Match Committee - Round 14 vs Port Adelaide

[Eastdog]

If you were on the Bulldogs match committee what changes would you make for our round 14 game against Port Adelaide at Adelaide Oval?

As always a brief explanation for your changes would add a lot of value to the discussion.

[bulldogtragic]

In and outs, Cooney looks like a few weeks spell.

[bornadog]

In Boyd

Out Cooney

[azabob]

Gee tough for Honeychurch to get in.

[bulldogtragic]

Gee tough for Honeychurch to get in.

He deserves a spot, even if Gia goes down to mentor Hunter and Stringer for a week. My only concern is that we are very small, but there is so much talent it hopefully won't matter...

In: Honeychurch
Out: Cooney

[boydogs]

Who would have thought last week we would be struggling to find a spot for someone that kicked 5 and had 25 touches in the VFL

Out: Cooney, Wallis
In: Honeychurch, Boyd

[craigsahibee]

Gia might be cooked after playing 3/4 of a game. Port have speed to burn so his effectiveness as a sub may be limited.

I would bring in Mitch for Cooney and Boyd for Gia. Would love to fit Stringer in also but not sure for who.

[G-Mo77]

There are some tough calls but we can't just sit on our hands.

Cooney will miss, I have no doubt.

Does Austin have a matchup? Not sure on Port's structure.

Griff looks pretty banged up.

Boyd and Honeychurch are certainties IMO. There will be 2 spots there for them.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I think there will be a few sore bodies after that, so I can a few spots opening up.

[always right]

Be an interesting team selection meeting this week. Cooney a definite out and Griffen doubtful. On the plus side, Boyd likely to be ready whilst Stringer and Sweet Jesus are candidates for inclusion after great performances with Footscray.

We are going to need a strong running team against Port. What changes do you make, particularly if Griff is available?

[LostDoggy]

6 day Break will be a tough ask against the fittest side in the comp.

Ins - Honeychurch, Hunter, Boyd
Outs - Cooney, Austin, Hrovat


Honeychurch has smashed the door to pieces. Must be rewarded. Boyd an automatic in if fit.

Included Hunter for Hrovat, not form related, he got fairly tired late against the Pies. 6 day break and Port a powerful running side, I think Hunter comes in to show us his worth after a couple of really good VFL matches.

Not entirely sure about this one but Austin has made way for more midfield run. Port have a 2 prong attack with Westhoff and Shultz. Plus they have been going in with the 1 ruckmen in Lobbe. I guess the issue is whether we want Morris on a Wingard or Monfries type. I think we need the extra midfielder so Morris takes Shultz and Rough takes the Hoff. Wood and Murf to do the job on the dangerous smalls.

[azabob]

Appears Honeychurch has been offered a one match ban for rough play.

[bornadog]

There are some tough calls but we can't just sit on our hands.

Cooney will miss, I have no doubt.

Does Austin have a matchup? Not sure on Port's structure.

Griff looks pretty banged up.

Boyd and Honeychurch are certainties IMO. There will be 2 spots there for them.

According to Macca this morning, Griff will be right to go

[Go_Dogs]

Appears Honeychurch has been offered a one match ban for rough play.

Terrible timing.

Out: Cooney

In: Boyd/Stringer depending on Boyds fitness.

I'm also wondering if we might look to give Stringer a few more weeks in the middle at VFL level - if so perhaps Hunter or JJ may come in if Boyd isn't quite ready.

[Webby]

I'm also wondering if we might look to give Stringer a few more weeks in the middle at VFL level

I think this would be wise. It's the wonderful thing about having our own reserves side. It's interesting to note that James Aish (someone a few scribes were saying we should've drafted ahead of Bonty) is beginning to regress a bit in recent weeks, and word is he'd benefit from some time in the twos.

A blend of role play in the seniors combined with going back to the twos with license to dominate is the way to go. The two roles compliment each other beautifully. At this exact point in time, Bontempelli is flying higher than Aish. He's had a good development programme.

I absolutely LOVE us having our own reserves!

[Dry Rot]

I can report that WOOF had a spy at the SCG on Saturday. Feel free to ask any questions about Port.

Didn't have the best seat being behind the goals at the Paddington end. Forget about who was on Franklin, I wasn't impressed with the rest of their defence on a few levels.

[Dry Rot]

Does Austin have a matchup? Not sure on Port's structure.



Schulz seems to be the main tall, with Westhoff floating forward and back.

Roughead can deal with Schultz, but a match up for Westhoff may be more tricky.

[G-Mo77]

Schulz seems to be the main tall, with Westhoff floating forward and back.

Roughead can deal with Schultz, but a match up for Westhoff may be more tricky.

Morris maybe? What about someone like Wood? Do their rucks rest forward?

I'm really showing how much of opposition teams I watch here. All I've seen of Port is bits and pieces here and there. I have not sat down and watched them yet.

[azabob]

Morris maybe? What about someone like Wood? Do their rucks rest forward?

I'm really showing how much of opposition teams I watch here. All I've seen of Port is bits and pieces here and there. I have not sat down and watched them yet.

For mine Austin has to stay.

Morris / Picken/ Wood / Murphy need to play on Wingard, Monfries, Gray etc.

[lemmon]

Out- Cooney
In- Boyd

Would love to squeeze Honeychurch in and considered Hrovat going out but having missed so much footy I think Nathan needs an extended run in the ones for his confidence and development (felt he was good on the weekend anyway).

[Dry Rot]

Morris maybe? What about someone like Wood? Do their rucks rest forward?

I'm really showing how much of opposition teams I watch here. All I've seen of Port is bits and pieces here and there. I have not sat down and watched them yet.

IIRC they only played one ruck.

Wood on Westhoff is interesting, but Wood would be giving away a lot of height.

If we could afford to, Morris on Monfries (good in the air) and Picken to make Wingard's life misery.

Still need to cover dangerous small to medium guys like Grey, Boak and Ebert.

[Rocco Jones]

Would definitely keep Austin in. He isn't great but really highlights how ordinary some of the KP backs we have tried this year have been.

Definitely Boyd for Cooney. Hrovat/Honeychurch is a toss up.

[LostDoggy]

Having watched the game again today I would drop Wallis. He tries so hard but just poor decision making and gives away to many frees. Feel sorry for player and coaches - don't know how we help him take the next step.

Out: Wallis, Cooney
In: Boyd, Honeychurch (or Hunter)

[Remi Moses]

Disagree. He played on Pendlebury and had as much of the ball .
In Boyd ( like to see The church of Honey in though)
Out Cooney

[LostDoggy]

It's not how much he got its what he does with it. His actions created 3 opposition goals that I counted. 3. Including one ridicuolus OOB kick under no pressure - just poorly weighted. Puts his teammates under pressure much more regularly than the other midfielders for mine. I'm not anti the kid. He's desperately trying and he's clearly a bulldog at heart. He just needsore work or, if I got to vote with the coach, a different role. Run with isn't working.

[bornadog]

It's not how much he got its what he does with it. His actions created 3 opposition goals that I counted. 3. Including one ridicuolus OOB kick under no pressure - just poorly weighted. Puts his teammates under pressure much more regularly than the other midfielders for mine. I'm not anti the kid. He's desperately trying and he's clearly a bulldog at heart. He just needsore work or, if I got to vote with the coach, a different role. Run with isn't working.

Where would you play him?

[Axe Man]

From the Herald-Sun:


Mitch Honeychurch will challenge a one-match suspension at the VFL tribunal on Tuesday night, with the small forward a hot chance to make his AFL debut after starring with five goals and 25 disposals against Port Melbourne.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

I think this would be wise. It's the wonderful thing about having our own reserves side. It's interesting to note that James Aish (someone a few scribes were saying we should've drafted ahead of Bonty) is beginning to regress a bit in recent weeks, and word is he'd benefit from some time in the twos.

A blend of role play in the seniors combined with going back to the twos with license to dominate is the way to go. The two roles compliment each other beautifully. At this exact point in time, Bontempelli is flying higher than Aish. He's had a good development programme.

I absolutely LOVE us having our own reserves!

From my perspective as a not so strongly opinionated supporter,it almost doesn't matter that Cooney or any established player goes out of the team because it provides opportunity for game time for Footscray players. All of them would benefit from a few games in the ones. Greenwood is not eligible but saw him do something for the first time on Saturday, a kick, but it was enough to sense his composure,skill and style. It shows that we have plenty of development possible. That victory over Port was awesome and left no doubt of the fantastic asset that the VFL side is to the AFL side. They have the luxury of not having the only goal as winning, in fact it's secondary to implementing the team and individual programmes. The winning can take care of itself, especially when you're winning:)
Out Cooney, Austin
IN Boyd, Jong

[always right]

Having watched the game again today I would drop Wallis. He tries so hard but just poor decision making and gives away to many frees. Feel sorry for player and coaches - don't know how we help him take the next step.

Out: Wallis, Cooney
In: Boyd, Honeychurch (or Hunter)

He has shortcomings but I disagree with your summation. Pendlebury was good but I thought Wallis limited his influence somewhat. As for the free kicks, at least one of those was outrageous and he can count himself unlucky. His kick OOB was poor but was always a low percentage option. By memory there were two other bulldogs players that made the same error.

[jeemak]

In - Boyd, Honeychurch
Out - Cooney, Hrovat

I feel a bit for Hrovat as he didn't actually do a lot wrong, though if I was to think of the player within our midfield that had the least impact then it was him. Honeychurch has smashed the door down and needs a chance.

Wallis will benefit from going head to head with one of Port's accumulators this week in a defensively minded, but not pure shut down role. He almost filled the second omission instead of Hrovat.

[Happy Days]

In - Boyd, Honeychurch
Out - Cooney, Hrovat

I feel a bit for Hrovat as he didn't actually do a lot wrong, though if I was to think of the player within our midfield that had the least impact then it was him. Honeychurch has smashed the door down and needs a chance.

Wallis will benefit from going head to head with one of Port's accumulators this week in a defensively minded, but not pure shut down role. He almost filled the second omission instead of Hrovat.

Yep +1.

Wallis wasn't good on Pendlebury but he can beat a guy like Boak, who I don't think has lost a clearance that he has attended this year. Stopping him will go a long long way to helping us win (?) this game.

Honeychurch has to play if he gets off.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Would definitely keep Austin in. He isn't great but really highlights how ordinary some of the KP backs we have tried this year have been.

Definitely Boyd for Cooney. Hrovat/Honeychurch is a toss up.

Agree with the need to retain Austin to take one of Port's talls. This would free up Morris to take Wingard. I would retain Hrovat with Honeychurch to get his chance in the coming weeks. Boyd is the obvious replacement for Cooney.

[bornadog]

Agree with the need to retain Austin to take one of Port's talls. This would free up Morris to take Wingard. I would retain Hrovat with Honeychurch to get his chance in the coming weeks. Boyd is the obvious replacement for Cooney.

This ^^^^

Only one change this week.

[Scorlibo]

How about Boyd to come on as the sub?

[JohnGentStand]

I still think Stringer & Hunter are ahead of Honeychurch.
So good that they are all playing so well.
in Boyd
out Cooney

[Ozza]

B: Wood; Roughead; Picken
HB: Murphy; Morris; Higgins
C: Griffen*; Wallis; Macrae
HF: Bontempelli; Grant; Dahlhaus
F: Crameri; Jones; Stevens
R: Minson; Boyd; Liberatore
Int: Honeychurch; Gia (sub); Tutt; Hrovat

In: Boyd; Honeychurch
Out: Cooney; Austin

-Was a fan of Austin's game, but Port only play Schultz as a tall forward, and Westhoff as swingman/most forward.
* If Griffen doesn't come up - suggest Hunter comes in, and Stevens/Hrovat/Hunter all work through the midfield at times.

[LostDoggy]

B: Wood; Roughead; Picken
HB: Murphy; Morris; Higgins
C: Griffen*; Wallis; Macrae
HF: Bontempelli; Grant; Dahlhaus
F: Crameri; Jones; Stevens
R: Minson; Boyd; Liberatore
Int: Honeychurch; Gia (sub); Tutt; Hrovat

In: Boyd; Honeychurch
Out: Cooney; Austin

-Was a fan of Austin's game, but Port only play Schultz as a tall forward, and Westhoff as swingman/most forward.
* If Griffen doesn't come up - suggest Hunter comes in, and Stevens/Hrovat/Hunter all work through the midfield at times.

Agree with this.

I think we need the extra midfield run this week. 6 day break playing against a very fit and powerful running Port Adelaide outfit.

[azabob]

B: Wood; Roughead; Picken
HB: Murphy; Morris; Higgins

-Was a fan of Austin's game, but Port only play Schultz as a tall forward, and Westhoff as swingman/most forward.
* If Griffen doesn't come up - suggest Hunter comes in, and Stevens/Hrovat/Hunter all work through the midfield at times.

I think we may need Austin to stay in.

Who picks up Schultz, Westhoff, Gray, Wingard, Monfries - all of those guys are very good run, lead & mark players.

They play tall, without being tall.

[Ozza]

I think we may need Austin to stay in.

Who picks up Schultz, Westhoff, Gray, Wingard, Monfries - all of those guys are very good run, lead & mark players.

They play tall, without being tall.

Its a good point. We may well need Morris to play on Monfries.

My original approach would be;

Schulz/Westhoff - Morris/Roughy depending on whether Westhoff plays deep (Roughy) or further up the ground (Morris).
Wingard - Picken
Gray - Murphy
Monfries - Wood

But a scenario where Austin goes to Westhoff, Rough to Schulz, Morris to Monfries - certainly has merit.

Just need to find the balance of enough run in our side...but still good defensive coverage.

[azabob]

Its a good point. We may well need Morris to play on Monfries.

My original approach would be;

Schulz/Westhoff - Morris/Roughy depending on whether Westhoff plays deep (Roughy) or further up the ground (Morris).
Wingard - Picken
Gray - Murphy
Monfries - Wood

But a scenario where Austin goes to Westhoff, Rough to Schulz, Morris to Monfries - certainly has merit.

Just need to find the balance of enough run in our side...but still good defensive coverage.

It certainly is a tough one.

I don't think Wood is at a stage yet were he can nulify a player like Monfries and provide run, unlike Murphy who could do that role on Gray.

I think Morris will have to play on Monfries, Picken on Wingard and Austin / Roughead on the two talls.

But as you have pointed out, Ports biggest strength is their run - so we may be forced to replace Austin with a runner such as Honeychurch.

[LostDoggy]

Gray will spend a very little amount of time forward. He will be in the midfield as he has been majority of the year. Especially with Hartlett looking unlikely with an ankle injury.

Picken goes to Gray. Gray has been Port's best player this year.

[Happy Days]

Picken goes to Gray. Gray has been Port's best player this year.

Lolnope.

Picken goes to Wingard because c'mon man.

Wood can take Gray. Wood has been super this year and if we're being real his run is not as evident as we all want to think it is.

[LostDoggy]

Lolnope.

Picken goes to Wingard because c'mon man.

Wood can take Gray. Wood has been super this year and if we're being real his run is not as evident as we all want to think it is.

Wingard is like Rioli. Floats in and out of games and has had a couple of shockers. Gray has been suberb all year.

You want Wood on Gray? If you have watched Port much this year you will realise Gray is playing midfield. Unless you want Wood in the guts?

[Happy Days]

Wingard is like Rioli. Floats in and out of games and has had a couple of shockers. Gray has been suberb all year.

You want Wood on Gray? If you have watched Port much this year you will realise Gray is playing midfield. Unless you want Wood in the guts?

I've had him pegged as more floating through; did spend a lot of time in there last week but it's more a Dahlhaus type deal.

If Picken doesn't got to Wingard then who does? I wouldn't feel comfortable with anyone else on him.

[LostDoggy]

I've had him pegged as more floating through; did spend a lot of time in there last week but it's more a Dahlhaus type deal.

If Picken doesn't got to Wingard then who does? I wouldn't feel comfortable with anyone else on him.

With Hartlett and Polec both questionable for this week, I think Gray will spend alot of time in the midfield.

Its a good question re the Wingard matchup.. He's really good overhead but also lethal at ground level. If picken does go to him expect him to play very deep. Which i would be nervous considering his overhead marking ability.

I would personally give Wood the match up and allow Picken to take Gray everywhere he goes.

[Bulldog Joe]

I would be inclined to use Morris on Wingard.

Austin to go to Schulz and Roughy to go with Westhoff.

Happy to have Picken tag Gray as he can take him wherever he plays.

[Remi Moses]

With Hartlett and Polec both questionable for this week, I think Gray will spend alot of time in the midfield.

Its a good question re the Wingard matchup.. He's really good overhead but also lethal at ground level. If picken does go to him expect him to play very deep. Which i would be nervous considering his overhead marking ability.

I would personally give Wood the match up and allow Picken to take Gray everywhere he goes.

Add me to that list. Just reckon Dale's not quite athletically up with Wingard .

[whythelongface]

Roughead to Schulz
Picken to Wingard
Austin to Westhoff
Morris to Monfries
Wood to Gray

[LostDoggy]

Williams in Austin out
Honey in Cooney Out

Roughead to Schulz
Picken to Gray
Morris on Monfries
Wood on Wingard
Williams on Westhoff

Think Williams better size and athleticism is a better match for the Hoff.
Wood overhead better able to cover Wingard (reckon he'd chop Picken up overhead)

Boyd to have a week in twos to get match fit.

[always right]

I'll be disappopinted if Williams comes in for Austin after last week. Westhoff is not a physical player and I don't think Austin loses anything athletically in comparison to Tom.

Agree with Morris on Monfries. Tos sof the coin between Picken and Wood for Wingard......I reckon Picken could get right under his skin so I'd start with that as a match-up.

[bornadog]

Official

One Change Boyd in for Cooney



Emergencies
J Stringer
M Honeychurch
S Darley

[chef]

Fair enough.

[Greystache]

Honeychurch seriously stiff.

[LostDoggy]

Tough to drop someone from that 4 quarter win though.

[ratsmac]

Boyd in for Cooney, obvious choice.
Ports pace will be a concern.
Had we lost last week Honeychurch would of been a certainty, but if it aint broke, don't fix it I suppose.

[chef]

Honeychurch seriously stiff.

He is, but so would be anyone coming out to fit him in.

[Remi Moses]

The church of honey very stiff.
He'll play against the Dees you'd think, but winning has kept him out.
Obvious change

[Webby]

This might sound a little disrespectful and ungrateful, but I'd like to poise the awkward/uncomfortable question "are we a better side without Boyd?"

Seriously, we seem to move the ball faster, more efficiently and effectively when Boyd isn't in the side... When I saw that he was the in rather than Honeychurch, I felt a bit flat. Is it just me?

[Rocco Jones]

This might sound a little disrespectful and ungrateful, but I'd like to poise the awkward/uncomfortable question "are we a better side without Boyd?"

Seriously, we seem to move the ball faster, more efficiently and effectively when Boyd isn't in the side... When I saw that he was the in rather than Honeychurch, I felt a bit flat. Is it just me?

Maybe it's just that the kids have stepped up.

With Boyd out last week, Cooney injured early, we then had Griffen clearly hampered in the 3rd quarter.

Dahl, Macrae, Libba and Bonts combined for 42 disposals in that 3rd term.

[Scorlibo]

This might sound a little disrespectful and ungrateful, but I'd like to poise the awkward/uncomfortable question "are we a better side without Boyd?"

Seriously, we seem to move the ball faster, more efficiently and effectively when Boyd isn't in the side... When I saw that he was the in rather than Honeychurch, I felt a bit flat. Is it just me?

Don't forget that Boyd also wasn't in the side for the Brisbane encounter. I'll admit that our midfield did look great against Collingwood, but Boydy is a heavy lifter. When Griff or Libba are down, he can step in and make the impact that guys like Macrae and Bontempelli can't yet. Still in our best midfield for mine.

[Webby]

Maybe it's just that the kids have stepped up.

With Boyd out last week, Cooney injured early, we then had Griffen clearly hampered in the 3rd quarter.

Dahl, Macrae, Libba and Bonts combined for 42 disposals in that 3rd term.

I think that's true. However I'd pose the question that Boyd's 30 possessions seem to fall into the hands of the players you mention when he's not around... And do they seem to all use it better than him?

Boyd was great when those young guys were starting out, but now I really think he's Bottlenecking things. As Cooney is an in/out runner/user if the footy, I thought Honeychurch would be a custom fit.. And what better time to debut than when you're jumping out of your skin?... As the kid clearly was against Port last week.

[Maddog37]

Boyd dragged us across the line in a couple of early games this year didn't he?

[Webby]

Don't forget that Boyd also wasn't in the side for the Brisbane encounter. I'll admit that our midfield did look great against Collingwood, but Boydy is a heavy lifter. When Griff or Libba are down, he can step in and make the impact that guys like Macrae and Bontempelli can't yet. Still in our best midfield for mine.

Yeah, I'll grant that he's a heavy lifting grunt player and could be handy for that aspect on Saturday. But geez I cringe when I see him trying to hit up a target upfield! Teams open us up on the rebound.

[G-Mo77]

This might sound a little disrespectful and ungrateful, but I'd like to poise the awkward/uncomfortable question "are we a better side without Boyd?"

Seriously, we seem to move the ball faster, more efficiently and effectively when Boyd isn't in the side... When I saw that he was the in rather than Honeychurch, I felt a bit flat. Is it just me?

No, not just you. I think there is a fair argument for choosing Honeychurch over Boyd.

[LostDoggy]

No, not just you. I think there is a fair argument for choosing Honeychurch over Boyd.

Not if you want to win . Boyd has been great this year and has terrific when we needed a senior player to stand up when needed.
Beez knees will get his chance

[LostDoggy]

For 13-14

Team with Boyd: Won 7 from 22
Without Boyd: Won 5 from 13

Stats on Boyd and Wallis when playing together or not for 13 & 14

2013
Boyd & Wallis Won 1, Played 4
Just Wallis Won 4 Played 9
Just Boyd Won 3 Played 9
Neither Won 0 Played 1

2014
Boyd & Wallis Won 2 , Played 5
Just Wallis Won 1, Played 3
Just Boyd Won 1, Played 4

Totals
Boyd and Wallis Won 3, Played 9 - 33%
Just Wallis Won 5, Played 12 - 41%
Just Boyd Won 4 Played 13 - 30%

[Twodogs]

Maybe they thought two ports in a row was a bit over his limit!? Hohoho.

[Twodogs]

Not if you want to win . Boyd has been great this year and has terrific when we needed a senior player to stand up when needed.
Beez knees will get his chance

Agree about Boyd. I've been his big critic of his practice of bombing the ball to opposition players up until last year. But this year I've seen him drop his eyes and hit a target 20-25 metres away.

I think Honey church will come in.

[LostDoggy]

Agree about Boyd. I've been his big critic of his practice of bombing the ball to opposition players up until last year. But this year I've seen him drop his eyes and hit a target 20-25 metres away.

I think Honey church will come in.

Agree that Boyd has improved this year and is lowering eyes more. He ranked something like 200 and something in clangers per game this year. Previous 4 years he was ranked in Top 20 for clangers per game (two in top 5, one in top 10).

Still think there is reason to suggest that team functions better without him and numbers tend to back it up.

[bornadog]

Will Boyd start as sub?

[LostDoggy]

Agree that Boyd has improved this year and is lowering eyes more. He ranked something like 200 and something in clangers per game this year. Previous 4 years he was ranked in Top 20 for clangers per game (two in top 5, one in top 10).

Still think there is reason to suggest that team functions better without him and numbers tend to back it up.

So you would prefer to have Honey instead of Boyd? the 3 time B&F now theres a stat

[LostDoggy]

So you would prefer to have Honey instead of Boyd? the 3 time B&F now theres a stat

Yep and you forgot Boyd is an AA too.

On your logic no B & F player gets dropped for a new players debut? So at what point would you have cut ties with Scott West? Would you have traded Lake and retired Cross all B & F winners too? Get the feeling our list would be pretty static if you were in charge.


Don't get me wrong respect Boyd's service to the club, but it is getting close to time that he is no longer an automatic inclusion, especially if Wallis is playing okay as they play very similar roles

[Happy Days]

I think we're all forgetting how good Boyd has been in the games he's played this year. His lack of win shares or whatever can probably be explained by the rest of the team sucking.

[1eyedog]

Up to last week Boyd has been playing better than both Cooney and Griffen. He was the form mid when the shit hit fan between the Richmond and Brisbane game. I'm all up for playing Honeychurch who has earnt a crack but if we think he is actually going to outperform Boyd on the big stage well we have another thing coming. We're playing a heap of kids as it is we need to strike a balance out there and Boyd provides solid leadership and good form so why would you drop him? Silly. Rotate Honeychurch with Hrovat / Bonts so we get some games into them but don't wear them out.

[Scorlibo]

Not if you want to win . Boyd has been great this year and has terrific when we needed a senior player to stand up when needed.
Beez knees will get his chance

Yep. Anyone who thinks Macrae, Bontempelli or Wallis have gone past Boyd is kidding themselves. By all means, make a case for the development/cohesion of our future midfield (and on that basis exclude Boyd from the side), but on the ability to help us win games - Boydy makes the cut for every side in the AFL.


For 13-14

Team with Boyd: Won 7 from 22
Without Boyd: Won 5 from 13

Stats on Boyd and Wallis when playing together or not for 13 & 14

2013
Boyd & Wallis Won 1, Played 4
Just Wallis Won 4 Played 9
Just Boyd Won 3 Played 9
Neither Won 0 Played 1

2014
Boyd & Wallis Won 2 , Played 5
Just Wallis Won 1, Played 3
Just Boyd Won 1, Played 4

Totals
Boyd and Wallis Won 3, Played 9 - 33%
Just Wallis Won 5, Played 12 - 41%
Just Boyd Won 4 Played 13 - 30%

Meaningless stat.

"Consider the following for a reason why: By this measure Gary Ablett was the worst midfielder in the competition last year. Gold Coast's points per 100 minutes with Ablett on the field was 71.3 for, 79.7 against for a margin of -8.3 points. With him on the bench, it was 97.0 for, 57.4 against for a margin of +39.6 points. His +/- differential of -48.0 points per 100 minutes was the worst of the 150 midfielders who played 10 or more games last season an over 20% worse than any other player (next worst was -39.2 points/100 minutes). This year after six games he is coincidentally running at exactly the same differential as last season (On: 67.9 v 75.3. Off: 94.0 v 53.5 for -48.0) - the eighth-worst of the 123 midfielders with four or more games.

Others in the bottom-20 (all players, not just mids) this year who you may be surprised to see there: Scott Selwood, Michael Johnson, Jared Polec, Sam Mayes, Jordan Lewis, Mathew Stokes, Cale Hooker, Brent Macaffer." - Champion Data, http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/statistical-analysis-of-patrick-dangerfield.1061404/page-3#post-32849968.


Agree that Boyd has improved this year and is lowering eyes more. He ranked something like 200 and something in clangers per game this year. Previous 4 years he was ranked in Top 20 for clangers per game (two in top 5, one in top 10).

Still think there is reason to suggest that team functions better without him and numbers tend to back it up.

Again, meaningless. The guy has been one of the best accumulators in the AFL in the same period - it only makes sense for him to register more clangers. Jeremy Cameron could have twice the likelihood of kicking a clanger and he'd only register two thirds the total number of clangers as Boyd.

[1eyedog]

Yep and you forgot Boyd is an AA too.

On your logic no B & F player gets dropped for a new players debut? So at what point would you have cut ties with Scott West? Would you have traded Lake and retired Cross all B & F winners too? Get the feeling our list would be pretty static if you were in charge.


Don't get me wrong respect Boyd's service to the club, but it is getting close to time that he is no longer an automatic inclusion, especially if Wallis is playing okay as they play very similar roles

Huh? He's simply saying that Boyd is a great player and it seems some here are jaded by Honeychurch's game last week and are gung-ho about playing a team of kids. Quite simply Boyd is a far better player than Honeychurch at AFL level and has more to offer us - at least for this year. For the record Scott West had a bung knee and his output in his last season was barely satisfactory when he could get on the park and Brian Lake wanted out for whatever reason(s).

[Remi Moses]

The issue is moving forward who is the better option ?
Honeychurch will get his chance, and at years end the club will have the same decision it had with Cross.
The club can't carry to many 30 plus players , and not allowing the likes of Honeychurch, Hunter and the like, not getting a game.

[Remi Moses]

Huh? He's simply saying that Boyd is a great player and it seems some here are jaded by Honeychurch's game last week and are gung-ho about playing a team of kids. Quite simply Boyd is a far better player than Honeychurch at AFL level and has more to offer us - at least for this year. For the record Scott West had a bung knee and his output in his last season was barely satisfactory when he could get on the park and Brian Lake wanted out for whatever reason(s).

Scott West was dirty on being forced to retire, and he later admitted he was cooked .
The question is for the future, and the club is on record as playing the long game.

[LostDoggy]

I think we're all forgetting how good Boyd has been in the games he's played this year. His lack of win shares or whatever can probably be explained by the rest of the team sucking.

Bingo...

Cannot believe people are questioning his place in the side this week... Short memories.

[whythelongface]

Bingo...

Cannot believe people are questioning his place in the side this week... Short memories.

Agree also. Looking at our midfield it is important to have the experience of a Boyd in there with our young brigade, particularly after one of our experienced players, in Cooney, is injured.

Honeychurch is only 18/19 and will get plenty of chances in the short to medium term - I just think that Boyd's experience against Port Adelaide will be critical for the team.

[LostDoggy]

Huh? He's simply saying that Boyd is a great player and it seems some here are jaded by Honeychurch's game last week and are gung-ho about playing a team of kids. Quite simply Boyd is a far better player than Honeychurch at AFL level and has more to offer us - at least for this year. For the record Scott West had a bung knee and his output in his last season was barely satisfactory when he could get on the park and Brian Lake wanted out for whatever reason(s).

Look maybe I am not making myself clear. Boyd is a good player and likely a better one than Honeychurch at the moment. But then is anyone saying Austin is better than Stringer or Hunter? I doubt it. But Austin plays ahead of them for the overall benefit of the team.

But the query is, is the team better with Boyd in it? The numbers over the last two years say we win around 15% more games when Boyd doesn't play. At a minimum, Boyd not playing does not seem to hurt us.

Could team balance be served better with Honeychurch? Possibly we won't know until he is picked and see how he plays.

At some point bullets need to be bitten with our senior players, like they were with Cross.

Maybe now is not the time for it, but the time is approaching fast for Boyd in my view.

And yes I can see an argument for a senior player to replace Cooney. And no doubt Boyd will try his guts out and may even get 30 possies, but will his impact diminish Wallis' and even Libba's impact, and the team's?

I guess we'll see.

[Scorlibo]

But the query is, is the team better with Boyd in it? The numbers over the last two years say we win around 15% more games when Boyd doesn't play. At a minimum, Boyd not playing does not seem to hurt us.


RWB, your 'numbers' are bogus, as I've already shown. By the same logic, the player who most deserves to be dropped in the whole league is Gary Ablett.

[azabob]

Interesting to see Sam Darley has moved up to the emergency list. May not mean much in the scheme of things, but positive to see.

[jeemak]

Interesting to see Sam Darley has moved up to the emergency list. May not mean much in the scheme of things, but positive to see.

I reckon it would mean a bit to him. Bit of a carrot after putting some better form together at Footscray.

[1eyedog]

Look maybe I am not making myself clear. Boyd is a good player and likely a better one than Honeychurch at the moment. But then is anyone saying Austin is better than Stringer or Hunter? I doubt it. But Austin plays ahead of them for the overall benefit of the team.

But the query is, is the team better with Boyd in it? The numbers over the last two years say we win around 15% more games when Boyd doesn't play. At a minimum, Boyd not playing does not seem to hurt us.

Could team balance be served better with Honeychurch? Possibly we won't know until he is picked and see how he plays.

At some point bullets need to be bitten with our senior players, like they were with Cross.

Maybe now is not the time for it, but the time is approaching fast for Boyd in my view.

And yes I can see an argument for a senior player to replace Cooney. And no doubt Boyd will try his guts out and may even get 30 possies, but will his impact diminish Wallis' and even Libba's impact, and the team's?

I guess we'll see.

I get where you're coming from and there is no doubt that Boyd is in the twilight of his career but he is still the crankshaft of the engine and we still need him in the team. Perhaps Libba and Wally will come on once Boyd retires (or is tapped on the shoulder) but I believe his solid work ethic, great leadership and form on field far outweighs any perceived counterweight he may be putting on Wally and Libba.

I wonder whether you could dig out a stat showing how many games Boyd has actually won for us. There is no doubt in my mind that Boyd was the reason we were still a chance to win the Richmond game deep in the last quarter - he was sensational. Lucky for us Ellis won us the game.

[Scorlibo]

There is so doubt in my mind that Boyd was the reason we were still a chance to win the Richmond game deep in the last quarter - he was sensational.

Good call. His run has always been undervalued imo, and he showed great leadership in that last quarter.

[LostDoggy]

I get where you're coming from and there is no doubt that Boyd is in the twilight of his career but he is still the crankshaft of the engine and we still need him in the team. Perhaps Libba and Wally will come on once Boyd retires (or is tapped on the shoulder) but I believe his solid work ethic, great leadership and form on field far outweighs any perceived counterweight he may be putting on Wally and Libba.

I wonder whether you could dig out a stat showing how many games Boyd has actually won for us. There is no doubt in my mind that Boyd was the reason we were still a chance to win the Richmond game deep in the last quarter - he was sensational. Lucky for us Ellis won us the game.

Yeah sure, you dig out the stats on games Boyd has lost for us, and I dig out stats he won for us...

Boyd has been a great servant, still reckon there is an argument the team functions better without him, but yes he is still a good player.

[wimberga]

Boyd always keeps going in the last quarter, a time when Port Adelaide are particularly dangerous

[chef]

So Murphy and Morris should be shipped out too?

[bornadog]

Yeah sure, you dig out the stats on games Boyd has lost for us, and I dig out stats he won for us...

Boyd has been a great servant, still reckon there is an argument the team functions better without him, but yes he is still a good player.

so Boyd lost the games for us :confused: All by himself or were there another 21 players involved. :D

[LostDoggy]

so Boyd lost the games for us :confused: All by himself or were there another 21 players involved. :D

so Boyd won games for us :confused: All by himself or were there another 21 players involved.

[Eastdog]

I've said this before we need to keep in mind that we need to strike a balance between experience and youth. Too many and too little of one is not the best. What we don't want is mass retirements at seasons end. We should do it like we did with Cross last year. I still think while Gia is coming towards the end he offers us something in that forward line which is so valuable and which make the case to keep him on a bit longer.

[always right]

It's the perennial question. Which approach will result in faster development of our younger players......putting quality experienced players around them or letting them burden greater responsibility?

No-one can answer this categorically but wasn't Melbourne criticised for adopting the latter strategy?

[josie]

Not if you want to win . Boyd has been great this year and has terrific when we needed a senior player to stand up when needed.
Beez knees will get his chance

Love the nickname "Beez Knees" !! right up there with "Sweet Jesus". I also think there could be a late change with Honeychurch coming in, especially as a 6 day turnaround and there was a lot of tackling in Sunday's match too.

Also agree with Cooney out an older, wiser head like Boyd is good way to go. Furthermore Gia was good on Sunday so should play unless he is tired/sore.

[Scorlibo]

so Boyd won games for us :confused: All by himself or were there another 21 players involved.

You were the one who judged the influence of 1 player on the performance of 22.


It's the perennial question. Which approach will result in faster development of our younger players......putting quality experienced players around them or letting them burden greater responsibility?

No-one can answer this categorically but wasn't Melbourne criticised for adopting the latter strategy?

They were and when Roos came in he recruited Vince and Cross, gave the captaincy to N. Jones etc. to rework their team and more closely align with the former strategy.

[jeemak]

You were the one who judged the influence of 1 player on the performance of 22.



They were and when Roos came in he recruited Vince and Cross, gave the captaincy to N. Jones etc. to rework their team and more closely align with the former strategy.

And they're dominating now! Almost on four wins and playing great footy with a clearly defined style that is so so good to watch. There's a club that's going places.

Seriously still butt-hurt over Melbourne it seems. Don't know whether more white wine will calm me down, or get me even more belligerent.

[bornadog]

so Boyd won games for us :confused: All by himself or were there another 21 players involved.

Argh now you get it.