Liam Jones in 2011 - realistic expectations?

[Bulldog Revolution]

OK Liam Jones is now heading into his third year on the list, but really its only his second given his part time availability due to Year 12 studies and injury rehab in his first year.

He was very impressive at senior VFL level last year and was serviceable at AFL level playing 5 games.

Physically he has continued to develop, and whilst his decision making and disposal need to improve, he is a determined player, leads well, pretty good hands, works hard at defensive pressure etc.

I think most would agree that he looks an AFL player in the making.

What should be the expectations of Jones heading into 2011?

[mjp]

Somewhere between 8 (low) and 15 (high) games.

Average somewhere around 10-14 possessions/3 marks per game. Somewhere around the 1/1.5 goals per game mark would be nice.

Will depend on injuries and how the forward line structures up...with the changed sub rule we can't afford to take in an extra tall - Jones might actually end up being squeezed out because of this with Roughead (or Minson for those who think that way) playing as a backup ruckman/extra tall forward in order to allow us additional rotations...

If Grant nails down the high role and Hall plays deep, the new rule might mean it is just a bit tougher for Jones who is almost exclusively a deep forward at this stage (though I accept he can get through brief stints up the ground).

[divvydan]

I think the expectations you list are about right mjp. In training the forward line structure has been Hall, Grant and Jones as the main players.

You're right that a resting ruckman might make the fwd line too tall but with Murphy seemingly becoming a permanent defender, it's possible he could still play even with the resting ruckman but for that to happen, Grant would have to play essentially as a small/med fwd and Jones would have to play quite a high role.

The amount of pressure/tackles that Grant and Jones can apply will be a key factor in how many games Jones gets.

[Greystache]

I think you're about the mark MJP, although perhaps on the conservative side. The sub rule creates an unkown, but depending on how Roughead goes playing forward I see Jones playing 12-18 games this year. He has all the tools be a terrific AFL player, and IMO I think it's between him and Roughy to see who will be our most improved player this year. I think they both have massive potential.

[Bulldog Joe]

I see Jones as playing CHF as I believe we need his height or we are in danger of being too small. If he has maintained his mobility as he builds strength he is an excellent option. I also see his main competition coming from Cordy. Grant is too lightly framed to even contest in any sort of pack mark situation and needs to be on the lead, or feeding off the pack. He also needs to be the one applying pressure defensively. Jones is also capable of that defensive pressure.

I also believe we need to play at least Roughead or Minson as well.

We do have some quality tall players developing and realistically need to utilise them as a strength and maybe a point of difference.

[GVGjr]

10 to 12 games and playing a few different positions including the occasional run in the back half. He's an exciting prospect but we can't expect too much from him at the moment.

[Mofra]

Will depend on injuries and how the forward line structures up...with the changed sub rule we can't afford to take in an extra tall - Jones might actually end up being squeezed out because of this with Roughead (or Minson for those who think that way) playing as a backup ruckman/extra tall forward in order to allow us additional rotations...

If Grant nails down the high role and Hall plays deep, the new rule might mean it is just a bit tougher for Jones who is almost exclusively a deep forward at this stage (though I accept he can get through brief stints up the ground).
Is the top-heavy worry over defensive pressure/pace?
If so, I would think Jones is a marked improvement over Hahn/Johnno/Aker when they were playing forward - he covers the ground well and his defensive pressure & willingness to chase are fantatsic. He does the hard things, it's the easy things he needs to work on.

[Bulldog Revolution]

If Grant nails down the high role and Hall plays deep, the new rule might mean it is just a bit tougher for Jones who is almost exclusively a deep forward at this stage (though I accept he can get through brief stints up the ground).

Would you play Jones in Halls role pre-season?

The new rule potentially makes a future Cordy/Roughead combination very dangerous - but they both still have a lot of improving to do, and AFL rule changes sometimes dont last that long



the occasional run in the back half


Is this something you would do at VFL or AFL level?




We do have some quality tall players developing and realistically need to utilise them as a strength and maybe a point of difference.


I'm a bit unsure how many bigs you are suggesting we will play B-Joe?

Hudson, Hall, Williams and Lake, Grant - appear certain selections when fit

AND then what one of Minson and Roughead?

ANd one of Jones, Cordy?

[LostDoggy]

I actually don't see Grant as a tall, his style of play is different from that of many tall players.

[GVGjr]

Is this something you would do at VFL or AFL level?



Right through the pre-season cup and any other games before the season. I think we are light on for tall defenders and it won't hurt him to add another string to his bow. If he plays in the VFL it should be as a forward with the occasional run as a defender.

[Bulldog Joe]

I'm a bit unsure how many bigs you are suggesting we will play B-Joe?

Hudson, Hall, Williams and Lake, Grant - appear certain selections when fit

AND then what one of Minson and Roughead?

ANd one of Jones, Cordy?

I also don't see Grant as a tall. He is more a forward like Murphy than anything else and lacks bulk.

I see we need one at CHF and my choice is Jones. Then we need the additional ruckman and that is Minson/Roughead with my preference to Will. Cordy can hopefully challenge for a position

I also see some rotations possible game by game to give Hudson and Hall time off to maximise the chances to have players fit for the business end of the season.

[Cyberdoggie]

I thought Liam might of got a few extra games last year because his endeavour and defensive pressure was very good. He was trying hard but didn't quite take advantage of the few chances he had with the ball.

Will he advance this year? he looks very similar shape wise, but so does Grant.
I think it will come down to a confidence thing. If he's finds his mojo like Grant did in the VFL game against Collingwood round 1 last year, then i'd say 8-15 games is likely.

[Dazza]

I'd like to see him in the side round 1 and from there see how he goes. The kid has got pace and the determination to chase and harass when he doesn't have the ball. Something we lacked last year badly.

Realistically I'm not sure if he could play all 22 games but I'm hoping he plays in the majority of them throughout the year.

[Ghost Dog]

There have been players in the past who debuted young and made a huge impact. Chris Grant, Tim Watson. Who knows. Could be a surprise weapon in a key game.
Will give defenders all manner of grief. ( or the heeby jeebies as one poster hilariously commented )

[Go_Dogs]

I think 10 games would be a good result for Jones, anything more a bonus, although could be one to have a breakout year.

I really like the idea of trying him in the back half too, because we're short on for tall defenders, and have guys like Panos and now Hill coming through who we probably see as deep forward prospects. Jones could become a very good option at CHB with his speed, mobility and defensive mindset.

Needs to continue working on his fitness, and improving his mass/strength. Going to be an interesting player to watch this year.

[Mofra]

I actually don't see Grant as a tall, his style of play is different from that of many tall players.
Agree, he was our best crumber for much of 2010, has pure pace and does work defensively so he certainly isn't one that would make us top-heavy.

[Go_Dogs]

Agree, he was our best crumber for much of 2010, has pure pace and does work defensively so he certainly isn't one that would make us top-heavy.

Can't disagree with that assessment, but I think Grant will still be a "key position player", similar to Murph and Johnno who both essentially played as key forwards even though they were short of stature.

At the end of the day, it's not the size of the player, but the role they'll be asked to play as to whether or not they'll all be able to fit into our structure. I think Grant may be asked to play that lead up role, which may allow us to play 2 taller blokes deeper, and a crumber. I guess the question then becomes how much diversity to we want up forward - do we go with a Hall/Jones/DJ combo, or something more like Hall/J Hill/DJ or even Skinner in place of Hill if he can get himself right and play as that 3rd forward?

Plenty of options available, finding the best mix to give us goal scoring targets, crumbing options, speed and defensive pressure etc will be crucial.

[Mofra]

At the end of the day, it's not the size of the player, but the role they'll be asked to play as to whether or not they'll all be able to fit into our structure. I think Grant may be asked to play that lead up role, which may allow us to play 2 taller blokes deeper, and a crumber. I guess the question then becomes how much diversity to we want up forward - do we go with a Hall/Jones/DJ combo, or something more like Hall/J Hill/DJ or even Skinner in place of Hill if he can get himself right and play as that 3rd forward?
Even if he does play as a KPP this year or later, I still don't believe he is one of the players that would make us too "top heavy" - arguably, I would put Liam Jones in that category either. They are both quick & apply defensive pressure. Hahn makes us more top heavy than either of those two.

[Mantis]

I see him as becoming a permanent member of our team, but in my way of thinking it could come down to how we go about using the 2nd ruck spot.

If we play 2 rucks it will become a juggling act to if we can fit all of Jones, Hudson, Hall and one of Minson or Roughead into the same team. With just 3 interchange players we probably won't be able to have more than 1 of these players on the bench at any one time which will make it hard.

As others have pointed out if we can give Jones some time in defence thru the pre-season his position might become more assured because if he shows promise he can be used in defence for short periods when Williams & Lake are resting.

As others have mentioned his fitness needs to improve (which it is), as does his field kicking, but his raw tools give us a great platform to build a very good player from. Really like his courage in the air and his work ethic (2nd efforts, chasing, etc..)

[mjp]

I see him as becoming a permanent member of our team, but in my way of thinking it could come down to how we go about using the 2nd ruck spot.

If we play 2 rucks it will become a juggling act to if we can fit all of Jones, Hudson, Hall and one of Minson or Roughead into the same team. With just 3 interchange players we probably won't be able to have more than 1 of these players on the bench at any one time which will make it hard.



That was my point before - we wont risk going in with one ruckman, therefore for a lot of the time you will have Hall plus Roughead or Minson up forward. Plus Grant. I don't see how we could play Hall, Jones and Roughead/Minson in the same forward line and be effective.

Given that, one has to miss out. It wont be Hall. And we have to play two ruckman, so it wont be Roughead/Minson.

[Mantis]

That was my point before - we wont risk going in with one ruckman, therefore for a lot of the time you will have Hall plus Roughead or Minson up forward. Plus Grant. I don't see how we could play Hall, Jones and Roughead/Minson in the same forward line and be effective.

Given that, one has to miss out. It wont be Hall. And we have to play two ruckman, so it wont be Roughead/Minson.

Yep.... I probably should have just quoted your OP rather than writing it out again.

I guess it may also come down to game time and how we manage it. If Hall & Hudson play around 70% game time we could probably use both Jones and a 2nd ruck, but if this game time increases to around 80% it probably squeezes one out. It will be interesting to see how we use the 'oldies' this year as well as getting sufficient games into our developing KPP's.

With the team also having quite a few mids able to 'rest' up forward or down back (not that you really rest too much in these regions in the modern game), we do have some extra flexibility which may allow us to play the extra tall.

[LostDoggy]

We surely haven't gone after pace in our recruiting if we intend to load up on slower talls. I'm wondering whether one ruck will do the job; the other has to play both forward and in the ruck, but have some mobility. That leaves out Minson for mine and brings in the younger brigade like Roughhead or Jones for blocks of games.

[soupman]

I don't see Grant as a KPP in e traditional sense. He'll be more of the Brad Johnson type who is very difficult to match up on.

I don't want him to bulk up because his game style isn't about strength, but more utilizes his strengths which are his pace, agility and clean hands at both ground and in the air.

[Dazza]

We surely haven't gone after pace in our recruiting if we intend to load up on slower talls. I'm wondering whether one ruck will do the job; the other has to play both forward and in the ruck, but have some mobility. That leaves out Minson for mine and brings in the younger brigade like Roughhead or Jones for blocks of games.


Jones isn't slow though. But I doubt he could play in the ruck. Only possibility of playing one ruck in a game is probably having Williams as the backup ruckman while someone like Jones covers his spot which might be too much to ask from an inexperienced player.

This is why Everitt would have been handy to keep on the list.

[Mofra]

Jones isn't slow though. But I doubt he could play in the ruck. Only possibility of playing one ruck in a game is probably having Williams as the backup ruckman while someone like Jones covers his spot which might be too much to ask from an inexperienced player.

This is why Everitt would have been handy to keep on the list.
Roughy is no slouch forward - I rate Roughead as a better forward and a ruckman than Everitt, and would have him in the team well before lil' Spidey.
I actually see Roughead as being the major threat to Jones getting senior games.

[mjp]

This is why Everitt would have been handy to keep on the list.

As a ruck backup?

Well, good news we traded him then!

[Sedat]

As a ruck backup?
I can't recall a more discussed and feted one-off performance than Everitt's ruck back-up effort in Round 22 2009. That match was played under almost no pressure, with both teams guaranteed a top 4 berth, and wanting to save their legs for the finals and not go flat-out for a Sunday twilight match. Not before or since did Everitt have any impact in that specific role, yet it has been mythically talked about in hushed tones since then - even by opposition supporters (especially Collingwood ones, some of whom thought he was the second coming of Len Thompson).

[LostDoggy]

Roughy is no slouch forward - I rate Roughead as a better forward and a ruckman than Everitt, and would have him in the team well before lil' Spidey.
I actually see Roughead as being the major threat to Jones getting senior games.

Hi Guys. Just discovered WOOF. What a breath of fresh air! Agre re: Roughy but based on the above and the new bench size wouldn't the ideal scenario be a Cordy/Huddo combo? Cordy seems to be the most naturally talented forward of our ruck division IMO. A forward line including Grant, Hall and a firing Cordy would excite me greatly:D:D:D Anyone know how close the club feels he is getting a debut?

[Before I Die]

I can't recall a more discussed and feted one-off performance than Everitt's ruck back-up effort in Round 22 2009. That match was played under almost no pressure, with both teams guaranteed a top 4 berth, and wanting to save their legs for the finals and not go flat-out for a Sunday twilight match. Not before or since did Everitt have any impact in that specific role, yet it has been mythically talked about in hushed tones since then - even by opposition supporters (especially Collingwood ones, some of whom thought he was the second coming of Len Thompson).

Wayde Skipper dominated more AFL games (both as a ruckman and as a CHF) than Everitt did from a not too dis-similar number of appearances. He also has (from memory, not research) a matching Western Bulldogs Best First Year Player Award in his cupboard.

[Dazza]

As a ruck backup?

Well, good news we traded him then!

Not only a ruck backup. But could go forward and back without much problem. Jack of all spades master of none type. Would have made a good sub.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Roughy is no slouch forward - I rate Roughead as a better forward and a ruckman than Everitt, and would have him in the team well before lil' Spidey.
I actually see Roughead as being the major threat to Jones getting senior games.

This.

I can't see how we can play Roughead and Jones in the same side, unfortunately.

[Topdog]

Not only a ruck backup. But could go forward and back without much problem. Jack of all spades master of none type. Would have made a good sub.

Seriously I saw him go back without much problems once in his career and that was against a rookie last season.

[LostDoggy]

Seriously I saw him go back without much problems once in his career and that was against a rookie last season.

And the year before against Taylor Walker and got absolutely towelled

[Mantis]

I can't see how we can play Roughead and Jones in the same side, unfortunately.

I can. If we play all of Hall, Jones, Hudson & Minson/ Roughead it just means that we will have one of these on the bench at all times which I don't think limits our rotations.

What I think we will see this year is that our mids will need to be rotated in & out of the side a little more often which probably suits us as we have solid depth in this region.

[Sedat]

Jack of all spades master of none type.
Everitt reminds me of those all-rounders selected in cricket but would not command a place for either discipline. He's certainly no key backman and he's no key forward either, which leaves ruck back-up, and we have more than enough cover in this area.

Back on the Jones boy, I can genuinely see a Jarrad Grant-esque season for him in 2011. Like Grant, he has a hunger and thirst for defensive pressure that does not come naturally to tall forwards, but is worth its weight in gold in the modern game. Getting his tank up to the required AFL standard is the key for him, and by all accounts he is having an excellent pre-season. Depending on the opposition, he should get more than his fair share of opportunities this season. Watching Jones develop in comparison to Jack Watts will be interesting - both bottom age in their draft year and both KP forwards.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I can. If we play all of Hall, Jones, Hudson & Minson/ Roughead it just means that we will have one of these on the bench at all times which I don't think limits our rotations.

What I think we will see this year is that our mids will need to be rotated in & out of the side a little more often which probably suits us as we have solid depth in this region.

It'll be interesting to see how all sides juggle it, but with the sub rule coming in, you're already 1 rotation down for a large proportion of the match. That's assuming the sub isn't used until the second half/last quarter.

Given that, I think it'll only be a bigger push to play more midfielders - who are flexible. Players like Sherman will thrive, players like Reid probably not so much.

I can definitely see one of Roughead/Jones/Minson being used as a sub regularly, but I think we'd be at a disadvantage if we played them all at the same time.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Back on the Jones boy, I can genuinely see a Jarrad Grant-esque season for him in 2011. Like Grant, he has a hunger and thirst for defensive pressure that does not come naturally to tall forwards, but is worth its weight in gold in the modern game. Getting his tank up to the required AFL standard is the key for him, and by all accounts he is having an excellent pre-season. Depending on the opposition, he should get more than his fair share of opportunities this season. Watching Jones develop in comparison to Jack Watts will be interesting - both bottom age in their draft year and both KP forwards.

Good point Sedat.

At this very, very early stage - Jones is holding up well. He's quicker than Watts and perhaps a better mark at this stage, but Watts' kicking is superior.

Definitely a comparison to keep an eye on.

[Go_Dogs]

I can. If we play all of Hall, Jones, Hudson & Minson/ Roughead it just means that we will have one of these on the bench at all times which I don't think limits our rotations.

Problem being, we are likely to only play 3 forwards 'deep', and having 2 or 3 of them as big fellas probably isn't the way to go. I can see the benefits of playing 2 tall guys deep at times, but generally I think we should look to have one taller player deep, one medium sized marking target and one smaller player.

Jones may be able to get over the line given he has some defensive work ethic, which is going to be a very important part of the role of both the medium sized and smaller sized forward (Hopefully Josh Hill can really improve in this area). I guess Jones can also interchange with Grant further up the field, but I'd question his fitness to play that role in a sustainable fashion over the course of the season.

[Sedat]

At this very, very early stage - Jones is holding up well. He's quicker than Watts and perhaps a better mark at this stage, but Watts' kicking is superior.
Watts' field kicking for a big man has the potential to rival Chris Grant's in the future - massive call as Granty was the best field kick I've ever seen for a KP forward but Watts is a beautiful distributor of the ball by foot. This is the one area (as well as decision making by foot) I'd like to see marked improvement from Jones on - it was only an isolated match but his field kicking against Essendon in Round 22 bordered on awful. As others have stated the other tools in his repertoire are exceptional, so if he can bring this area up to scratch we will have a serious player on our hands.

[mjp]

Not only a ruck backup. But could go forward and back without much problem. Jack of all spades master of none type. Would have made a good sub.

We must be talking about a different bloke.

The one I have been watching was a shining light in his rookie year when the team fell apart. Since that time, he has delivered nothing but poor efforts and disappointment.

[stefoid]

Problem being, we are likely to only play 3 forwards 'deep', and having 2 or 3 of them as big fellas probably isn't the way to go. I can see the benefits of playing 2 tall guys deep at times, but generally I think we should look to have one taller player deep, one medium sized marking target and one smaller player.

Jones may be able to get over the line given he has some defensive work ethic, which is going to be a very important part of the role of both the medium sized and smaller sized forward (Hopefully Josh Hill can really improve in this area). I guess Jones can also interchange with Grant further up the field, but I'd question his fitness to play that role in a sustainable fashion over the course of the season.

I see jones as a CHF in the riewolt style -- cover a lot of ground at a good clip and mark a lot of ball. I know everybody says Grant should be a flanker, and whilst Hall is with us, that will be the case. But I think ultimately Grant should be leading out of the goal square. That doesnt make him a deep target, although the guy can take a big grab. But his speed and sticky hands suits him to lightning leads and if ignored, he can turn around and use his ground level reactions if the ball hits the deck.

Long term deep target, I like the resting ruckman - i.e. roughhead or cordy depending on who is rucking.

[LostDoggy]

I think you guys might be looking at the wrong end of the ground with Jones for the future.

[Bulldog Joe]

I can definitely see one of Roughead/Jones/Minson being used as a sub regularly, but I think we'd be at a disadvantage if we played them all at the same time.

I really don't see the value in a big man as the sub.

The sub actually needs to be someone who can come on when the pace of the game is slowed and add something. Not the type of impact you would expect from a lumbering big man.

This is more likely from a player with dash who could give the spark to change a game. Someone like Josh Hill would be the most likely on the Bulldog list.

[dog town]

Good point Sedat.

At this very, very early stage - Jones is holding up well. He's quicker than Watts and perhaps a better mark at this stage, but Watts' kicking is superior.

Definitely a comparison to keep an eye on. I also think it is going to be an interesting comparison to follow but the only area I think Jones has him in at the moment is defensive pressure. Watts is a far superior athlete in terms of pace and agility. His draft camp results were amazing for a big bloke. I see Watts as one of the more harshly judged early draft picks in memory. If Jones keeps pace with him from this point on we will have a hell of a player.

In terms of whether we can fit Hall, Grant, Jones and occasionally a resting ruckmen in our front half all at once I think it depends on a couple of other factors.

Collingwood played Brown, Dawes and Cloke deep at times but the style they were playing allowed them to get away with it. We didnt really press hard the way Collingwood did last season but I think whatever set up we choose to employ when we dont have the ball impacts who we can have playing forward at any one time.

It probably also depends on how some of the individual players are performing. If Grant can replicate the pressure he applied in a couple of games this season and do it consistently then it changes things dramatically because he may stand at over 190 but he moves better and with more agility than most of the guys that are smaller than him. He has that closing speed that could see him become one of our most important defensive weapons. I think the form and fitness of Gia and Higgins will also have an impact. If they are not doing enough defensively they either need to be having a large scoreboard impact or we may have to find something else for them to do. It just puts to many restrictions on us in terms of the other options we can use. Higgins fitness didnt allow him to move with any freedom last season and Gia couldn't apply enough defensive pressure. To Gia's credit he was able to shut out other players at times to make up for this.

It is going to be very interesting to see how we approach all of this given pressuring the opposition was probably our main stumbling block last season.

[Topdog]

I think you guys might be looking at the wrong end of the ground with Jones for the future.

Hope not would be an absolute waste of his talents to send him back for good.

[LostDoggy]

In terms of whether we can fit Hall, Grant, Jones and occasionally a resting ruckmen in our front half all at once I think it depends on a couple of other factors.
.

Whenever we discuss this possibility we tend to look at it this as being a central plank of he game plan. I don't think this is realistic.

But, to use this as an option to upset the opposition by finding themselves either too short or too tall when we pull a couple back to the bench gives us some real flexibility.

it is a ploy we can use as the occasion fits and for as long as we deem it worthwhile. I can see opposition coaches getting a headache trying to keep up with it.

[alwaysadog]

Whenever we discuss this possibility we tend to look at it this as being a central plank of he game plan. I don't think this is realistic.

But, to use this as an option to upset the opposition by finding themselves either too short or too tall when we pull a couple back to the bench gives us some real flexibility.

it is a ploy we can use as the occasion fits and for as long as we deem it worthwhile. I can see opposition coaches getting a headache trying to keep up with it.

There are a lot of positives to ponder in what you suggest EJ, certainly we never structure up in a consistent way. Rocket's mantra of never being predictable fits your suggestion.

In the immediate past we have more often witnessed us alternating with a small structure and even playing Cooney at FF, just to try and confuse the opposition by creating match up problems. To the best of my recollection we have never been able, in recent times at least, to exploit the opposite configuration.

While it sounds an interesting concept to explore, and even better to be contemplating the possibility, the 3+1 interchange bench may not allow it to become a possibliity.

The issue for me is the impact the tall forward structure would have in 2011 at least, when rotations are going to be limited (for implausible reasons) and carrying so much tall timber might dramatically limit the midfield rotations.

[Mantis]

The issue for me is the impact the tall forward structure would have in 2011 at least, when rotations are going to be limited (for implausible reasons) and carrying so much tall timber might dramatically limit the midfield rotations.

But with our team having so many mid sized players that can take there turn through the middle we might find that we see a return to the 'old days' when players rotate positions on the ground rather than heading to the bench. ie Gia & Cooney change between FP and on-ball, etc... If we go down this path, which I hope we do, it will allow us to play a taller team which I believe will increase our chances of improving as a team.

[GVGjr]

But with our team having so many mid sized players that can take there turn through the middle we might find that we see a return to the 'old days' when players rotate positions on the ground rather than heading to the bench. ie Gia & Cooney change between FP and on-ball, etc... If we go down this path, which I hope we do, it will allow us to play a taller team which I believe will increase our chances of improving as a team.

If this is the right approach, and I think it has some merit, we could have used it more frequently last season regardless of the IC rules.
I think the problem for us going taller is that it limits our scoring ability. We all acknowledge that Hall was invaluable last season but despite his goal kicking prowess we kicked less goals than the previous season. Was this because we were too tall, or because we had too many passengers or because of the loss of Johnson and Akermanis (insert a number of other possible reasons) I'm not really sure but normally what works for us is a smaller forward set-up.

I've never seen the value in someone kicking a goal then immediately sprinting to the bench for a couple of minutes only to again return but how we manage this will be critical to our successes in 2011.

For Jones, I do think it will be a struggle for him to have Hall, Grant, a resting ruckman and possibly Murphy in the forward line and still get enough playing time. It's also one of the reasons why I think Jones could be given a shot as a key defender during the NAB cup.

It's would be very interesting to know how Eade sees the side looking for round one and how Jones is likely to be used.

[alwaysadog]

But with our team having so many mid sized players that can take there turn through the middle we might find that we see a return to the 'old days' when players rotate positions on the ground rather than heading to the bench. ie Gia & Cooney change between FP and on-ball, etc... If we go down this path, which I hope we do, it will allow us to play a taller team which I believe will increase our chances of improving as a team.

It's certainly a point for consideration Mantis, and it's a nice position to be in because baring injuries we have an unprecedented flexibility to contemplate, no doubt our physical conditioning people who know a lot more about rest and recovery are working on it.

While I appreciate your pov I wonder if players are out of the game as much these days as they used to be when positions were much less fluid. It's not uncommon to see 30+ of the players involved even when the ball is at one end of the ground.

Maybe it means that fewer players will be invited to play in bursts ie go flat out for a period knowing they will be rested or maybe the conditioning will have to change.

[Mofra]

For Jones, I do think it will be a struggle for him to have Hall, Grant, a resting ruckman and possibly Murphy in the forward line and still get enough playing time. It's also one of the reasons why I think Jones could be given a shot as a key defender during the NAB cup.
I'm not sure Grant would come into considerations in making us too top heavy - his pace is a massive weapon and if he was exactly the same player at 188cm it wouldn't effect the structure at all. I also expect Murphy to play as a full time backman this year, as we now finally have enough leading & marking power in the front half to afford this luxury (and Shaggy/Gilbee's slowdown mean we need to compensate for the rebound somehow).

The rub is if Hall, Jones and a resting ruckman will all play in the forward half at the same time - that we wont know until the season proper starts.

[Go_Dogs]

It's would be very interesting to know how Eade sees the side looking for round one and how Jones is likely to be used.

I've been thinking about this quite a bit, and for mine there are still about 5 positions up for grabs for Rd 1. Something like:

Morris, Lake, Wood
Gilbee, Williams, Murphy
Picken, Boyd, Ward
Higgins, Grant, ______
____, Hall, _______
Hudson, Griffen, Cooney
Cross, Gia, ______
________


One spot needs to be filled be someone who can take some of the ruck duties.
One spot needs to be filled by a small, crumbing forward - still not sure we have this player on our list, but someone is going to need to do it, and do the defensive job too. Speed is crucial. (Stack, DJ?)
I would like to see a medium sized marking target in the forward line too, but one who can also do the defensive role and even rotate further up the field too if need be. Hill is one who springs to mind but needs to have improved intensity and defensive efforts, and get his fitness up so he can run further up field.
I'd like to squeeze Addison in too, because I liked how he finished the year and adds some versatility in that he could play back, midfield or forwards (which I'd like trialled more too).

Whether Jones can fit in, I guess will depend on injuries etc, however if he could add the key defensive string to his bow, it certainly gives him a better chance of getting more game time.

My thoughts are with Cross and Gia on the bench that a Cooney, Griff, Boyd, Ward and Picken centre square is a more dangerous starting position. Picken and Ward will throw themselves in like mad men, Boyd can snaffle a clearance or create space, and Griffen and Cooney can do their thing.


Anyway, now that I've derailed the Jones thread...I'll move on. ;)

[GVGjr]

I'm not sure Grant would come into considerations in making us too top heavy - his pace is a massive weapon and if he was exactly the same player at 188cm it wouldn't effect the structure at all. I also expect Murphy to play as a full time backman this year, as we now finally have enough leading & marking power in the front half to afford this luxury (and Shaggy/Gilbee's slowdown mean we need to compensate for the rebound somehow).

The rub is if Hall, Jones and a resting ruckman will all play in the forward half at the same time - that we wont know until the season proper starts.

I understand that Grant isn't a true KPP and I have him more as a Bob Murphy type who provides some match-up issues for the opposition but where I'm coming from is even allowing for Grants pace he isn't a genuine crumber and it does take another mid/tall position out of the equation. If we are intending to use Minson or Roughead in the forward line for decent periods then it becomes a challenge for Jones to get a lot of minutes.

My feel is that we shouldn't play the rucks in the forward line which would open up a position for Jones.

[Ghost Dog]

I understand that Grant isn't a true KPP and I have him more as a Bob Murphy type who provides some match-up issues for the opposition but where I'm coming from is even allowing for Grants pace he isn't a genuine crumber and it does take another mid/tall position out of the equation. If we are intending to use Minson or Roughead in the forward line for decent periods then it becomes a challenge for Jones to get a lot of minutes.

My feel is that we shouldn't play the rucks in the forward line which would open up a position for Jones.

So who are the crumbers in our current list? Vezpremi, Djerukka? Hooper, any others?

would be gutted if Grant didn't get an endorsment of serious playing time in 2011 on the back of his effort last year. his ability to chase down and pressure inside 50 is a huge bonus that crumbers in our current list ( Vezpremi , Hoops for example ) will have a hard time matching.

[GVGjr]

would be gutted if Grant didn't get an endorsment of serious playing time in 2011 on the back of his effort last year. his ability to chase down and pressure inside 50 is a huge bonus that crumbers in our current list ( Vezpremi , Hoops for example ) will have a hard time matching.

Based on last season I can't see why he wouldn't play every game except for injuries.

[chef]

So who are the crumbers in our current list? Vezpremi, Djerukka? Hooper, any others?

would be gutted if Grant didn't get an endorsment of serious playing time in 2011 on the back of his effort last year. his ability to chase down and pressure inside 50 is a huge bonus that crumbers in our current list ( Vezpremi , Hoops for example ) will have a hard time matching.

I don't think Hooper or DJ are crumbers.

Does anyone know if Dahlhaus has been playing as a forward pocket in the practice games?

If Grant shows the same application as last year he will easily play ever game(plus he will also be a better player with another preseason under his belt).

[Ghost Dog]

Ok I see. Besides Dhaus, who would you have?
The video of him posted through here a few weeks back was great. Speedster. Very much looking forward to the start of the season.

Back on the topic of Liam Jones, how many games did he play in 2010 again? Can't remember. was only 1 or 2 i think

[ledge]

I was impressed with Jones when him and Hall clashed going for the same mark.. means he isnt afraid to go for it when he has the chance and also has hunger..
Wou;ld certainly look at him as a major forward, FF or CHF.. just who has Eade got his eye on becoming FF after Hall retires?
If Bazza has another good year I wouldnt be surprised if the club tried to talk him into another year.

[GVGjr]

Back on the topic of Liam Jones, how many games did he play in 2010 again? Can't remember. was only 1 or 2 i think

5 games. Kicked 6 goals.

[Desipura]

Jones is a very good overhead mark and has that instinct of a natural forward very rare to find a tall forward who is good overhead and chases. We have Lake at the other end who is a proven good mark. Playing Jones down back will somewhat take away that strength to his game as they will get in the way of each other.

[GVGjr]

Jones is a very good overhead mark and has that instinct of a natural forward very rare to find a tall forward who is good overhead and chases. We have Lake at the other end who is a proven good mark. Playing Jones down back will somewhat take away that strength to his game as they will get in the way of each other.

I'm not so sure about that. Hall commands the ball up forward and we don't see that as an issue for Jones. Having Lake and Williams in the back line doesn't appear to be a problem so if it happened to be Lake and Jones I think it should work.

[Desipura]

I'm not so sure about that. Hall commands the ball up forward and we don't see that as an issue for Jones. Having Lake and Williams in the back line doesn't appear to be a problem so if it happened to be Lake and Jones I think it should work.

Williams hardly takes a contested mark, he offers support down back. Jones has the potential to have an impact in games not just play a supporting role like Williams.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Williams hardly takes a contested mark, he offers support down back. Jones has the potential to have an impact in games not just play a supporting role like Williams.

I think I get your point. William's strategy is to spoil his opponent in air contests, his focus is on his opponent whereas Lake and Jones are superior readers of the ball in flight and mark, and Lake uses this rather than the whereabouts of his opponent to defend. Jones would use this skill somewhat too and they could negate each other at times. Then again we could end up with the best marking/reading the play FB and marking/reading the play CHB combo there is and Williams could find freedom for his natural talents as a CHF?? I loved that goal he got reading the ball off the play and running along the boundary/point line to slam it home. He's a closet creative type.

[Dry Rot]

Williams and now increasing Lake have an increasing injury history.

Having another capable tall defender if required up our sleeves is a good position to be in IMO.

[Desipura]

I think I get your point. William's strategy is to spoil his opponent in air contests, his focus is on his opponent whereas Lake and Jones are superior readers of the ball in flight and mark, and Lake uses this rather than the whereabouts of his opponent to defend. Jones would use this skill somewhat too and they could negate each other at times. Then again we could end up with the best marking/reading the play FB and marking/reading the play CHB combo there is and Williams could find freedom for his natural talents as a CHF?? I loved that goal he got reading the ball off the play and running along the boundary/point line to slam it home. He's a closet creative type.

Spot on!

[hujsh]

My feel is that we shouldn't play the rucks in the forward line which would open up a position for Jones.

At all? So would you be using say Minson as a sub and letting Hudson ruck solo till he's stuffed?

[GVGjr]

At all? So would you be using say Minson as a sub and letting Hudson ruck solo till he's stuffed?

Not at all but in my opinion we shouldn't plan fully around it. It didn't work when we tried it with Minson as a forward and whilst Roughead is the better forward option prospect, it remains to be seen if he can be effective with it. We needed to get a more versatile part time ruckman during the trade period but instead focused on the smaller guys.

[Dry Rot]

Not at all but in my opinion we shouldn't plan fully around it. It didn't work when we tried it with Minson as a forward and whilst Roughead is the better forward option prospect, it remains to be seen if he can be effective with it. We needed to get a more versatile part time ruckman during the trade period but instead focused on the smaller guys.

Any thoughts on who we might have got?

[chef]

Not at all but in my opinion we shouldn't plan fully around it. It didn't work when we tried it with Minson as a forward and whilst Roughead is the better forward option prospect, it remains to be seen if he can be effective with it. We needed to get a more versatile part time ruckman during the trade period but instead focused on the smaller guys.

Hopefully Williams can do this with Jones covering him down back when he does.

[GVGjr]

Hopefully Williams can do this with Jones covering him down back when he does.

Given his history with injuries and our lack of tall defenders I don't think Williams should be used in the ruck at all.

I guess the break up for say a Roughead and Hudson ruck combination is Roughy spending 40% of his time in the forward line (and doing any of the ruck work in the forward 50), 30% of his time as the ruckman and the other 30% on the bench. Hudson then is 70% or more on the ball and 30% or less on the bench.

I wonder if Barlow gets promoted to cover Hargrave if he could do a ruck rover type role.

[Bulldog Joe]

Not at all but in my opinion we shouldn't plan fully around it. It didn't work when we tried it with Minson as a forward and whilst Roughead is the better forward option prospect, it remains to be seen if he can be effective with it. We needed to get a more versatile part time ruckman during the trade period but instead focused on the smaller guys.

It wasn't a complete failure. We did after all lead the scoring in 2009 and was second to Geelong in 2008.

I believe we need to play the second ruck and rotate off the bench with Hall and partly with other rotations to give about 80% game time.

Playing 2 rucks will leave us with more clearance power late in games, as those relying on a sole ruck start to struggle.

The deeper in the season we get, the more clear will be the advantage.

I expect at least one serious loss for a fancied team playing 1 ruckman and losing him early in a game.

[GVGjr]

It wasn't a complete failure. We did after all lead the scoring in 2009 and was second to Geelong in 2008.

I believe we need to play the second ruck and rotate off the bench with Hall and partly with other rotations to give about 80% game time.

Playing 2 rucks will leave us with more clearance power late in games, as those relying on a sole ruck start to struggle.

The deeper in the season we get, the more clear will be the advantage.

I expect at least one serious loss for a fancied team playing 1 ruckman and losing him early in a game.


All very good points.