Ruckmen - what we have learnt form the drafts

[Hurricane]

Its pretty clear that with what we have recruited we are going to attempt to be a lightening quick, skillfull side with pin point ball movement.

With Stanley I reckon we have an ideal ruckman to play in that side. Yes his disposal lacks but with the staff we now have in place we can use Stanley's good points (speed) and build his weaker points (body size, disposal, awareness) to be stronger we can have an ideal second ruck suited to our (possible) new structure.

I would much prefer to use Big Mac and Stanley and even Leaver plus pinch hitters than recruit a plodder or a kid that will take 5 years to develop

BANG BANG

[Gershwin]

I'm quite concerned over lack of ruckmen to be honest. Over the past few years we've dropped Gardiner, King, Pattison, McGrath and Gaertner and haven't recruited one ruckman to cover them.

We've got an up and coming a-grader in McEvoy, a couple of serviceable pinch-hitters in Kosi and Blake and an underperforming, injury-prone, timid athlete in Stanley. Surely it would have been worth taking a big-bodied backup ahead of one of the many speculative medium forwards. Realistically, one or maybe two (or zero) of our rookie picks will forge any worthwhile AFL career for themselves, but someone like McCauley could have given us vital insurance for a few years until we develop another couple of talls of our own. It almost seems arrogant on the recruiters behalf to spend every pick on an obscure medium forward/midfielder while ignoring a very simple, obvious, easily fixed deficiency in the list.

i agree with you - we lost 5 and recruited 1 (Lever)

We lost two that played and none that played this year and have recruited none that have played yet so we are two down from previous years and not 4 or we are none down from this year. Sandy are a couple down though. Sorry but i dont care about them.

Good point. Gardiner was not present this year. Thus same ruck division.


Rucks - McEvoy, Stanley, Koschitzke, Blake.

Wilkes to play forward.

Picking up some ruckman kid isnt going to make a difference in 2012... Nor is some hack like Patterson.

Correct weight.

It's funny, when he was drafted people were ropable, when he was delisted people said I told you so, now that he's been drafted to another club - all of a sudden we should've taken him/hung onto him?

If McEvoy and Kossie are injured and we have no big body to at least contest then we will get slaughtered.
Stanley and Blake - if I was an opposing ruckman I would be giggling.

Pattison is an undersized ruckman - Daniel Archer would be just as effective - so I can't see a major difference if that occurs.

Daniel Archer: 193 cm / 99 kg
Andrew Pattison: 198 cm / 97 kg

I can see a major difference.

But any way it is not necessarily Pattison that I wanted but some legitimate Ruck back-up - McCauley, Currie - it's all about risk management.
If McEvoy and Kossie can handle the Ruck - fabulous.
If they can't then I'll be on here letting everyone know.

[SainterK]

Rucks - McEvoy, Stanley, Koschitzke, Blake.

How many does one need?

[savatage]

I'm quite concerned over lack of ruckmen to be honest. Over the past few years we've dropped Gardiner, King, Pattison, McGrath and Gaertner and haven't recruited one ruckman to cover them.

We've got an up and coming a-grader in McEvoy, a couple of serviceable pinch-hitters in Kosi and Blake and an underperforming, injury-prone, timid athlete in Stanley. Surely it would have been worth taking a big-bodied backup ahead of one of the many speculative medium forwards. Realistically, one or maybe two (or zero) of our rookie picks will forge any worthwhile AFL career for themselves, but someone like McCauley could have given us vital insurance for a few years until we develop another couple of talls of our own. It almost seems arrogant on the recruiters behalf to spend every pick on an obscure medium forward/midfielder while ignoring a very simple, obvious, easily fixed deficiency in the list.

i agree with you - we lost 5 and recruited 1 (Lever)

We lost two that played and none that played this year and have recruited none that have played yet so we are two down from previous years and not 4 or we are none down from this year. Sandy are a couple down though. Sorry but i dont care about them.

Good point. Gardiner was not present this year. Thus same ruck division.


Rucks - McEvoy, Stanley, Koschitzke, Blake.

Wilkes to play forward.

Picking up some ruckman kid isnt going to make a difference in 2012... Nor is some hack like Patterson.

Correct weight.

It's funny, when he was drafted people were ropable, when he was delisted people said I told you so, now that he's been drafted to another club - all of a sudden we should've taken him/hung onto him?

If McEvoy and Kossie are injured and we have no big body to at least contest then we will get slaughtered.
Stanley and Blake - if I was an opposing ruckman I would be giggling.

Pattison is an undersized ruckman - Daniel Archer would be just as effective - so I can't see a major difference if that occurs.

Daniel Archer: 193 cm / 99 kg
Andrew Pattison: 198 cm / 97 kg

I can see a major difference.

But any way it is not necessarily Pattison that I wanted but some legitimate Ruck back-up - McCauley, Currie - it's all about risk management.
If McEvoy and Kossie can handle the Ruck - fabulous.
If they can't then I'll be on here letting everyone know.

If they can't - we'll have someone else to pinch hit in the meantime. Not like there were quality options for us to pick & that's the point. I'd rather a good small on the list that can play - rather than a tall for the sake of it.

[Dr Spaceman]

What he said

[Gershwin]

But you still need a plug for the sink rather than a vase for the flowers.
We need RUCKMEN !!

[plugger66]

But you still need a plug for the sink rather than a vase for the flowers.
We need RUCKMEN !!

Gt had one thing right. You need ruckmen but they must be able to play. No point in having a guy like Pattison on the list. It doesnt give us a ruckman, it gives us a tall and that is it. The club obviously didnt see any player they liked this season. We may get 2 next year if the club think they will be better than other types of players.

[Gershwin]

I understand that we are rolling the dice.
I hope we get through with McEvoy, Kossie etc.
But if we don't then we have only ourselves to blame. We could have taken a back-up (of dubious quality) but instead we took mid-fielders (of dubious quality).
Fingers crossed that McEvoy stays healthy. We are thinner for ruckman than any other club.

[Dr Spaceman]

I understand that we are rolling the dice.
I hope we get through with McEvoy, Kossie etc.
But if we don't then we have only ourselves to blame. We could have taken a back-up (of dubious quality) but instead we took mid-fielders (of dubious quality).
Fingers crossed that McEvoy stays healthy. We are thinner for ruckman than any other club.

It's pretty hard to get a good ruckman and keep him happy running around for the Zebs awaiting an injury to the main rucks.

And a skinny young kid is not going to be able to help out for years even if he does eventually make it.

So yes there is a bit of dice rolling going on however I don't think we could've picked up anyone in any draft this year who would have made a lot of difference. Our fortunes for the next couple of years are well and truly welded to the big men who were already at the club.

[HitTheBoundary]

We could have taken a back-up (of dubious quality) but instead we took mid-fielders (of dubious quality).

Which of the new mid-fielders (none of whom have played yet) do you believe are not up to it?

[stinger]

What he said

+1......maybe grant was spot on the money all along...just a couple of years before his time....

for my info.......did his kid get drafted.???...they thought he might...

[Old Mate]

One thing about McEvoy, he's one of our more durable players. Seems to play his best footy with more work load. And it looks as though Watters has big plans for Stanley.

Kosi and Blake offer a lot of flexibility.

On a side note: The recruiters have really targeted medium forwards, we have an abundance of them. Opposite to the way Lyon structured the team. Talls and smalls with minimal mediums up either end.

[Con Gorozidis]

What he said

+1......maybe grant was spot on the money all along...just a couple of years before his time....

for my info.......did his kid get drafted.???...they thought he might...

well i rate clarko slightly ahead of GT as a coach and he went for patto.

footy seasons are all about injurues injuries and injuries!

if we get none we are fine if we get a few we might be in strife.

[Dr Spaceman]

On a side note: The recruiters have really targeted medium forwards, we have an abundance of them. Opposite to the way Lyon structured the team. Talls and smalls with minimal mediums up either end.

History shows that recruiting is more miss than hit so by loading up on these quick forwards we've given ourselves a chance to snag one or two (and hopefully more) who just might make it.

[Quixote]

"Back here for the start of the 2nd quarter... rucks go up - Riewoldt with a beautiful tap down to Steven!"

[Old Mate]

On a side note: The recruiters have really targeted medium forwards, we have an abundance of them. Opposite to the way Lyon structured the team. Talls and smalls with minimal mediums up either end.

History shows that recruiting is more miss than hit so by loading up on these quick forwards we've given ourselves a chance to snag one or two (and hopefully more) who just might make it.

If I had to put money on it I'd say Markworth and Siposs. Markworth the talented athlete and Siposs the natural footballer. I predict we have a very good combination with those two for the next 10 or so years.

[BigMart]

Medium Fwds or medium players for that matter need to be exceptional IMO

They are like cricket all rounders...... they need. To be good enough in the air (play tall) or on the ground (play small) in isolation to hold there spots....and not reasonable at both....

'tweeners' can be a real advantage....Goddard/gwilt or a real flop ferguson/heyne....

[saintsRrising]

On a side note: The recruiters have really targeted medium forwards, we have an abundance of them. Opposite to the way Lyon structured the team. .

It also may depend on where they end up......

Sam Fisher, Blake and Gwilt were all not backman when recruited...but that is where they play their best football.

In the last several years we gained players like Sweeney, Cahill, Heyne, Lynch etc etc...so they churned through forwards too. Unfortunately our choices of who was poor.....though we were stiff with Allen having a freak injury..

I have to say that our recruiting of the last two draft periods looks to at last been on track.

Prior to that our trades were quite good on the whole....but our drafting was dismal in the main.

[Gershwin]

We could have taken a back-up (of dubious quality) but instead we took mid-fielders (of dubious quality).

Which of the new mid-fielders (none of whom have played yet) do you believe are not up to it?

I think you are missing the point.
All rookies are particularly speculative as they have been overlooked in the draft by all clubs.
I think we have recruited particularly well in terms of midlfielders in this years draft and last years. To keep topping up midfielders and ignore a glaring weakness doesn't seem to make sense.
Therefore I prefer a speculative ruckman to another speculative midfielder.
There is no particular rookie that I think "is not up to it" (your words).

[HitTheBoundary]

I think you are missing the point.

If you prefer ruckman, fair enough.

You said "we took mid-fielders (of dubious quality)". That is a direct quote.

I just asked you to back up what you said, and you waffled back at me about rookies being speculative - as are all draft picks. You went from claiming "dubious quality"(your words) to "I think we have recruited particularly well in terms of midlfielders".

[saintly]

What he said

+1......maybe grant was spot on the money all along...just a couple of years before his time....

for my info.......did his kid get drafted.???...they thought he might...

nah, he didn't

[gringo]

Could've/should've brought Pattison back - a ready-made ruckman ???

I'm not sure why we cut him? Cash maybe? He was one of those players that had a sliding doors moment where if his shots on goal had been accurate we would have still had him. Good luck to him.

[mad saint guy]

I just really hope we don't end up with injuries and have to go in to a finals series with Archer and Gwilt rucking. I suspect with the loss of Misson we might see a few more hammies and calf injuries this year; it seemed he was ultra conservative and didn't allow much in the way of strenuous skills training (contributing to our shocking ball use) but he is the absolute best in the business for injury prevention.

If McEvoy holds up and Kosi/Stanley shine as the backup; fantastic. If he breaks down due to the ridiculous workload then we're stuffed.

[mad saint guy]

I just really hope we don't end up with injuries and have to go in to a finals series with Archer and Gwilt rucking. I suspect with the loss of Misson we might see a few more hammies and calf injuries this year; it seemed he was ultra conservative and didn't allow much in the way of strenuous skills training (contributing to our shocking ball use) but he is the absolute best in the business for injury prevention.

If McEvoy holds up and Kosi/Stanley shine as the backup; fantastic. If he breaks down due to the ridiculous workload then we're stuffed.

[borderbarry]

Jay Lever (either 200cm or 198) must be groomed as a ruckman as well.