No he played as a deep forward.
It wasn’t a shot at you directly/only as others have done the same thing.
Yeh well in that case could easily swap him and Gresh around, which will probably be what they do anyway.
My post was more trying to show that I cant find room for Kelly or Hepp.
The starting back six in the probables team yesterday was:
Reid McKay McGrath
Martin Laverde Redman
Obviously Ridley has to return.
2 Likes
I think the issue with that is the task of defensive cover requires huge running capacity (Heppell has done it too).
I don’t think Baldwin can cover enough ground to do it.
1 Like
I get the feeling that we are going to be screaming for Baldwin to play all season, meanwhile Laverde & Kelly get found out playing on smaller quicker players, and offering nothing offensively.
This is the big criticism of Brad Scott.
3 Likes
Baldwin cant cover Kellys spot because Kelly is playing wing.
I agree with you, that’s why I said they’d take the easy option and not the right one. He probably isn’t best 22 but they will make him the sub and have him in the team on game day.
I personally think Gresham is a horrible high forward and a better deep fwd or player around congestion. He gets lost at Hf imo and that’s why he sucked last year at Saints.
I’d also play Menzie. So I agree he should play.
My post was purely guessing what I think they will do. Not what I’d like to see.
I can see Hobbs potentially missing
It comes down to this, if we want an actual outside mid in the rotations whose been training as such to combo with Duursma & Durham then that’s another spot gone to Kelly/Tsatas
I’d view Caldwell as ahead of Hobbs as the off the bench inside mid rotation, I’d expect coaches would do also. Caldwell has actually played it with good success inc tagging Neale
That then leaves Hobbs vs Perkins as the 7th fwd who may also mid at times, frankly Perkins offers something different and even in intra yesterday he stood out
By way of having a fit squad spots in the team become tight and players will miss out, his shoulder injury yesterday and time in recovery going to hinder his chances in short term I feel
But only takes one injury to another player who he is fighting for similar role with and he’d get his go. Albeit what happens with Shiel will be intriguing once he is back
If Hobbs misses he just plays as one of main men inside mids in VFL and tries to bang door down
Sub is obviously an option but personally I’d rather Hind (assuming doesn’t make team to begin with) or Guelfi for impact and flexibility to play multiple roles
4 Likes
I personally think Hobbs is ahead of Caldwell.
Thought he had a better year last year and has played a season less worth of games.
Tsatas is completely unproven, and has issues with his kicking atm, so I can see why he would need some time, but Hobbs has shown time and time again what type of player he is.
Think we would be very very foolish to leave him out of the team.
2 Likes
On what basis?
Caldwell came 7th in the BnF (I think he played a couple more games, but still). I think the role they are competing for is HF/midfield rotation, something that Caldwell has been a lot more damaging at.
If it’s as a pure mid then maybe Hobbs, but that isn’t the role they are competing for.
If Hobbs is going to be a lock for best 22 he either needs to move past Parish, Merrett and Setterfield or he needs to start hitting the scoreboard more when he is forward, until that happens he will be fighting for a spot.
I’d have him in my best 22, but it is far from a sure thing imo.
3 Likes
Hobbs is ever so slightly statistically better in most categories that are important for a midfielder, and he plays less game time on average.
Caldwell is ever so slightly better at kicking goals, but again, he plays more game time.
Just think Hobbs is the better of the two, whilst being younger.
I want both of them to play, but if I had to choose one of them it would be Hobbs.
If you adjust them to equal game time, Hobbs is basically statistically better in every major category, while being younger and having played almost half the games.
Last year the difference in their goal kicking was the exact same as this year but the other way, with Hobbs again playing less game time. I dont think either of them excel at the position and the difference between them as forwards is negligible.
Whats unfortunate is that as midfielders they both bring the toughness/competitiveness that we lack as a whole, but they just cant break into the middle full time.
1 Like
I have a much more negative view of game time % as a stat, it forgives the overall contribution.
While it may reflect an issue with conditioning (which can improve in time/age), it can also reflect an inability to play multiple roles. Although perhaps impacted by the sub role?
Either way it is a concern, imo.
In the end, game time means nothing.
On this basis, Caldwell still performed better, imo. Which reflected his BnF finish.
It’s an interesting debate with clearly different views on each player.
1 Like
As a forward I agree, not as a midfielder.
Hobbs still was statistically better as a midfielder. He found the ball more, had better disposal efficiency, moved the ball forward more and had better clearance numbers.
Either way the differences between them are minute. And again, Hobbs has played half the games and is 3 years younger.
I know who I would be investing my time into if I could only choose one. But, like I said, I want them both to play and I personally think it will be a failure if we dont get them both in the middle for considerable time this season.
It’s also how damaging you are with your disposals.
I think Caldwell is more damaging. But I agree they are at about the same level.
2 Likes
I thinks that’s the issue, which I touched on earlier.
And I agree, Hobbs has a better prospect as a pure mid. At the moment if it is Hobbs vs Caldwell it is for the HF/mid rotation.
Otherwise it is Hobbs vs Parish or Merrett as a discussion.
Yeah fair.
Hopefully they both play.
Arrrgh…it’s tough.
Hobbs, Tsatas, Ruck, Caldwell, wings, Durham, Reid, small hb’s, speed, height, leadership & experience, Stringer…injuries will play a big part in the team. And fit-for-purpose.
My stab at it, and I’d probably do it differently each time.
4 Likes
Whatever you want to call it, he has been very good at the role he has been playing this pre season.
So you’d rather Baldwin on a smaller, quicker player than Kelly, who actually has a good track record nullifying these types?
5 Likes
I think Baldwin might be the unlucky one out. He’s had a great preseason but we may be too top heavy in defence if he comes in too
I guess at least kelly can go lock down on a small or play wing as he has done