The Big Improver

[Bulldog Revolution]

OK so my Surprise Packet thread wasn't clear enough, and I should have limited it to rookies and draftees who have not yet played, but moving on regardless

Who are the candidates for the Big Improver in 2010?

Last year Harbrow was a guy who made an enormous improvement.
Higgins also had his best year.

What do people think? and Why?

[GVGjr]

OK so my Surprise Packet thread wasn't clear enough, and I should have limited it to rookies and draftees who have not yet played, but moving on regardless

Who are the candidates for the Big Improver in 2010?

Last year Harbrow was a guy who made an enormous improvement.
Higgins also had his best year.

What do people think? and Why?

Ryan Griffen, injury free and a full pre-season behind him he should be able to get somewhere near his potential this year. I hope we look at playing him either off half back or on a wing rather than mainly in the centre square.

[Mantis]

Ryan Griffen, injury free and a full pre-season behind him he should be able to get somewhere near his potential this year. I hope we look at playing him either off half back or on a wing rather than mainly in the centre square.

I too hope for a big year from Ryan.

In respect to this slight positional change would we robbing Peter to pay Paul? His ability to break away from a clearance situation as evidenced by his game in the PF means he is an extremely valauable commodity in the centre square. I would not want to rob us of this unique ability by playing him in a fulltime 'outside' role.

At times he should be rotated into a position you describe, but primarily I see him as an on-baller.

[The Coon Dog]

I'm expecting Lindsay Gilbee to improve on last season. It wasn't as good as his previous two & there were reasons obviously with his father's ill health. Nothing better in football than watching Lindsay delivering the ball; like watching David Gower cover drive.

[GVGjr]

I too hope for a big year from Ryan.

In respect to this slight positional change would we robbing Peter to pay Paul? His ability to break away from a clearance situation as evidenced by his game in the PF means he is an extremely valauable commodity in the centre square. I would not want to rob us of this unique ability by playing him in a fulltime 'outside' role.

At times he should be rotated into a position you describe, but primarily I see him as on-baller.

I don't rate his instincts in the centre square. He just doesn't seem to be a natural centre square player. Throw him onto the ball by all means but I think he is far better value if given some more space.

[Mantis]

Andrejs Everitt - He has finally had a full pre-season and from reports is showing the benefits of this on the track. He is a fairly unique player in that even though he is 6'4" he is much more adept at playing a smaller man's role, yet the extra height gives him a big advantage in the air. His attitude has turned the corner and I would love to see him patrolling a wing this year.

I also expect big things from Sam Reid in the 2nd half of the year once he has fully recovered from his off-season surgery. He is exactly the type of player we need firing in September to beat the likes of St.Kilda & Geelong.

[Greystache]

I don't rate his instincts in the centre square. He just doesn't seem to be a natural centre square player. Throw him onto the ball by all means but I think he is far better value if given some more space.


I agree with you GVGjr, I don't think Griffen instinctively knows where the ball is going, and also don't think he's a clean enough one grab midfielder to be damaging in the centre square. Players like Cooney, Boyd, Cross etc are much better suited to clearance situations.

I think he's best placed on the wing or halfback where he has more time to gather the ball, or paddle it along the ground waiting for it to bounce up to him like we see so often. I don't know whether it's a core felxibility issue or something else, but for a fast and agile running player, Griffen seems to really struggle below his knees when trying to gather a loose ball.

[Go_Dogs]

I too hope for a big year from Ryan.

In respect to this slight positional change would we robbing Peter to pay Paul? His ability to break away from a clearance situation as evidenced by his game in the PF means he is an extremely valauable commodity in the centre square. I would not want to rob us of this unique ability by playing him in a fulltime 'outside' role.

At times he should be rotated into a position you describe, but primarily I see him as on-baller.

Agree Mantis. I think he'll certainly play his best football as a pure on-baller. He reads the ball very well inside, and has the ability to snag the ball and bolt unlike many others.

Given the depth of our rotations it's likely we'll see him play all over, and I for one actually wouldn't mind seeing him play a bit more forward of centre too, as well as in the back line and off a wing. His contested ball work and tackling all improved significantly once again in 2009, so no reason it won't step up again.


Josh Hill is another who I think could really go up another level.

[Go_Dogs]

Players like Cooney, Boyd, Cross etc are much better suited to clearance situations.

I don't know whether it's a core felxibility issue or something else, but for a fast and agile running player, Griffen seems to really struggle below his knees when trying to gather a loose ball.

Cross is often played off a wing because his clearance work in the centre square isn't very effective, so I'm not sure that will change much in 2010.

Really? I've seen Griff gather loose balls at speed and disappear like the flash. His hands aren't a huge asset like Hill's, but I certainly wouldn't consider it a weakness. (Perhaps my man-love is just blinding me!) :p

[Greystache]

Cross is often played off a wing because his clearance work in the centre square isn't very effective, so I'm not sure that will change much in 2010.

Really? I've seen Griff gather loose balls at speed and disappear like the flash. His hands aren't a huge asset like Hill's, but I certainly wouldn't consider it a weakness. (Perhaps my man-love is just blinding me!) :p

I don't think he's awful below his knees by any means, but in comparison to his other attributes it is a weakness. He does gather balls at speed, but normally when he has a bit of time and space where he can wait for it to run along in front and bounce up to him. I just think he's best suited to being an outside player in space.

[gohardorgohome]

I have a gut feel Easton Wood will play at last half a season in the Doggies.

[LostDoggy]

Andrejs Everitt - He has finally had a full pre-season and from reports is showing the benefits of this on the track. He is a fairly unique player in that even though he is 6'4" he is much more adept at playing a smaller man's role, yet the extra height gives him a big advantage in the air. His attitude has turned the corner and I would love to see him patrolling a wing this year.

I also expect big things from Sam Reid in the 2nd half of the year once he has fully recovered from his off-season surgery. He is exactly the type of player we need firing in September to beat the likes of St.Kilda & Geelong.

How about Everitt on e one wing and Boumann on the other. Both are run and carry type players with speed, good skills and added height! Would have a few clubs scratching thier heads. Could push back or forward! Thoughts?

[Mofra]

Andrejs Everitt - He has finally had a full pre-season and from reports is showing the benefits of this on the track. He is a fairly unique player in that even though he is 6'4" he is much more adept at playing a smaller man's role, yet the extra height gives him a big advantage in the air. His attitude has turned the corner and I would love to see him patrolling a wing this year.
This could be an important factor for us - already Malthouse is touting Fraser as a tall wingman, Cale Morton at Melbourne is a 193cm midfielder, we all know what Goodes can do when let off the leash, and draftees are getting bigger overall.

If we can develop a taller midfielder to go head to head with these bigger running guys, we wont be caught out in future seasons.

[The Underdog]

I don't rate his instincts in the centre square. He just doesn't seem to be a natural centre square player. Throw him onto the ball by all means but I think he is far better value if given some more space.

I hope he's been doing some work on running shots at goal as his running kicking at goal last year was awful. It's wierd because he's not a bad kick but he wormburned a heap of shots into the point or out of bounds from 50 out. He clearly choked up in those situations.

[Bulldog Revolution]

I too hope for a big year from Ryan.

In respect to this slight positional change would we robbing Peter to pay Paul? His ability to break away from a clearance situation as evidenced by his game in the PF means he is an extremely valauable commodity in the centre square. I would not want to rob us of this unique ability by playing him in a fulltime 'outside' role

At times he should be rotated into a position you describe, but primarily I see him as an on-baller.



I don't rate his instincts in the centre square. He just doesn't seem to be a natural centre square player. Throw him onto the ball by all means but I think he is far better value if given some more space.



I think he's best placed on the wing or halfback where he has more time to gather the ball, or paddle it along the ground waiting for it to bounce up to him like we see so often.


I thought a few of us would be hoping for the Griff

When he's going he is a super exciting player

Whatever his role was in the prelim in my eyes is his best position.

I saw it as a wingman, so I agree with Graystache, GVGjr -

And the thing I liked about it was he still got involved in clearances and stoppages which utilises his strengths there, but also gets to run and carry to create shots on goal.

If he could play 18 games like that prelim we might have another Brownlow medallist

I dont think he is not a follow the ball everywhere type on baller in the same way Cooney is

[Bulldog Revolution]

Andrejs Everitt - He has finally had a full pre-season and from reports is showing the benefits of this on the track. He is a fairly unique player in that even though he is 6'4" he is much more adept at playing a smaller man's role, yet the extra height gives him a big advantage in the air. His attitude has turned the corner and I would love to see him patrolling a wing this year.



It seems like a Wing is Everitts shot

It seems to me that the coaching staff feel he is not a defender

I'm looking forward to seeing Andrejs strut his stuff tomorrow

[LostDoggy]

It seems like a Wing is Everitts shot

It seems to me that the coaching staff feel he is not a defender



He has a major weakness as a defender in that he is not a body player and is easily out-positioned when the ball is in the air.

Taylor Walker (himself young and inexperienced) made a mess of him against the Crows.

But he has good leg speed and poise for a big man and the wing beckons.

[Dogs 24/7]

Shaun Higgins mainly because if he can stay clear of the injury set backs he could very well become an elite player in the competition.

We have great depth of players capable of being big time contributors as both midfielders and forwards and I'd love to see what Higgins could achieve if he can stay on the park this year.

[mjp]

Everyone knows there is no such position as 'WING' right?

[Bulldog Revolution]

Everyone knows there is no such position as 'WING' right?

OK, maybe not, but starts on wing at centre bounces and spends most of their time wide, but pushes forward and back -

So from the way I saw it I thought Griffen played Wing in the prelim final, and I guess Eagleton has largely done that throughout his career - ok Eagle probably doesn't push back into defence much

Would you just call those guys largely outside midfielders? Is that a role you think Everitt can thrive in?

[mjp]

They are just midfielders. They will be expected to go forward, back, to pretty much every stoppage (wherever it is) etc.

There are only really 4 or 5 positions left.

Deep defenders (just matched on opposition deep forwards. Normally two as the opposition normally play 2 deep forwards - Kozzy and Milne, Hawkins and Burns etc etc. We used Callan and Lake during the finals).
Deep forwards (we normally only play one of these - historically Minson or Hahn - most sides play 2).
Lead-up forward (pretty much every side plays 1 of these - we have used Murphy, Geelong use Mooney, Saints use Riewoldt etc etc. If we play Murphy and Hall side by side in this role and it is successful then it will be fascinating to see what happens in other sides).
Midfielders - 13 or so.
Ruck.

That is it.

Watch a game - every stoppage is pretty much a 13 on 13/14 on 14 type contest. No-one plays their spots...At some forward line stoppages, the attacking team (Geelong are the kings of this) have No-one - not a single player - goal side of the ball. I honestly believe the game has changed more in the last 5-6 years than it did in the previous 25. I had to laugh when I read the quotes from the St Kilda players from the 69 premiership side saying that the 2009 version would beat them by about 5 goals - that 1969 side would not even score. They would not a single point if they tried to use a 1970's game plan against a team today.

All of that said, Everitt and Griffen are good picks as 'improvers' - so is Higgins. Kicking is more valuable now than ever before - those guys can kick and therefore they have the chance to effect a massive impact on the competition.

[LostDoggy]

think Griffin is a wingman, fullstop.
Skills and evasive acceleration are really redundant in the slog of centre clearances, and a waste of his talents. This does not mean he is an outside player- am very suspicious of these facile categories.

[w3design]

God, winger, outside midfielder, generic midfielder, surely it is all just semantics! Some players are at their best in and under packs and amid the action [Cross, West etc], while others are more effective wider and with room to move [Eagleton, Griffin etc]. What does it matter what you call them. Wing is traditional Aussie rules terminology. Saints preserve us from American terms like wide receiver, deeefence etc. If some players fill the role of an outside receiving, running midfielder whose role is to accept the ball dug out by the Crosses and Boyds of this world, and distribute it forward, let us just continue to use our own games terminology to describe them [wingers], and simply appreciate them for what they do. Sure the game is changing in the way it is played, but that was always the case. Maybe the rate of that change is faster than it was in the past [then that is true of our entire society anyway], but a lot of that can simply be sheeted back to the games administration insisting on constantly interfering with how the game is ruled as much as by anything else.
As to how teams of previous eras would stand up playing against todays game plans, probably not very well. The great players would still be great, the good players would still be good, and the also rans would still be also rans and the coaches would simply adjust. If todays players by the reverse situation were required to play against teams of the past playing the game styles, rules and conditions endured by past players they would be the ones to struggle. How would the high posession, slick passing, drop punt style of play perform at Windy Hill on a cold wet day, with a howling gale blowing and 3 days rain lying on a ground with little or no drainage, or trying to dig themselves out of a bog heap at Collingwood in mud encrusted ankle boots? Not so flash I would not mind betting. How would they go when most marks they had to go for would be contested, frequently by themselves and half a dozen other players, with the balls rotations and rate of travel subject to the vagaries of drop kicks, torpedos, stab kicks, punt kicks, drop punts, not to mention mud encrusted miss kicks.
I am not suggesting 'old time' players were better. Simply that in other eras it was a very different game played under vastly different conditions.
But even as the game changes, let us preserve some of its traditions, even if it is only something as simple as using Aussie Rules terminology.

[mjp]

Aussie rules terminology like 'wing'? Give me a break - the same term is used in every invasion style game in the world.

You might mean 'any generic outside midfielder' when you say 'Wingman' - but I guarantee you that most people don't. Say 'wing' and images of Robbie Flower and Doug Hawkins come to mind...play one side of the ground, first option out of defence, thumping kick into the forward line - they think of this and equate that role with players like Everitt. The role doesn't exist.

As for your whole inside / outside thing - that doesn't exist either. I pointed out that the game is simply a series of rolling contests - any player who cant play 'both ways' (win their footy and also run and carry + hit their target) is not long for this world. Why do you think (sticking with the Saints) they preferred Lovett over Ball? And if you are blaming administration and rule changes for the differences in the game rather than the small armies of coaches and opposition analysts and whatever you know for the different way footy is played, then you are completely missing the point.

On the different era thing, I will make one other point - most marks wouldn't be contested in a new vs old game...the new guys wouldn't kick to a contest so it just would not happen this way. There is no 'kick it long' to Royce anymore...it would be 6 on 1 and he wouldn't get near it.

[w3design]

Aussie rules terminology like 'wing'? Give me a break - the same term is used in every invasion style game in the world.

You might mean 'any generic outside midfielder' when you say 'Wingman' - but I guarantee you that most people don't. Say 'wing' and images of Robbie Flower and Doug Hawkins come to mind...play one side of the ground, first option out of defence, thumping kick into the forward line - they think of this and equate that role with players like Everitt. The role doesn't exist.

As for your whole inside / outside thing - that doesn't exist either. I pointed out that the game is simply a series of rolling contests - any player who cant play 'both ways' (win their footy and also run and carry + hit their target) is not long for this world. Why do you think (sticking with the Saints) they preferred Lovett over Ball? And if you are blaming administration and rule changes for the differences in the game rather than the small armies of coaches and opposition analysts and whatever you know for the different way footy is played, then you are completely missing the point.

On the different era thing, I will make one other point - most marks wouldn't be contested in a new vs old game...the new guys wouldn't kick to a contest so it just would not happen this way. There is no 'kick it long' to Royce anymore...it would be 6 on 1 and he wouldn't get near it.

Ok MJP perhaps it might help if you went back and actually READ what I wrote.
Firstly, I never stated that the term wing/winger was an exclusively Aussie Rules term, merely that it was "traditional" terminology. Try going back over the history of the game, and see how far back you need to go to not find that term used. Simply because it is also used in some other codes [as are forward and back] as well changes absolutely nothing.
Next I think you are seriously underselling the intelligence and understanding of most football fans by suggesting their only concept of winger/running outside mid fielder is limited to some one out of the 1970's. And if you don't think that Eagleton and Gilbee just to name two, do not receive the ball then send long kicks into the forward line, then you must go to different games from the rest of us.
To your St Kilda reference, it is pretty obvious, even without my discussions with Saints insiders, that there was a significant personality clash between Ball and his coach, and their [StK's] need for some leg speed would be obvious even to Blind Freddy.
I thought I had mentioned that the coaches create the changes in the game. However in my opinion and expirience 9 out of 10 coaches are reactive, rather than pro active. Each season most teams try to imitate the reigning premiers, react to others inovations, or react to rule/interpretation changes.
Had you actually read what I said about past verses current, at no point did I suggest that past players were better than modern players, merely that were either to play the style of football operating in the others eras and conditions, both would struggle, until they learned to adjust to those conditions. And that the good players of either era would still be the good players.
The one final point I can not walk away from though. If you are [ and I am not sure one way or the other] are suggesting that A. Everitt is a comparable talent to Hawkins or Flower, then God help you.

[GetDimmaBack]

Brennan Stack is flying under the radar at the moment, but I feel that he's going to be a bit stronger and more mature this year. Could be the "smokey" for the improver...

Hopefully he's under the radar of other clubs, too.

[mjp]

Ok MJP perhaps it might help if you went back and actually READ what I wrote.


I read it.

I wrote a long response that I have now deleted. It is going to be a long year on this site with all the 'did you read it', 'my inside knowledge', 'are you suggesting' posturing going on these days...and it is only February.

[Topdog]

Ok MJP perhaps it might help if you went back and actually READ what I wrote.


I read the first 2 lines and then stopped when I saw a bunch of text. I would have read it if you put some spacing between the paragraphs.

[Dazza]

Tldr.

[hujsh]

I read the first 2 lines and then stopped when I saw a bunch of text. I would have read it if you put some spacing between the paragraphs.

Same here. My eyes glazed over as soon as I saw that chunk of text

[The Coon Dog]

Tldr.

Excuse my ignorance, but what does Tldr mean? :confused:

[comrade]

Excuse my ignorance, but what does Tldr mean? :confused:

Can only guess but I'm thinking 'too long, didn't read'?

[Dazza]

Bingo. The subject matter also played a part in me not reading it haha.

[The Coon Dog]

Bingo. The subject matter also played a part in me not reading it haha.

OK, thanks. Just wasn't sure.

[alwaysadog]

Ok MJP perhaps it might help if you went back and actually READ what I wrote.

I actually read it twice and the first time I couldn't decide if it was serious or the second time if it was an attempt to replicate a stream of consciousness piece ala James Joyce what with St Pat's day in the offing, and praying that The Dubliners wasn't next on your list. Still Ulysses would be worse it would take a whole season to work our way through it.

[LostDoggy]

I actually read it twice and the first time I couldn't decide if it was serious or the second time if it was an attempt to replicate a stream of consciousness piece ala James Joyce what with St Pat's day in the offing, and praying that The Dubliners wasn't next on your list. Still Ulysses would be worse it would take a whole season to work our way through it.

Ulysses isn't worse than paulv.

I have a question for mjp -- what do you think were the main factors in the change over the last 5 years? When I was watching footy back in the 80s and 90s I would go on and on to all and sundry about keeping possession, being (then) a soccer player and coach and all (and we all know how 'boring' and possession based that game can be -- although I don't know how anyone can watch the way Barcelona are playing now and call it boring). The 'mark' rule in AFL seemed ideal for a possession based game, even more so than soccer.

Then one day in 2003 I watched the first game of the season between then defending champions Brisbane Lions and Paul Roos's Sydney Swans in his first game of his first full season as senior coach. Everyone expected a huge thumping in favour of the Lions, but from the first bounce it became clear that we were watching football evolution right before our eyes, as the Swans just played keepings off for three and a half quarters. The Lions won but only by a couple of goals, and suddenly, after threatening to do so for the best part of a decade, footy strategy seemed to have finally caught up to 21st century invasion sport strategy in all its cerebral glory.

I know Sockeye and other traditionalists hate the possession game (in general) but I have to confess that I had movement in the lower regions when in that game I watched Sydney effect a chain of passes from one forward pocket back to the wing, back to the back pocket, to the full back and then out to the other side again before ending up in the opposite forward pocket for a shot at goal without a Lion getting close to the ball. Of course the game has since evolved again and defensive and offensive structures have matured to cope, but that was a fun night.

[Hotdog60]

All I used to say when watching Sydney was "For god sake pick up a player" or "Man up!!!"

Very frustrating to watch.:)

[mjp]

What do you think were the main factors in the change over the last 5 years?

As you said, Sydney played a part in it - because they were able to win games with a list of players considered to be 'inferior' by the footy media. Time has shown that view to be a bit simplistic though, and if you looked at the list of names in the Sydney GF side from 2005 now (with the benefit of hindsight) you would say 'pretty talented group'.

I do think 2005 was a bit of a watershed though - the end of the Brisbane 'kick it long to Lynch' game plan as the success blueprint.

The whole change movement started before that though with the advent of flooding, the follow-on realisation that (perhaps) waiting for the ball to get into the opposition forward line before throwing the numbers back was too late which led to the forward pressure initiatives ==> midfield zones ==> Hawthorn extending that in 2008 ==> handball based attack from Geelong (2009) ==> ????. Throw the whole Saints 'slow 'em down' mantra from 2008/9 in there as well...

What caused this? The realisation by some clubs that there was a salary cap for players which limited their competitive advantage so they had better find another way to win. Investing in IT, coaches, off-field support. The evolution of stats from kicks/marks ==> loose ball gets etc ==> now where some clubs are categorising types of kicks and locations on the field etc to create a whole new mode of talking about the game and assessing player and team performance.

Is it like soccer? Not really.

1/.Now that Matthew Lloyd has retired, the ability to effectively stage for free-kicks is not considered a desirable skill.
2/.There is a real danger of physical injury and there is real, continuous physical contact (and high speed collisions). Say whatever you like, there is a sense of danger - 360 degree danger - involved in playing Australian footy that doesn't exist in too many other sports (oddly enough given comments in this thread playing American football is one of them).
3/.Your comment about 'marks' supporting a possession game is true....equally, they cause the game to slow down which enables the opposition to get back in numbers which makes scoring less likely...and this is the great conundrum of possession footy - what allows you to relieve the pressure makes it harder to score...which in turn increases pressure. Teams that are brave enough to play on and run at the and have the skills to execute such a strategy are the ones who will be successful. Here's hoping it is us.