Longer

[kevinb]

This bloke will be a gun and number 1 ruck man sooner than you all may think. If you get the opportunity to watch the replay have a look at his 2nd and 3rd efforts around stoppages. Only played in the 2nd quarter. I think.Watching the game live you could see he wanted to throw his weight around at the stoppages and laid a couple of big tackles.

[WinnersOnly]

Yep reminded me of Jolly when he was in his prime!

[plugger66]

I still havent seen how Longer and Hickey play in the same side. can someone help me because i cant see it. Did like Longer's efforts in the second quarter but just like its to early to write anyone off I reckon less than a quarter of footy is to early to call anyone a gun. Lets hope he is though.

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Yep like him,like him a lot!

[FQF]

They don't HAVE to play in the same side. If it works, great. If not, then we have very adequate back up, the ability to rotate ruckmen so that we can manage them (as they are still young), and in the long term, I'm sure they will have trade value if there is no room on the list.

[White Winmar]

Longer will be a gun. Loved the way he leapt and contested. In dry conditions and given more game time, you'll see how well he can klunk them as well. His competitiveness and physical attack at the contest were better than anything I saw from McEvoy over the years. Still can't believe we got him for pick 25. Will turn out to be a steal!

[wally]

This time last year probably no one predicted that collingwood would have chosen that young
Brodie fella over Jolly.

[#gosaintas]

I don't think Longer, Hickey and Stanley can play in the same side. Two of them, yes, definately. So we have the enviable position of 3 players playing for 2 spots with the loser being the depth player. Sounds good to me.

[Munga]

It's a catch 22. With the lower bench rotations you'd want more runners in the side. But then, later in the game/quarters the tall guys don't get any shorter. We'll have to watch how the successful teams manage the tall numbers.

[HitTheBoundary]

The ruck combinations that work are the ones that can also play forward and make the opposition nervous - e.g. Cox and Natanui. No good having a ruckman there if they can't take a mark and are a liability pace wise (being continually run off).
If they're not a marking target then they have to play the Kosi role - split the packs and bring the ball to ground.

I think it's too early to know whether both players can be damaging up forward, but as we may not win that many games I am sure there will be some experiments, and we will see both in the same side at some stage.

[FQF]

Both Longer and Hickey are known to be agile. (Stanley as well.)

I see no reason to believe that two out of the three cannot develop a versatile partnership with the non-rucking member either playing as a floating backman or extra forward. This will depend on the player's strengths and the team's needs.

But to allow this to happen, especially given their young age, they need to be developed patiently. This will involve a games where they will play together, and some when they will play alone.

Above all, with young bodies, short turnovers and injuries, it is nothing but a good thing that we have a number of very competent young ruckmen on the list. But expecting immediate results and chemistry between them is simply unrealistic.

[BigMart]

Longer will be a good player IMO

[The Redeemer]

I still havent seen how Longer and Hickey play in the same side. can someone help me because i cant see it. Did like Longer's efforts in the second quarter but just like its to early to write anyone off I reckon less than a quarter of footy is to early to call anyone a gun. Lets hope he is though.

I agree.

Maybe we are developing both (essentially playing one at time due to being young/etc) and then will ship the poorer one off for a high draft pick?

It is a left-field and convoluted scheme however and prone to excessive risk.

[BigMart]

It's why the recruitment of Hickey (pick 12) was. Weird with McEvoy.... And now also using Pick 19 on a replacement Ruckman.

Using two big resources on a two #1 ruckmen is a strange philosophy IMO

Argued the point last year, felt Hickey was a waste of time....

BTW don't argue that any of the 5 could become effective fwds.... 3rd fwds at best and even then, only for periods

[St Ick]

Longer and Hickey are both young/raw. Both could be anything, and it's far too early to write one or both of them off. We rate Longer's ability to play up forward, as he did a lot in the juniors I hear, and Hickey did ok in the intraclub too. Facts are both are young, have played under 50 games between them, so I'm not sure what else we expect from them at this stage.

[The Redeemer]

It's why the recruitment of Hickey (pick 12) was. Weird with McEvoy.... And now also using Pick 19 on a replacement Ruckman.

Using two big resources on a two #1 ruckmen is a strange philosophy IMO

Argued the point last year, felt Hickey was a waste of time....

BTW don't argue that any of the 5 could become effective fwds.... 3rd fwds at best and even then, only for periods

I agree regarding the key forward argument. It is rubbish and bugger all rucks become decent forwards. Ever.

[BigMart]

The argument is not whether either can play... It's why are two required?

It's like having Lloyd and Fevola on one list.... You'd trade one for an equivalent player in another area of the ground?!

Having said that though, not a huge fan of Hickey... Lacks presence around the ground and strength in the contest... He's like a baby giraffe ... Basketball taps to 50/50 contests aren't statistically relevant as one would think

[saintspremiers]

The argument is not whether either can play... It's why are two required?

It's like having Lloyd and Fevola on one list.... You'd trade one for an equivalent player in another area of the ground?!

Having said that though, not a huge fan of Hickey... Lacks presence around the ground and strength in the contest... He's like a baby giraffe ... Basketball taps to 50/50 contests aren't statistically relevant as one would think

You have two in case one doesn't make it and also add injury backup.

That's two good reasons

[dragit]

The argument is not whether either can play... It's why are two required?

It's like having Lloyd and Fevola on one list.... You'd trade one for an equivalent player in another area of the ground?!

Having said that though, not a huge fan of Hickey... Lacks presence around the ground and strength in the contest... He's like a baby giraffe ... Basketball taps to 50/50 contests aren't statistically relevant as one would think

You have two in case one doesn't make it and also add injury backup.

That's two good reasons

Yes, people seem to quickly forget 2012 which isn't that long ago.

McEvoy, Stanley & Blake injured for half of the season, Gilbert was taking tap outs and everyone was screaming for more ruck back-up.

Look at Vardy going down this week McIntosh, Simpson injured last year… imagine if they had thought one ruckmen is enough.

Obviously they will need to become competent forwards if we plan on playing both together, plenty of time yet… both are about 5 years from their peak.

[St Ick]

I wouldn't have complained had Lloyd and Fev been in the same forwardline. As Dragit said, we needed some backup for the ruck stocks, I don't think we were actually going for Longer but he was too good to be true at pick 25!

We can argue til we are blue in the face as to why we gave up so much for Hickey, but fact is that rucks are expensive and we obviously see our future in Hickey (and Longer). Reports stated that Savage was going to be traded for that Vince pick, or at least one around that mark, so really, we got two near enough to end of first rounders and a pick upgrade to a first rounder for Mac, just shows what you need to give up for a ruckman.

Cox/ Niknat, Bellchambers/Ryder, etc, both examples of rucks working as a team. I think the secret is to play fwd, and I think we believe they both can.

As for the baby giraffe comment, not sure many big men don't look that little bit unco when they filling out.

[wally]

I think that sometimes the effectiveness of the 3rd tall up forward is dependant on quality & quantity of the ball coming in,
if the defence is under pressure cant double team & zone off etc then an extra marking target works well.

[dragit]

It's why the recruitment of Hickey (pick 12) was. Weird

The other point worth mentioning is that this premise is just wrong.

We essentially got White & Hickey for pick 13… Lee & Wright for 12…

Similarly, we basically received Dunstan & Savage for McEvoy. (plus a 5 pick upgrade 24 into 19)

Only simpletons & perpetually negative people continue the Hickey for pick 12 myth.

[St Ick]

It's why the recruitment of Hickey (pick 12) was. Weird

The other point worth mentioning is that this premise is just wrong.

We essentially got White & Hickey for pick 13… Lee & Wright for 12…

Similarly, we basically received Dunstan & Savage for McEvoy. (plus a 5 pick upgrade 24 into 19)

Only simpletons & perpetually negative people continue the Hickey for pick 12 myth.

Hickey was pick 13 and two pick upgrades. Lee was 12 and two extra picks. McEvoy was pick 18, Savage and a pick upgrade.

The Hickey and Lee deals differ by the fact that (besides the players involved) pick 13 got us upgrades, whereas Pick 12 netted us two additional picks.

Considering the state of our lists, each of the trades and picks were worthy, with the exception of TDL which was a strange choice at the time and still is on the eve of his second year on the list

[BigMart]

So we gave up a first round draft pick for a back up Ruckman? In case we copped an injury

First rule of trading.... Never trade a FRDP unless its for a gun under 23

Second rule.... Only give up any live DP for a required player( hole in the list) we could have picked up a back up Ruckman with pick whatever? Or Rookie?

[St Ick]

So we gave up a first round draft pick for a back up Ruckman? In case we copped an injury

First rule of trading.... Never trade a FRDP unless its for a gun under 23

Second rule.... Only give up any live DP for a required player( hole in the list) we could have picked up a back up Ruckman with pick whatever? Or Rookie?

Back up ruckman? A team can't have two rucks? I can't believe West Coast used their number 2 pick on Niknat, he has been back up ruckman to Cox since drafted... What a joke of a team.

Have you been in a bubble champ? Our situation with 4/5 years worth of draftees basically not at the club meant we needed to get creative, what we've achieved with our situation was remarkable - I wish you would stop being such a Harry hindsight and start being a little realistic with regard to the dire position that our list was in.