tall defender in those teams.
Now Geelong. Scarlett (192), Harley (191), Milburn (189), Mackie (192), Egan (196) and Taylor (193). The story is similar.
What we can say about these Premiership tall defenders is that that are likely to be around 189 cm to 193 cm but they are heavy and strong. Most of them would weigh somewhere around 90-95 kgs. They are all quick enough to keep up with all-comers on the lead and strong enough to hold their own in the body-on-body stuff. There is no evidence that teams need extra-tall defenders, but plenty to suggest that they need quick talls who are very strong. In fact, the only recent example of an excessively tall defender who has played in a Premiership team in the last 10 years or so is Fletcher. He is tall, wiry, agile, quick but not particularly strong. It does not follow that taller will mean stronger.
Even when you look at the current contenders for Geelong’s crown, the story is the same. They are more likely to be tall running players than out-and-out monsters.
St Kilda: Dawson, Fisher, Gilbert, Goddard, Blake.
Bulldogs: Lake, Morris, Hargrave, Williams when fit.
Collingwood: Presti, O’Brien, Maxwell, Goldsack
Adelaide: Rutten, Bock, Stevens, Otten
Our guys are too light and some of them are not as skilful as their counterparts at other teams. I doubt that replacing them with much taller players will achieve much, unless we can find a couple of Dustin Fletcher “Inspector Gadget” types.
Leysy Days said:
I am talking about the Hawks of the 80's - backlines containing Langford/Mew in the key posts and Ayres/Collins/Kennedy/Schwab/Greene/Morris in pockets and flanks.
IMO Gilham/Schoenmakers will form a pretty good pairing for a while to come - much better than anything we have to offer
It was funny watching Tom Murphy try to hold down a key post, at best he is a 3rd tall like McGuane/Moore
TOT70 said:
Exactly - our "tall" backs are not big enough and will never be big enough. McGuane/Moore/Thursfield may be bulking up but to what - 85kg. Getting them to 95kg would seriously impact upon other areas of their game. Upgrading should be a priority. At least Grimes/Post (it appears he may be played at CHB this year) Rance (extremely unlikley to makle a KPP IMO) will have the physical capability.
