Article 32: Team of The Century: Defence

[bulldogtragic]

Woofers,

Those reading or contributing to the Team of the Century thread, will now be aware we have 7 nominations for 6 defence spots.

Ryan Hargrave, Brian Lake, Dale Morris
Lindsay Gilbee, Easton Wood, Bob Murphy, Rohan Smith

In keeping with the effort of the posters in the other thread, can you please help ratify this Article 32 Question with some thought, detail or insight. That is which 6 players should be holders of the 6 spots?

You can freely pick on the 6 on the quality of the player, type of defender (I.e. KPD, rebounding, running, third tall etc) or the best 6 as a group. Can you please explain why you think the 6 defenders you select should be the 6 that we run with. The player who doesn't make the 6 can be moved if nominated for an alternative position on the ground, or interchange. But when they're out of the back 6, they're out of the back 6 for good.

If we can't get overwhelming agreement, a poll thread will be needed. So try to be as passionately persuasive as you can be, especially for those who might not have seen the best of the 7 nominated.

[bulldogtragic]

My 6 is this, and I'll explain why:

Murphy Lake Morris
Smith Wood Gilbee

Hargrave - Interchange

I want a combination of the best players, but also best players in their position. So a full back, centre half back, third tall, flexible defender (big/small) and two running defenders off the half back flank.

Only 17 years in, Brian Lake is our best full back. So he's in. Dale Morris & Easton Wood are the best at covering CHB and third tall.

So my dilemma comes with Hargrave, Smith, Gilbee & Murphy. Rohan Smith brings genuine pace, genuine, pace. Lindsay Gilbee's kicking is about as elite as anyone in our club's history. Bob Murphy is elite off both feet, and has great rebounding tricks. Hargrave when played in the flexible tall/small role became a gun when he didn't have to man big KPFs.

So I go with the elite pace of Smith on one side of the HBF, and the elite kicking of Gilbee off the other HBF. Both can hit the scoreboard too. Hargrave is probably the better defender over Murphy, but Murphy has the ability to also play tall and small, and play the rebounding role off both feet. With Easton Wood being able to intercept in all directions, having Bob running passed on either foot distributing would be ideal with Smith & Gilbee able to be immediate beneficiaries. My concern is its a very attacking defence, but it's got quality across the lines and for only 17 years in, it looks very handy.

B: Bob Murphy - Brian Lake - Dale Morris
HB: Rohan Smith - Easton Wood - Lindsay Gilbee

Int: Ryan Hargrave

[always right]

Bob Murphy, Brian Lake, Dale Morris
Lindsay Gilbee, Easton Wood, Rohan Smith

I was tempted to name Morris in all positions.

Shaggy is the unlucky omission. He was a fine player and I admired the fact that he played undersized for virtually all of his career, but he comes up short against the others for the following reasons;

- Lake is a clear choice for the key defender role. Despite weekly brain fades, his ability to not only negate his opponent but dominate them was incredible....and had a pretty good record against Buddy.
- Morris is simply our greatest defender ever due to his versatility, bravery, consistency, and team ethic.
- Bob is a leader and possesses poise and skill that we have never seen before....a joy to watch.
- Gilbee was a strong defender but launched attacks with precision kicking and kicked goals as well.
- Bubba was a true attacking back flanker, whose pace and long kicking carved up opposition.
- Easton Wood is a freak, the like we have never seen. Courageous, athletic, attacking and a great defender in the vein of Alex Rance.

In my view Shaggy was solid in many areas. A reliable mark, tough despite a wiry frame, a good kick, a great team man. Along with Morris he was a true defender but had the ability to run forward and create attacks. Unlike the others however, I don't think he had a standout attribute that gave him a point of difference.

JJ might be a little unlucky not to get nominated. He is after all the only Norm Smith medallist at our club.

[westdog54]

If JJ re-signs at the end of this year I'll be nominating him.

[bulldogtragic]

If JJ re-signs at the end of this year I'll be nominating him.

These Article 32's threads will be fun as more and more players become eligible. Imagine deciding between say Bubba vs JJ! The rucks will be interesting too in the years ahead. A thread where being older probably pays off a little bit to give a really good analytic comparison.

[KT31]

My 6 is this, and I'll explain why:

Murphy Lake Morris
Smith Wood Gilbee

Hargrave - Interchange

I want a combination of the best players, but also best players in their position. So a full back, centre half back, third tall, flexible defender (big/small) and two running defenders off the half back flank.

Only 17 years in, Brian Lake is our best full back. So he's in. Dale Morris & Easton Wood are the best at covering CHB and third tall.

So my dilemma comes with Hargrave, Smith, Gilbee & Murphy. Rohan Smith brings genuine pace, genuine, pace. Lindsay Gilbee's kicking is about as elite as anyone in our club's history. Bob Murphy is elite off both feet, and has great rebounding tricks. Hargrave when played in the flexible tall/small role became a gun when he didn't have to man big KPFs.

So I go with the elite pace of Smith on one side of the HBF, and the elite kicking of Gilbee off the other HBF. Both can hit the scoreboard too. Hargrave is probably the better defender over Murphy, but Murphy has the ability to also play tall and small, and play the rebounding role off both feet. With Easton Wood being able to intercept in all directions, having Bob running passed on either foot distributing would be ideal with Smith & Gilbee able to be immediate beneficiaries. My concern is its a very attacking defence, but it's got quality across the lines and for only 17 years in, it looks very handy.

B: Bob Murphy - Brian Lake - Dale Morris
HB: Rohan Smith - Easton Wood - Lindsay Gilbee

Int: Ryan Hargrave

Well put BT, agree Shaggy to the bench for me as well.

[boydogs]

The player who doesn't make the 6 can be moved if nominated for an alternative position on the ground, or interchange. But when they're out of the back 6, they're out of the back 6 for good

Not fair on current players e.g. Wood who could elevate themselves to another level in future

[bulldogtragic]

Not fair on current players e.g. Wood who could elevate themselves to another level in future

I realised Wood after I posted. That's an obvious caveat, so if the player has retiredand they're moved that's it. If they're still playing they can be reviewed at a later date.

Based on two longer responses, Wood will make it in any event.

[bornadog]

Not fair on current players e.g. Wood who could elevate themselves to another level in future

He is also not your traditional CHB.

[bornadog]

I will go with:

Rohan Smith, Brian Lake, Dale Morris

Ryan Hargrave Vacant Bob Murphy

[1eyedog]

It depends on what we are trying to do here. Reward the best players or build the best team per position over the past 17 years. Gilbee is probably a better player than Shaggy, certainly more skilled, but looking at that back six there is a shortage of options 190cm and over. Lake is the only monster and Morris (190) and Wood (185) are undersized. Shaggy is by no means a key but he is a very solid third tall and I think his versatility to play tall / small gets him across the line against Gilbee. Added to this is that he is a better defender and has a mongrel streak, which every champion team needs.

[bornadog]

It depends on what we are trying to do here. Reward the best players or build the best team per position over the past 17 years. Gilbee is probably a better player than Shaggy, certainly more skilled, but looking at that back six there is a shortage of options 190cm and over. Lake is the only monster and Morris (190) and Wood (185) are undersized. Shaggy is by no means a key but he is a very solid third tall and I think his versatility to play tall / small gets him across the line against Gilbee. Added to this is that he is a better defender and has a mongrel streak, which every champion team needs.

That is the exact thinking I had when looking at my six. I left CHB vacant at this stage.

[1eyedog]

That is the exact thinking I had when looking at my six. I left CHB vacant at this stage.

Yeah I think ultimately Wood moves from CHB and takes Shaggy's place. Hopefully Adams plays 100 games and continues the upward trend!

[bulldogtragic]

It depends on what we are trying to do here. Reward the best players or build the best team per position over the past 17 years. Gilbee is probably a better player than Shaggy, certainly more skilled, but looking at that back six there is a shortage of options 190cm and over. Lake is the only monster and Morris (190) and Wood (185) are undersized. Shaggy is by no means a key but he is a very solid third tall and I think his versatility to play tall / small gets him across the line against Gilbee. Added to this is that he is a better defender and has a mongrel streak, which every champion team needs.

It's what ever you want to do. I figure the most detailed and persuasive posts like this one will get people to reflect on their memories/thoughts of watching these players. From there it's making a personal position about what the TOOC should be like, albeit only 17% in and in its infancy. Personally, I think you make an excellent good point and I will think about my 6 again.

[1eyedog]

It's what ever you want to do. I figure the most detailed and persuasive posts like this one will get people to reflect on their memories/thoughts of watching these players. From there it's making a personal position about what the TOOC should be like, albeit only 17% in and in its infancy. Personally, I think you make an excellent good point and I will think about my 6 again.

I forgot to mention ultimate team man who stuck up for his mates. Heath Black was running around like a dickhead trying to knock Johno out with an elbow to the head and throwing uppercuts in a scrum, Shaggy sorted him out on behalf of everyone.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS3S3icYgdY

[bornadog]

It's what ever you want to do. I figure the most detailed and persuasive posts like this one will get people to reflect on their memories/thoughts of watching these players. From there it's making a personal position about what the TOOC should be like, albeit only 17% in and in its infancy. Personally, I think you make an excellent good point and I will think about my 6 again.

My memory is a lot of supporters bagged Shaggy unfairly. Most of those times it was due to him playing undersized and having to fill a hole due to our inability to draft a CHB (bloody Clayton :D ) He was a very good player with great ability to read the play and kick the ball long into the F50. He was actually rarely beaten when he played on players his size and was also good at shutting down smaller players.

[1eyedog]

My memory is a lot of supporters bagged Shaggy unfairly. Most of those times it was due to him playing undersized and having to fill a hole due to our inability to draft a CHB (bloody Clayton :D ) He was a very good player with great ability to read the play and kick the ball long into the F50. He was actually rarely beaten when he played on players his size and was also good at shutting down smaller players.

He gave away too many free kicks and was sketchy over 20-30 metres but you have to crack a few eggs if you want to make an omelette.

[bornadog]

He gave away too many free kicks and was sketchy over 20-30 metres but you have to crack a few eggs if you want to make an omelette.

Most of those frees were for over the shoulder as he tried to reach over the monster forwards. ;)

[bulldogtragic]

My memory is a lot of supporters bagged Shaggy unfairly. Most of those times it was due to him playing undersized and having to fill a hole due to our inability to draft a CHB (bloody Clayton :D ) He was a very good player with great ability to read the play and kick the ball long into the F50. He was actually rarely beaten when he played on players his size and was also good at shutting down smaller players.

I remember that clearly too. But I remember Shaggy as the latter player that was a near gun defender when he played on guys his own size. As well as a tough bugger off-field (emergency bowel surgery) and on field (as per video on last page). I'm not sure he'll be in the side in 83 years, but right now it's certainly interesting the way you look at the TOOC as best players or best overall defensive 6. Shaggy is probably in on best defensive 6, but the other 6 all have a standout feature/s. I find it interesting trying to weigh up all these club great players.

[bornadog]

I find it interesting trying to weigh up all these club great players.

Yes a very difficult task.

I am reluctant to put in any current players, other than Bob, until they show consistency over a long career. Wood for example has only had a couple of good years, mainly under Bevo, same with JJ. If they can continue on this path, they certainly would be considered under my team, as they are still young.

Over our history, we have had some real champion KPP backman, like Herb Henderson, Merrington, David Darcy, Rick Kennedy. We struggled over the 1990s, until Brain came along and are still struggling in this area. Similar situation with the KPP CHFs. We have had our fair share of gun Full Forwards that I can remember, like Templeton, Beasley, Chris Grant (who was also a CHF, and CHB).

The 2000s, we continue to struggle with a Team of the Century KPPs

[1eyedog]

Yes a very difficult task.

I am reluctant to put in any current players, other than Bob, until they show consistency over a long career. Wood for example has only had a couple of good years, mainly under Bevo, same with JJ. If they can continue on this path, they certainly would be considered under my team, as they are still young.

Over our history, we have had some real champion KPP backman, like Herb Henderson, Merrington, David Darcy, Rick Kennedy. We struggled over the 1990s, until Brain came along and are still struggling in this area. Similar situation with the KPP CHFs. We have had our fair share of gun Full Forwards that I can remember, like Templeton, Beasley, Chris Grant (who was also a CHF, and CHB).

The 2000s, we continue to struggle with a Team of the Century KPPs

The FF position will be vacant until Jake plays 100+ games.

[boydogs]

Ryan Hargrave, Brian Lake, Lindsay Gilbee
Bob Murphy, Dale Morris, Rohan Smith

Interchange: Easton Wood

Wood is the least established of the 7 nominated. He has been AA once, and hasn't performed to quite the same level since. He took several years to establish himself and hasn't yet delivered the same level of play for the same amount of time as others nominated, as yet. This may change as the years go on, or he may again struggle with soft tissue injuries and continuity and have a career more like Will Minson's than Bob Murphy's, punctuated by many years as just a goer for a couple at an elite level

Of the other 6 nominees, Wood's role is most comparable to Ryan Hargrave's. Both could be described as 3rd talls, yet have different strengths and weaknesses. Wood is a better mark, with a better leap, whilst Hargrave was a little taller and known for getting spoils in yet also known for giving away free kicks when undersized. Hargrave was the much better attacking player, comfortable running up the wings with long, accurate kicking. Hargrave's skills were far superior, whilst Wood's kicking is sufficient he tends to go long whilst Hargrave was more damaging and able to pinpoint targets

The team balance is an interesting question, looking at the 6 selected today it seems short but when Morris started there weren't anywhere near as many 195cm+ forwards as there are today, and he was able to handle most of them. There may also be a second tall nominated down the track such as Marcus Adams, which would negate the need for Wood/Hargrave to play tall and bring their other strengths and weaknesses more into focus

[bulldogtragic]

Great post GG. Really good comparison between Shaggy & Easton.

Your observation on height of the defenders in the time they played is a really excellent one, one I hadn't yet contemplated. With the move towards 200cm+ second forwards/rucks what that will do towards selection for our forwards, and our defenders. Teddy Whitten was 184cm CHB as our current TOOC, who stands about the same height as our nominated flankers in Smith & Gilbee. Certainly adds another dimension, and yet another layer of consideration about the players we pick, why we pick them or prefer them and the time they played in and changes over time.

[1eyedog]

Ryan Hargrave, Brian Lake, Lindsay Gilbee
Bob Murphy, Dale Morris, Rohan Smith

Interchange: Easton Wood

Wood is the least established of the 7 nominated. He has been AA once, and hasn't performed to quite the same level since. He took several years to establish himself and hasn't yet delivered the same level of play for the same amount of time as others nominated, as yet. This may change as the years go on, or he may again struggle with soft tissue injuries and continuity and have a career more like Will Minson's than Bob Murphy's, punctuated by many years as just a goer for a couple at an elite level

Of the other 6 nominees, Wood's role is most comparable to Ryan Hargrave's. Both could be described as 3rd talls, yet have different strengths and weaknesses. Wood is a better mark, with a better leap, whilst Hargrave was a little taller and known for getting spoils in yet also known for giving away free kicks when undersized. Hargrave was the much better attacking player, comfortable running up the wings with long, accurate kicking. Hargrave's skills were far superior, whilst Wood's kicking is sufficient he tends to go long whilst Hargrave was more damaging and able to pinpoint targets

The team balance is an interesting question, looking at the 6 selected today it seems short but when Morris started there weren't anywhere near as many 195cm+ forwards as there are today, and he was able to handle most of them. There may also be a second tall nominated down the track such as Marcus Adams, which would negate the need for Wood/Hargrave to play tall and bring their other strengths and weaknesses more into focus


Really enjoying this discussion.

I'm not sure I agree with much of this boydogs. It sounds like you're talking about Wood pre-AA. Wood has been exceptional this season and, more so, last season post-AA and is a player every club would desire. I hear about him from rival fans all the time, more than any other player on our list actually. I think Wood and Shaggy are comparable over 20 metres and both are effective long kicks. Shaggy was more likely to run with the ball and kick long than look for the short option. For me Wood is in the team because it's ridiculous that he's not he's that good and Shaggy is in for team balance. Wood is a superior player but Shaggy was so critical to the structure of our back six for so long he deserves to be there.

Aside from all of this if you break it down Wood has an AA and a Charles Sutton medal to his name and Shaggy doesn't and Wood's leadership is second to none - he led this club on field to its first premiership in 62 years. He simply has to be in that back line now.

Even if he never played another game from now he would take some dislodging from a HBF over the next 25 years for mine.

[always right]

I take the point that Wood has not yet been able to string together the injury free years that Shaggy achieved.....but it's hard to overlook the standard of play he's shown over the last few years. Have we ever seen a defender who spoils so effectively and spectacularly? His ability to get to contests with his own opponent and that of others is extraordinary and he impacts them from seemingly impossible positions. He also launches counter attacks with his intercept play and forces opposition coaches to devise strategies to limit his influence. I don't think we've ever seen a player quite like him.

[boydogs]

For me Wood is in the team because it's ridiculous that he's not he's that good and Shaggy is in for team balance

You've left out Gilbee, possibly the best kick in AFL history and a great defender in the air for his height, and included two third talls. That's fine if you're selecting on merit, but I don't think you could call it a team balance decision

Ultimately with a third tall you want them to be able to defend against talls when needed, but also make them accountable through their own attack. If they don't bring the attack, you may as well play another tall. Hargrave did, Wood struggles to

With Brian Lake in the side, up there with Rance, McGovern and Wood as the greatest intercept markers ever, Wood's intercept marking ability becomes less valuable, and even more so if another tall aside from Morris gets in e.g. Adams, who is a great intercept marker himself. Intercept marking is Wood's point of difference, to put him in the side I think you really need to drive home the value of this attribute in cutting off opposition attacks and turning them into attacks of your own, because Hargrave has him covered when it comes to his work with ball in hand

[soupman]

Hargrave is an easy omission for mine.

A very good player, but never an outstanding player. No where near the attacking threat that half of them are (Smith, Murphy, JJ, Gilbee), not big enough to play KPP (Lake), an excellent lock down player but not in Morris' league, and Easton Wood is elite now and has been pretty much since Bevo has arrived, including an awesome premiership campaign as captain.

[always right]

You've left out Gilbee, possibly the best kick in AFL history and a great defender in the air for his height, and included two third talls. That's fine if you're selecting on merit, but I don't think you could call it a team balance decision

Ultimately with a third tall you want them to be able to defend against talls when needed, but also make them accountable through their own attack. If they don't bring the attack, you may as well play another tall. Hargrave did, Wood struggles to

With Brian Lake in the side, up there with Rance, McGovern and Wood as the greatest intercept markers ever, Wood's intercept marking ability becomes less valuable, and even more so if another tall aside from Morris gets in e.g. Adams, who is a great intercept marker himself. Intercept marking is Wood's point of difference, to put him in the side I think you really need to drive home the value of this attribute in cutting off opposition attacks and turning them into attacks of your own, because Hargrave has him covered when it comes to his work with ball in hand

I think you are underplaying his other point of difference......his ability to impact contests from virtually any position with his courage, leap and agility. How many attacks does he foil?

[westdog54]

I think you are underplaying his other point of difference......his ability to impact contests from virtually any position with his courage, leap and agility. How many attacks does he foil?

Watch the last two minutes of the prelim.

[1eyedog]

You've left out Gilbee, possibly the best kick in AFL history and a great defender in the air for his height, and included two third talls. That's fine if you're selecting on merit, but I don't think you could call it a team balance decision

Ultimately with a third tall you want them to be able to defend against talls when needed, but also make them accountable through their own attack. If they don't bring the attack, you may as well play another tall. Hargrave did, Wood struggles to

With Brian Lake in the side, up there with Rance, McGovern and Wood as the greatest intercept markers ever, Wood's intercept marking ability becomes less valuable, and even more so if another tall aside from Morris gets in e.g. Adams, who is a great intercept marker himself. Intercept marking is Wood's point of difference, to put him in the side I think you really need to drive home the value of this attribute in cutting off opposition attacks and turning them into attacks of your own, because Hargrave has him covered when it comes to his work with ball in hand

I wouldn't necessarily play Wood as a third tall.

[Twodogs]

You've left out Gilbee, possibly the best kick in AFL history and a great defender in the air for his height, and included two third talls. That's fine if you're selecting on merit, but I don't think you could call it a team balance decision

Ultimately with a third tall you want them to be able to defend against talls when needed, but also make them accountable through their own attack. If they don't bring the attack, you may as well play another tall. Hargrave did, Wood struggles to

With Brian Lake in the side, up there with Rance, McGovern and Wood as the greatest intercept markers ever, Wood's intercept marking ability becomes less valuable, and even more so if another tall aside from Morris gets in e.g. Adams, who is a great intercept marker himself. Intercept marking is Wood's point of difference, to put him in the side I think you really need to drive home the value of this attribute in cutting off opposition attacks and turning them into attacks of your own, because Hargrave has him covered when it comes to his work with ball in hand

Well said you've almost convinced me. Given there is more value placed on intercept marking now than 15 years ago (more man on man back then) I wonder if Shaggy could have developed his ability to do it well. I can't really remember how good a mark he was. Whenever I cast my mind back to him all I can remember is him knocking out Simon Black at quarter time at Etihad.

[bulldogtragic]

Great discussion, thanks guys and gals. It seems we have some consensus for 5 of the 6 spots:

B: Murphy Lake Morris
HB: Smith **** Gilbee

That's a very, very handy defence, with a heap of different attributes.

So we're now between Hargrave & Wood for the CHB spot. There seems to be a genuine split, so to everyone who wants to give input of this, who should we go with is this head to head contest and why?

[1eyedog]

There is no competition between Wood and Shaggy and I think that's been detailed above. The only constraint is Wood hasn't played as many games as Shaggy so hasn't got the job done for as long, but the prerequisite is 100+ games and Wood meets that criteria. Wood in Shaggy out if it's between these two. Wood has him covered in every other stat / attribute and award.

[Twodogs]

Have we had any players called Harwood or Woodgrave? Maybe we could compromise and stick them in?

[Twodogs]

There is no competition between Wood and Shaggy and I think that's been detailed above. The only constraint is Wood hasn't played as many games as Shaggy so hasn't got the job done for as long, but the prerequisite is 100+ games and Wood meets that criteria. Wood in Shaggy out if it's between these two. Wood has him covered in every other stat / attribute and award.

You could also argue that Shaggy was much more durable than Wood. Hargrave would have averaged more games each season.

[1eyedog]

You could also argue that Shaggy was much more durable than Wood. Hargrave would have averaged more games each season.

Wood has been very reliable in this area post-hamstring issues. Kudos to conditioning staff for sorting it out.

[bulldogtragic]

Arguments in favour of Hargrave in the thread are his height, and therefore his ability to play on the third tall types, and his kicking skills, plus a bit of mongrel (which is always good).

Wood seems to have support for intercept marking, overall game and leadership.

I wonder if the debate is necessarily between the two players, or an ideological concept of how you pick the TOOC as to just the best players or most appropriate balance of players?

[Twodogs]

Arguments in favour of Hargrave in the thread are his height, and therefore his ability to play on the third tall types, and his kicking skills, plus a bit of mongrel (which is always good).

Wood seems to have support for intercept marking, overall game and leadership.

I wonder if the debate is necessarily between the two players, or an ideological concept of how you pick the TOOC as to just the best players or most appropriate balance of players?


I was wondering about that myself. Should we pick the flat out best six defenders we've had or a balanced ready to walk out on the ground two talls/third tall and three medium/small defenders back six?

[Twodogs]

Wood has been very reliable in this area post-hamstring issues. Kudos to conditioning staff for sorting it out.


Yeah true. We gambled almost exclusively on him providing the leadership we needed last year after Murph went down and he didn't let us down. He came back from injury earlier than originally predicted for the finals.

[bulldogtragic]

I was wondering about that myself. Should we pick the flat out best six defenders we've had or a balanced ready to walk out on the ground two talls/third tall and three medium/small defenders back six?

I think it's an individual choice. Personally, I'm weighing up best and best group of defenders. I want three who can play tall, two great flankers and flexible type. But if there's too good a defender to miss, I'm happy to re-evaluate it. But they've got to hold their place as the best so far first and foremost. But it's interesting to see the reasoning of detailed posts as to how we are looking at it.

I'm still tending to Wood over Shaggy, but we go in a little small (albeit 17% of the way in).

[boydogs]

Wood has him covered in every other stat / attribute and award.

Hargrave is marginally ahead stats wise over their careers

http://puu.sh/wanRB/2101ad6c5a.png


So we're now between Hargrave & Wood for the CHB spot. There seems to be a genuine split, so to everyone who wants to give input of this, who should we go with is this head to head contest and why?

I think there were more posters arguing for Wood than Hargrave

[bulldogtragic]

From the stat sheet, they're very close in deed including playing weight & height. A part from an extra two kicks a game, they're nearly identical in the key areas for a defender (handballs, marks, tackles).

In an aside, getting these two blokes at pick 66 & pick 43 is great going.

[soupman]

The more I think about this the more I am confident it is a no contest.

Easton Wood is a much better player than Hargrave ever was. This isn't to say Shaggy was no good, quite the contrary really, but Wood is awesome.

Hargraves strengths seem to be played up as the following:


whilst Hargrave was a little taller and known for getting spoils in yet also known for giving away free kicks when undersized. Hargrave was the much better attacking player, comfortable running up the wings with long, accurate kicking. Hargrave's skills were far superior, whilst Wood's kicking is sufficient he tends to go long whilst Hargrave was more damaging and able to pinpoint targets


Arguments in favour of Hargrave in the thread are his height, and therefore his ability to play on the third tall types, and his kicking skills, plus a bit of mongrel (which is always good).


Breaking these down I think they fall as follows:
"Shaggy is known for getting spoils in": Wood wins this one. As good at spoiling he was Wood is elite at both marking and spoiling.
"Hargrave was the much better attacking player, comfortable running up the wings with long, accurate kicking.": Yeah maybe, although I think he tended to just kick it long so would omit the accurate portion of this statement. Honestly I think when Wood goes on his runs he is fairly similar, but I think Hargrave tended to do it more and without checking the stats kicked more goals. In Woods defence he is often the one starting the counter attack which makes it harder to receive the ball up the ground. Still Shaggy gets this one, but I think it's marginal.
"Hargraves skills were superior": Again Wood is not a bad kick and Hargrave didn't have Gilbees leg so I don't think the difference is that pronounced. Shaggy wins this marginally.
"Hargraves height": Not sure you can claim this as a strength when it is continually pointed out he struggled against tall forwards and was better on players his size or smaller. Wood has proven capable of playing on all but the biggest forwards. Hargrave was better on the small forwards (like Milne) however.
"Ability to play on third talls": Wood is AA at this and absolutely elite. Hargrave doesn't come close to Wood on this point.
"Mongrel": Hargrave was keener to hurt than Wood is, but Wood has never shirked a contest or failed to fly the flag so this is marginal at best if it should even be considered.
"Hargrave is more durable": Not sure this matters or is relevant.

Personally I think Hargraves biggest strengths were his one on one ability and capability of being an attacking outlet while still locking down a very good player.

Woods strengths are his one on one ability in any situation and ability to dominate the air.

Wood is also a top 50 player in the league and absolutely elite, as good as Hargrave was I'm not sure he has ever been either of those two things.



I wonder if the debate is necessarily between the two players, or an ideological concept of how you pick the TOOC as to just the best players or most appropriate balance of players?

So far the consensus has us picking 5 defenders with 3 small-mid types, 1 lockdown type for all sizes and 1 key defender. Hargrave is another small-mid type, Wood is a versatile type who can play off the bigger guys. Shaggy's marginally better attacking ability is not very important in a defence that boasts Gilbee, Bubba and Murphy, while Woods ability to play taller and outmark key forwards surely gets him the 6th spot on team balance grounds.

I see no way Easton Wood can miss out for Ryan Hargrave in this team.

[bornadog]

If we are picking a CHB for team of the century, well we don't really have one in the traditional sense.

Having said that, our current team plays without one. If we are talking about playing a team in today's footy environment, with Bevo as the coach then I guess Wood would get the nod, as he has the ability to compete in the air against a taller opponent.

[bulldogtragic]

Great post Soupa and others. Not many footy forums have this quality of thinking, analytical assessment and discussion.

I'm still with my opening assessment of:

B: Murphy Lake Morris
HB: Smith Wood Gilbee

Games Played for the Western Bulldogs: 1,357 and counting.

Intuitively it still feels a little small, and Hargrave was a good player and great servant. But luckily we have 83 years to try to find another gun KPD over 195cm.

[1eyedog]

From the stat sheet, they're very close in deed including playing weight & height. A part from an extra two kicks a game, they're nearly identical in the key areas for a defender (handballs, marks, tackles).

In an aside, getting these two blokes at pick 66 & pick 43 is great going.

Key data to assist the comparison would be spoils and intercept marks. Picks 43 and 66 talk about bargain city.

[KT31]

I would like to nominate -

#10 Eastern Wood, 109 games, 15 goals, 2009- , Defender, 187cm, 87kg, Geelong Grammar

Nominated For: Half Back
Alternate Nominated For: Backline

Achievements:

All Australian 2015

International Rules Series 2011

Charles Sutton Medal - 2015

NAB Cup Premiership player: 2010

AFL Premiership Captain - 2016

Wood is a medium sized defender who has the ability to play on a range of different opponents. After a stellar 2015 season, Wood was named in the All Australian Team for the first time. In 2016, Wood stepped into the captaincy role in the absence of Bob Murphy, leading the Club to it's historic premiership victory. 2016 The athletic defender was recruited to the Bulldogs through the 2007 AFL National Draft with the Club’s third round selection (pick 43 overall).

Thrust into the captaincy after Robert Murphy injured his knee in round three, the 28-year-old had large shoes to fill but led with courage and pride, and as a Bulldogs premiership captain, now has a legacy that will echo through the ages

I will stick with my nomination Wood over Shaggy.

[always right]

Perhaps Bubba versus Shaggy would be a more appropriate debate. Wood has Shaggy covered by some way.

[bulldogtragic]

Perhaps Bubba versus Shaggy would be a more appropriate debate. Wood has Shaggy covered by some way.

No one seems to have looked at Smith. Maybe Twodogs threatening anyone who said no to Smith was going to get it had an effect?

[bulldogtragic]

Unless there's a call for poll to be taken, the consensus for the main thread to be updated is:

B: Murphy Lake Morris
HB: Smith Wood Gilbee

Int: Hargrave

[Twodogs]

No one seems to have looked at Smith. Maybe Twodogs threatening anyone who said no to Smith was going to get it had an effect?


I would hope so. I'm casting an arched eyebrow at AR even as we speak. ;)

[always right]

I would hope so. I'm casting an arched eyebrow at AR even as we speak. ;)
:D More than happy to have Bubba in our defensive setup.